You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

August 25, 2016

The Department of Intellectual Property’s IP Roadmap for Thailand

Informed Counsel

On June 20, 2016, Thosapone Dansuputra, the Deputy Director-General of Thailand’s Department of Intellectual Property (DIP), made a speech on the DIP’s roadmap for IP reform in Thailand. During his speech, Mr. Dansuputra mentioned five core strategies that the Thai government would follow in order to enhance IP protection in the country. The strategies relate to the creation, commercialization, and protection of IP; the prevention and suppression of IP rights violations; and the protection of geographical indications.

To foster innovation and promote the creation of IP, Mr. Dansuputra stated that the government would encourage SMEs and startup businesses to use IP databases, including patent mapping services and patent search services. This would enable enterprises to understand the past and current trends of R&D and patent activities in a particular industry, and it would provide an added benefit to the DIP’s existing automated systems that support IP workflow administration, including patents (i.e., inventions, designs, and petty patents), copyright, trademarks, trade secrets, and geographical indications.

In order to provide support for IP rights holders to commercialize their IP rights, Mr. Dansuputra stated that government agencies would organize annual IP fairs and events, and the government would help local research institutions establish technology licensing offices. These offices would undertake patent searches to assess the novelty of innovations, market and commercialize inventions, and negotiate licenses.

As far as the protection of IP is concerned, the DIP faces a backlog of approximately 38,500 patent applications and 34,300 trademark applications. To reduce the backlog, while maintaining or improving overall patent quality, the DIP will implement work-sharing programs with other agencies and organizations, including universities, and adopt new procedures that speed up the examination process such as the ASEAN Patent Examination Co-operation program, a regional patent work-sharing program among ASEAN members. The DIP will also hire and train more examiners, to increase the number of patent examiners from 39 to 127, and increase the number of trademark examiners from 20 to 40. To further enhance IP protection, the DIP is currently in the process of amending laws to streamline patent and trademark registration procedures.

A number of initiatives have been undertaken to prevent and suppress IP rights violations under the supervision of the Suppression of Intellectual Property Infringement Subcommittee, chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan. The initiatives include the promotion of IP rights among the general public, seeking cooperation of landlords and relevant agencies such as the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Authority, the State Railway of Thailand, and shopping malls (e.g., MBK Center and Pantip Plaza), and more. To raise IP protection awareness, the DIP is collaborating with the Ministry of Education to incorporate IP subjects into school curriculums and in activity-based programs of primary, secondary, and vocational schools.

For the protection of geographical indications, Mr. Dansuputra stated that this is intended to promote the marketing of Thailand’s agricultural, handicraft, and artisan products. Appropriate and effective geographical indication protection systems help promote SMEs’ products by guaranteeing exclusivity over the use of their geographical indications, and helping those companies overcome marketing challenges such as obtaining consumer recognition and loyalty. Appropriate protection policies could help transform manufacturing from quantity-driven indicators to quality-based factors. The Thai government is also considering a brand-building strategy for geographical indications to promote particular regions as tourist destinations.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 13, 2026
When Decree No. 186/2026/ND-CP (Decree 186) takes effect on July 15, 2026, it will introduce the most significant reform of Vietnam’s administrative IP enforcement framework since Decree 99/2013/ND-CP was issued in 2013. These changes are expected to make administrative enforcement faster, more accessible, and better suited to the realities of modern IP disputes. Below are the principal reforms and their practical implications for rights holders and enforcement practitioners. The End of Notarization and Consular Legalization Among the most welcome procedural changes is the abolition of the notarization and consular legalization requirement for powers of attorney (POA) submitted in administrative enforcement proceedings. Under the previous regime, foreign rights holders were generally required to execute a POA, then have it notarized and consular legalized (if seeking customs recordal). In practice, this process frequently delayed enforcement by four to eight weeks, often long enough for infringing goods to disappear before authorities could intervene. Decree 186 removes this bottleneck, now requiring only an original or certified copy of the POA. If the document is in a foreign language, a Vietnamese translation is sufficient, provided it is certified by a competent authority or confirmed by the authorized Vietnamese IP representative. Consular legalization and notarization are no longer required. For rights holders, the practical impact is substantial. Administrative enforcement files that previously took weeks to prepare can now be completed in a matter of days, allowing much faster responses in time-sensitive matters such as warehouse raids, border interventions, and trade-fair enforcement. The decree also introduces a useful administrative simplification. Where an original POA has already been submitted to the same enforcement authority and remains valid, applicants may rely on a copy of that earlier submission by identifying the previous case file. This eliminates unnecessary duplication for rights holders pursuing multiple enforcement actions before the same
July 9, 2026
Recycling, upcycling, and refill-packaging models are now widely promoted as ways to reduce waste, lower carbon emissions, and respond to consumer demand for sustainable products. However, complications arise when these environmentally driven trends intersect with intellectual property law—particularly where reused or altered packaging continues to display third parties’ registered trademarks. Adding to this complexity, Thailand’s draft Sustainable Packaging Management Act aims to introduce new environmental compliance obligations that businesses must navigate alongside existing trademark concerns. Recycling and upcycling packaging may infringe trademark rights, especially in cases not protected by the first-sale doctrine—the principle that a trademark owner’s rights over a particular mark-bearing product end once the owner first sells it. Furthermore, even refill packaging carries legal risk due to specific statutory prohibitions under Thai law. Compounding these challenges, the draft Sustainable Packaging Management Act will impose extended producer responsibility (EPR) obligations on manufacturers and brand owners, requiring them to manage packaging throughout its lifecycle. These overlapping legal frameworks could deter manufacturers from pursuing ESG-aligned business models unless businesses understand how to navigate both trademark and environmental requirements. Under Thai law, this issue remains uncertain because the Trademark Act does not expressly codify the first sale doctrine, also known as the exhaustion of trademark rights. Generally, this doctrine provides that once a trademark owner has lawfully sold goods bearing its trademark, the owner’s right to control further resale of those particular goods is exhausted. The rationale is that the owner has already received commercial benefit from the first authorized sale; therefore, the purchaser should be free to resell or otherwise dispose of the goods. Although the doctrine is not expressly codified in the Trademark Act, Thai courts have recognized it in relation to genuine goods and parallel imports, as seen in a Supreme Court Judgment No. 2817/2543 in which the
July 6, 2026
Indonesia’s regulation on reporting online intellectual property (IP) infringement provides comprehensive procedural guidance for IP rights holders and their licensees in reporting online infringement complaints. Issued in December 2025 by the Ministry of Law as Regulation No. 47 of 2025 regarding Handling of Intellectual Property Infringement Reports in Electronic Systems, this regulation covers all types of IP rights. It also specifies documentation when reporting infringement, and lays out the procedures for examination, verification, and enforcement actions. Submission of Complaints Complainants may submit reports through the online system of the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) or in person at the DGIP office. Complaints may also be filed through an authorized proxy. Under the regulation, complainants are required to provide the following information and documents: Personal details of the complainant; Brief description of the protected work or subject matter (i.e., type of IP and name or address of the infringing website, portal, account, or application, or a link to the location of the infringing content); Complete description of the alleged infringement; Certificate of registration or recordal of the relevant IP; Recordal of IP license agreement, if any; and Other supporting evidence. Verification and Examination Process Upon receiving a complaint, the responsible formality officer may request clarification or additional supporting documents. In the latter case, the complainant must then submit the necessary administrative documents within 14 days of the notification date. Once the documentation is deemed complete and sufficient, the case will be formally registered. Subsequently, the DGIP will establish a verification team to handle online IP violations, which will include the Civil Servant Investigator (PPNS), the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs, experts with relevant expertise in IP, and representatives from related associations such as AVISI (Indonesian Video Streaming Association). After examining the report, the team will prepare the Minutes
June 30, 2026
Customs recordation is an enforcement mechanism in Myanmar that enables intellectual property (IP) rights holders to seek prevention of the cross-border movement of infringing goods. The enactment of Myanmar’s IP laws in 2019 has enabled customs recordation for registered marks and copyrights under the Trademark Law 2019 and the Copyright Law 2019. By contrast, the Patent Law 2019 and the Industrial Design Law 2019 do not provide a practical framework for customs recordation, and accordingly such rights are not subject to the customs recordation regime. Under the Trademark Law 2019, rights holders may apply for customs recordation and may also ask the Customs Department to suspend the release of goods suspected of bearing counterfeit marks. Likewise, the Copyright Law 2019 allows for customs intervention in relation to pirated works. These provisions reflect Myanmar’s gradual alignment with international standards on border measures, although the implementation framework remains at a relatively early stage of development. Customs Recordation Pursuant to the Trademark Law 2019 and the Copyright Law 2019, the relevant authorities have issued customs rules concerning the protection of registered marks and copyrights. In practice, the process generally begins with the submission of an application to the Customs Department together with supporting documentation. This typically includes proof of registration in Myanmar; details of the rights holder, applicant, and any authorized representative; and a comprehensive description of the genuine goods. Product identification materials—such as photographs, packaging samples, and distinguishing features—are particularly important in helping customs officers identify suspected infringing goods. A recordation remains valid for two years from the date of approval. It may be renewed for additional two-year terms, provided that the renewal application is filed within the thirty days prior to expiry for marks and up to thirty days in advance of the expiry date for copyrights, in accordance with