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

Subscribe to Updates
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.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 4, 2026
Intellectual property (IP) protection sometimes hinges on fame and recognition. However, this alone will not always be sufficient to overcome an IP dispute when it involves contractual obligations or registered rights. Below are five cases from around the world that tackle some of the basic issues in IP registration, ownership, commercialization, and enforcement. 1. USA: Taylor Swift Trademark Application Refused Taylor Swift recently filed a trademark application to register “The Life of a Showgirl,” which is the title of her 12th studio album. When examining a trademark application, the examiner considers various factors before deciding whether it should be registered. One of these factors is whether there is a likelihood of confusion (i.e., would a regular consumer mistake the origin of the trademark). In Taylor Swift’s case, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) decided that that there would be a risk of confusion. This decision was based on the existing registered trademark, “Confessions of a Showgirl,” owned by Maren Wade, which was registered in 2015. The USPTO refused Taylor Swift’s application based on the shared key distinctive element “of a showgirl,” the lack of sufficient distinguishing terms, the marks being used in overlapping markets (entertainment and performances), and because consumers may assume a common commercial source. Maren Wade then filed a lawsuit in California against Taylor Swift and her affiliated companies, arguing that Taylor Swfit’s branding is confusingly similar in structure, wording, and overall commercial impression to her registered mark. She is also drawing on the USPTO’s refusal of Taylor Swift’s application to support her argument of a likelihood of confusion. A judgment has not yet been reached in this case, but it serves as an important reminder of the importance of satisfying the essential elements required for IP registration. 2. Australia: Katy Perry v. Katie Perry In
Read More
July 27, 2026
Vietnam’s new E-Commerce Law, which took effect on 1 July 2026 along with its implementing Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP (Decree 248), marks a significant development in the country’s approach to online intellectual property (IP) enforcement, reflecting a clear shift from a reactive model of intermediary liability to one that expects platforms to play a more active role in preventing infringement. From notice-and-takedown to platform responsibility The most significant change introduced by the E-Commerce Law is the transformation of the legal role of e-commerce platforms. The existing safe harbor provisions under the IP Law and the copyright notice-and-takedown regime established by Decree 17/2023/ND-CP (Decree 17) largely required intermediaries to act only after receiving notice of infringement. Once infringing content had been removed, the platform’s legal obligation was generally considered fulfilled. The new legislation adopts a fundamentally different approach. Article 17 of the E-Commerce Law requires intermediary platforms to screen information relating to goods and services before publication in order to prevent listings involving counterfeit or IP-infringing goods, and goods of unknown origin. Rather than relying exclusively on complaints from rights holders, platforms are now expected to implement preventive measures before infringing listings become publicly available. Decree 248 further requires platforms to update keyword filters based on recommendations issued by competent authorities. These filtering mechanisms are intended to prevent prohibited listings from appearing on the platform and represent a further move away from a purely complaint-driven enforcement model. The legislation also introduces Vietnam’s first statutory stay-down obligation. Under the E-Commerce Law and Decree 248, major digital platforms must maintain automated systems capable of reviewing, warning against, and removing unlawful listings while also implementing measures to prevent repeat violations, defined under Decree 248 as conduct that has previously been identified and handled by the platform, but continues to recur. This obligation addresses one
Read More
July 27, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins’ intellectual property specialists have authored the Thailand chapter of Trade Secrets 2026 from Chambers and Partners. This global guide examines the legal frameworks governing trade secret protection, enforcement, and litigation across jurisdictions worldwide. The Thailand chapter provides a comprehensive overview of the country’s legal regime for protecting confidential business information, covering the legal framework, trade secret misappropriation, litigation procedures, remedies, and dispute resolution. Some topics covered include: Protectable trade secrets Reasonable measures to maintain secrecy Employee confidentiality Trade secret licensing Civil and criminal remedies Litigation procedures and injunctions Damages and other remedies Mediation and arbitration The guide also examines practical issues relating to safeguarding trade secrets, defending against allegations of misappropriation, and managing trade secret disputes in Thailand. Chambers and Partners’ Global Practice Guides provide in-house counsel with authoritative commentary on practical legal issues affecting business, enabling readers to compare legislation and procedures across multiple jurisdictions. The Thailand chapter of Trade Secrets 2026 is available as a PDF through the button below. The full guide can be accessed for free on the Chambers and Partners website.
Read More
July 27, 2026
In March 2025, Thailand’s Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court (IP&IT Court) issued a landmark judgment in favor of Luckin Coffee, China’s leading retail coffee chain. The judgment marked a significant turnaround following earlier trademark litigation involving Luckin Coffee from 2021 to 2023 that had generated widespread public attention and raised questions about the protection available to legitimate foreign brand owners in Thailand. In a significant subsequent development, Thailand’s Court of Appeal for Specialized Cases has now affirmed the IP&IT Court’s judgment in its entirety. The appellate decision brings clarity to one of Thailand’s most closely watched trademark disputes. Significantly, this is the first case in Thailand to formally recognize the trademark squatting principle. The Court of Appeal confirmed that Luckin Coffee has a better right to the disputed mark and ordered cancellation of the defendants’ trademark registration—a key application of the “better right” doctrine. The court also upheld the substantial damages awarded at first instance, providing important guidance on assessing harm from systematic trademark squatting. Award-Winning Judgment Affirmed in Its Entirety The significance of the first-instance judgment extended beyond the outcome for Luckin Coffee. The IP&IT Court judgment was subsequently recognized in the IP&IT Court’s Distinguished Judgment Awards in 2025, reflecting the complexity, novelty, and legal significance of the issues considered in the case. The defendants nevertheless appealed the judgment, challenging several key aspects of the IP&IT Court’s decision. Luckin Coffee continued to entrust Tilleke & Gibbins as their sole attorney to pursue the case at the appellate level. After considering the defendants’ appeal and Luckin Coffee’s submissions in response, the Court of Appeal affirmed the first-instance judgment in its entirety. The judgment was announced on July 8, 2026. Better Right to the Marks The Court of Appeal confirmed Luckin Coffee’s superior rights. The orders include cancellation
Read More