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

December 3, 2014

The DIP’s Study into an International Industrial Design Registration System

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

One of Thailand’s keen ambitions is to become a member of the Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs, a key international treaty created for the purpose of protecting intellectual property. The treaty and its mechanisms, collectively known as the Hague System, have instituted an international system that facilitates the registration of industrial designs in several countries by allowing applicants to file a single application in one language with one set of fees to protect their industrial designs in states that adhere to the Hague Agreement. This system reduces the time and resources that are required to register an industrial design.   

In 2011, the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) in Thailand conducted an in-depth study into the benefits that Thai businesses and designers would derive from Thailand becoming a party to the Hague Agreement. The study confirmed that Thailand’s adherence to and involvement in the treaty would, indeed, benefit Thai businesses—both large corporations and SMEs—for the reason that it would increase their competitive capabilities as they relate to foreign corporations and would facilitate their expansion into the global market. Following the completion of this study, however, there were no significant developments in Thailand’s progress toward becoming a member of this treaty—until now.

With Thailand’s commitment to the ASEAN IPR Action Plan 2011-2015, under which the target has been set for at least seven ASEAN countries to become members of the Hague Agreement by 2015, in the third quarter of this year, the DIP began a nine-month study into a viable management system for international industrial design applications under the Hague Agreement, as established by the Geneva Act of 1999. The study’s ultimate goal is to prepare and make ready the DIP’s facilities and personnel for the management and examination of international applications. In particular, the study sets out to:

  1. create a process and management system for industrial design applications under the Hague Agreement which are appropriate for Thailand by taking into account all of the relevant factors, including the estimated amount of international applications, manpower required for management, and types of entities and industries that will use the international application route;
  2. evaluate the potential of the design industry in Thailand in fully exploiting the benefits of this international registration system of design;
  3. educate and prepare DIP personnel for the effective management and examination of international applications; and
  4. educate all businesses in the design industry and all designers on the use of the international registration system for protection of their designs.   

The methodology used in this study is not limited only to reviewing literature and data in the international registration system for industrial design. The scope also extends to looking at the standards and practices of the industrial design offices of countries that are already members of the Hague Agreement, reviewing its own current process and management system for national industrial design applications, conducting interviews with various corporations and organizations in the design industry to gain input and recommendations on the management system and examination process (to help minimize foreseeable difficulties), and organizing focus groups to obtain feedback on its proposed management system.

A conclusive study that takes heed of the objectives and proposed methods established at the outset will allow the DIP to implement an effective, internationally-compatible industrial design registration system that is suitable for Thailand and its available resources. However, we cannot leap to the conclusion that Thailand will soon become a member of the Hague Agreement. The ongoing study may reveal certain changes that the DIP needs to implement before accession to the Hague Agreement can be made, and these changes may lead to a significant delay in the further actions required for the accession. This is a subject for discussion at a later time. For the time being, we remain cautiously optimistic that the study will yield a positive result, and we will update readers on any developments in a future issue of Informed Counsel.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 24, 2026
As food innovation continues to accelerate, manufacturers are increasingly introducing ingredients derived from new sources, produced using novel technologies, or lacking a significant history of human consumption. While these innovations create new opportunities for the food industry, they also raise important questions regarding consumer safety. For this reason, many jurisdictions, including Thailand, the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, Canada, and Singapore, require a premarket safety assessment for novel food ingredients before they can be placed on the market. The objective of this assessment is to ensure that each ingredient is safe for its intended use and level of consumption, does not present toxicological, allergenic, microbiological, or nutritional concerns, and will not mislead consumers. Scientific authorities typically evaluate the ingredient’s identity, manufacturing process, composition, specifications, anticipated dietary exposure, toxicological information, nutritional impact, and history of use before determining whether it can be marketed. Against this background, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently took an important step toward improving regulatory transparency by publishing, for the first time, a consolidated public list of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process, including substances determined to be novel foods and those determined not to fall within the novel food category. The list identifies the approved substances, the corresponding manufacturers or importers, approval dates, and the approved conditions of use. Although the publication does not change the existing legal framework governing novel food approvals, it provides businesses with greater visibility into the Thai FDA’s regulatory precedents and the types of substances that have previously been accepted through the safety assessment process. The full announcement is available on the Thai FDA’s website. As the list is now publicly available, it also provides useful insight into the types of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process.
Read More
July 24, 2026
Indonesia has updated its fee framework for intellectual property (IP)-related government services, with implications for IP owners, licensees, lenders, digital platforms, and businesses operating in the country. Government Regulation No. 30 of 2026 on Types and Tariffs of Non-Tax State Revenue Applicable to the Ministry of Law (GR 30/2026) was promulgated on July 2, 2026, and will take effect on August 1, 2026. Key Takeaways GR 30/2026, which replaces the relevant IP service fees under Government Regulation No. 45 of 2024, reorganizes the fee schedule into separate categories for copyright, industrial designs, patents, layout designs of integrated circuits, trade secrets, trademarks, geographical indications, IP enforcement, and other categories. The most commercially relevant changes include a new copyright recordation tariff exemption for songs and music, higher fees for several trademark and geographical indication services, new IP enforcement service fees, and a new fee type for registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects. In addition, this is the first major update for trademark fees in approximately 10 years. GR 30/2026 is significant not only as a fee update but also as a further indication of Indonesia’s increasing recognition of IP as a financeable commercial asset. By expressly assigning fees to the registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects, the regulation places IP-backed collateral filings within the Ministry of Law’s administrative service framework. While GR 30/2026 does not create a new secured-transactions regime, this development is relevant for lenders, borrowers, and IP owners structuring financing arrangements secured by trademarks, patents, copyrights, industrial designs, or other registrable IP rights in Indonesia. Copyright: New Fee Exemption for Songs and Music Recordation For copyright, GR 30/2026 creates a fee-exempt category for recordation of works or related-rights products for songs or music, while maintaining a separate category for other works and related-rights products. It
Read More
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
Read More
July 15, 2026
Ambush marketing refers to a strategy in which a business associates itself with an event, campaign, or brand without paying for official sponsorship rights. The tactic is most visible in sports, concerts, and festivals, where official sponsors have invested substantially for exclusivity. Ambush marketers may use suggestive wording, event-themed imagery, athlete endorsements, venue-adjacent promotions, or social media campaigns implying a commercial connection with the event. Common Forms of Ambush Marketing Ambush marketing typically takes one of the following forms: Direct ambushing: using event names, logos, or mascots suggesting authorization Coattail ambushing: sponsoring an athlete or broadcaster connected with the event Subtle ambushing: themed advertising, venue-adjacent campaigns, or similar visual cues The legal analysis in each case turns on whether the marketing crosses from permissible event-based advertising into infringement, passing off, deception, or wrongful exploitation of goodwill, and the risk assessment is necessarily fact-specific. Thailand has no dedicated ambush marketing statute, so legality depends on execution. A campaign that merely comments on a public event may be permissible, but one that uses protected marks, creates consumer confusion, misrepresents sponsorship status, or makes unsubstantiated claims may trigger liability under various Thai laws, as laid out below. Ambush Marketing and Thailand’s Trademark Act The Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) is the primary tool for addressing campaigns that use registered trademarks, event names, logos, mascots, or confusingly similar signs. The law gives registered trademark owners the exclusive right to use their mark for registered goods, and infringement risk arises when a nonsponsor uses an event mark or a confusingly similar sign in advertising. Even referential or playful use may create liability if it causes public confusion as to sponsorship or commercial connection. The law also preserves passing-off claims for unregistered marks. This matters because event names, taglines, or mascots may not always be
Read More