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​ 

June 10, 2026
For multinational franchisors operating in Thailand, a key risk after franchise termination is that former outlets may continue operating in ways that could easily mislead consumers into believing they remain within the authorized network. To justify such operations, former franchisees often argue that the termination was invalid or ineffective. As a result, these cases are often treated as contractual disputes, making it difficult for franchisors to obtain injunctive relief before a final judgment confirms that the termination was lawful. Franchisors face significant commercial and reputational harm during lengthy proceedings, including consumer confusion, disruption to franchise restructuring, and damage to brand reputation and customer trust. In an encouraging development, the Thai court in a 2025 case responded to the problem of unauthorized post-termination franchise operations by granting interim relief, recognizing broader brand and consumer harm, and awarding substantial damages, highlighting a successful litigation strategy of framing the dispute not merely as a contractual termination issue but as trademark infringement causing ongoing commercial injury. The Subway Case From December 2024 to mid-2025, an unauthorized “Subway®” franchise operation in Thailand attracted substantial public and media attention. Reports and online discussions about unauthorized Subway® stores circulated widely after complaints arose about food quality and customer experience at certain outlets that were allegedly operating after their franchise rights had expired. Because these stores continued to use Subway® trademarks, trade dress, and overall commercial appearance, many consumers were unable to distinguish them from authorized operations, resulting in reputational risks and customer confusion that affected the franchisor’s brand and franchise system in Thailand. Subway treated this matter with the utmost seriousness and moved promptly to protect its brand, franchise system, and customers. It filed a civil action with the IP&IT Court seeking a permanent injunction and damages. During the proceedings, the court granted a preliminary injunction
Read More
May 22, 2026
Intellectual property specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins in Vietnam have contributed an updated Intellectual Property Transactions in Vietnam overview for Thomson Reuters Practical Law, an online publication that provides comprehensive legal guides for jurisdictions worldwide. The Vietnam overview was authored by Linh Thi Mai Nguyen, Thanh Phuong Vu, Chi Lan Dang, Son Thai Hoang, and Duc Anh Tran. The chapter provides a high-level examination of key aspects of IP transactions law in Vietnam, including IP assignment and licensing, research and development collaborations, IP in mergers and acquisitions (M&A), lending and taking security over intellectual property rights, settlement agreements, employee- and consultant-created IP, competition law, taxation, and non-tariff trade barriers. Key topics covered in the chapter include: IP assignment: Basis and formalities for assignments of patents, utility models, trade marks, copyright, design rights, trade secrets, confidential information, and domain names in Vietnam. IP licensing: Scope, formalities, and recordal requirements for licensing patents, trade marks, copyright, design rights, and trade secrets. Research and development collaborations: Treatment of improvements, derivatives, and joint ownership of IP, including exploitation and enforcement issues. IP aspects of M&A and security: Due diligence, warranties, transfer formalities, and taking security over intellectual property rights. Practical Law, a legal reference resource from Thomson Reuters, publishes a range of guides for hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas. The Intellectual Property Transactions Global Guide is a valuable resource for legal practitioners seeking comparative insight into transactional IP issues across multiple jurisdictions. To view the latest version of the Intellectual Property Transactions in Vietnam overview, please visit the Practical Law website and enroll in the free Practical Law trial to gain full access.
Read More
May 13, 2026
Laos has significantly broadened its industrial property administrative review framework, most notably by extending it to cover copyright and related rights for the first time. Decision No. 0306/IC on the Administrative Resolution of Disputes Concerning Industrial Property Registration, New Plant Variety Registration, and Copyright and Related Rights Recordation took effect on April 24, 2026, replacing the previous rules from 2023, which had covered only industrial property and new plant variety matters. Decision No. 0306/IC governs how Laos’ Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) and provincial offices handle formal challenges to industrial property registrations and applications. The proceedings covered include oppositions to pending applications, appeals of refused applications, requests for cancellation of existing registrations, and—newly—disputes concerning the recordation and interpretation of copyright and related rights. These administrative proceedings within the DIP are heard by a government-appointed Administrative Dispute Resolution Committee, which functions similarly to the opposition and review boards found in other jurisdictions. Key Changes Decision No. 0306/IC covers four categories of administrative proceedings: Oppositions: Third-party challenges to a pending industrial property application before it is granted. Refusal appeals: Challenges to the DIP’s decision to refuse their application. Cancellation or deletion requests: Applications to invalidate an existing registered right on the grounds that it should not have been granted. Copyright and related rights disputes: Challenges to or interpretations of copyright and related rights recordations, including determinations of whether a work qualifies for copyright protection under Lao law. The most significant development is the committee’s new jurisdiction over copyright matters. The committee is now empowered to resolve disputes concerning copyright and related rights recordation—this includes the authority to determine whether a work qualifies for copyright protection and to interpret the scope of an existing recordation. Parties who believe a competitor has improperly recorded copyright over a work, or who wish to contest
Read More
April 30, 2026
Vietnam’s Decree No. 134/2026/ND‑CP, which took effect on 9 April 2026, plays an important role in detailing and implementing Vietnam’s Intellectual Property (IP) Law in the context of rapid digital transformation and the growing application of artificial intelligence (AI). The new decree provides comprehensive guidance on the application of copyright and related‑rights regulations, addressing key issues such as authorship, ownership, statutory exceptions and limitations, registration procedures, and enforcement mechanisms. Through these measures, Decree 134 seeks to achieve an appropriate balance between safeguarding the legitimate interests of rightsholders and fostering innovation, research, and technological advancement, thereby strengthening the state’s framework for the effective management, protection, and exploitation of intellectual property in the digital and AI‑driven environment. Some notable aspects of Decree 134 are discussed below. Copyright for AI-Created Works Decree 134 provides important guidance on the determination of copyright and related rights in works created with the assistance of AI. Article 5a reaffirms the principle that human creativity remains central to copyright protection, clarifying that copyright or related rights arise only where a human makes a substantial and decisive intellectual contribution, exercises effective control over the creative outcome, and assumes responsibility for the content and its legality. At the same time, the provision confirms that AI is regarded solely as a technological tool rather than a rights‑holding subject, thus ensuring consistency with the fundamental concepts of authorship and ownership under the IP Law. By introducing requirements on transparency, proof of human contribution, and compliance with AI‑specific labelling and technical marking obligations, Decree 134 establishes a clear and enforceable legal framework for the responsible use of AI in creative activities. Lawful Use of Copyrighted Texts and Data Article 37a of Decree 134 sets out the specific conditions under which copyrighted texts and data may be lawfully used for scientific research, experimentation,
Read More