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

July 28, 2021

Extension of the TRIPS General Transition Period for Least Developed Countries: Effects on Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar

On June 29, 2021, World Trade Organization (WTO) members approved another 13-year extension of the least developed country (LDC) transition period for applying the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The extension came as a result of a last-minute consensus during the TRIPS Council meeting, and just two days short of the original expiry date of July 1, 2021. As a result of the agreed extension, the new deadline for LDCs to comply with the TRIPS intellectual property protections is July 1, 2034.

The TRIPS Agreement establishes minimum standards for protection of intellectual property rights in WTO member states, which include complying with the substantive rules under the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property and the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, as well as rules on the protection of trademarks, geographical indications, patents, industrial designs, layout designs of integrated circuits, and undisclosed information (i.e., trade secrets).

At the same time, the WTO recognized that its LDC members face unique challenges, often coupled with a lack of resources or administrative infrastructure, and are not yet at a point where full compliance with the TRIPS Agreement would be feasible. Therefore, LDCs were not required to implement the TRIPS Agreement other than certain articles on equal treatment for foreign parties, most-favored nation status, and obligations under World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties. Instead, a “transition period,” or grace period, was instituted to give LDC members time to prepare for full adoption of the treaty. It is this transition period that has been extended until July 1, 2034.

Many LDCs are already in compliance with some of the remaining provisions, so the latest extension will have varying effects in these jurisdictions. Overviews of the extension’s ramifications for Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar are provided below.

Cambodia

In Cambodia, the effects are primarily copyright-related, as other IP matters are covered under existing laws and regulations that are generally already in line with the TRIPS Agreement. The TRIPS Agreement incorporates the substantive provisions of the Berne Convention (except those on moral rights), including providing for automatic protection of literary and artistic works without local publication formalities.

Cambodia, on the other hand, does not grant automatic copyright protection, so until the country amends domestic legislation or becomes fully bound by the TRIPS Agreement or the Berne Convention, copyright holders will have to carefully review their protection in Cambodia. Without meeting local publication requirements, foreign copyright holders may find that their work is without protection in Cambodia.

The extension of the transition period also relates to protection of trade secrets and undisclosed information in Cambodia. Currently, the Cambodian Constitution and Civil Code afford private information legal protection, and the Criminal Code makes disclosure of any confidential information a crime, but there is not yet a law specifically on trade secrets. While the TRIPS Agreement treats disclosure of confidential information as an act of unfair competition, Cambodia’s broad treatment of the issues falls short of this. There is no guidance on what is considered a trade secret, conditions for obtaining protection, the protection and remedies available, and exceptions. This means that commercial secrets (e.g., marketing plans, pricing information, etc.) that would normally be afforded trade secret protection may not currently be eligible for protection in Cambodia.

As part of its WTO accession commitments, Cambodia agreed to protect undisclosed test or other data submitted for marketing approval of agricultural or pharmaceutical products using new chemical entities from unfair commercial use (i.e., data exclusivity) for at least five years after a grant of marketing approval. However, it seems that this specific commitment may be suspended until 2033 under the pharmaceutical products waiver (see below) in light of Cambodia’s LDC status.

An eight-year data exclusivity period with respect to agricultural products is currently available upon request, but it is unclear whether this also applies to pharmaceutical products, potentially making this information difficult to protect under current Cambodian law.

Laos

The extension of the TRIPS deadline for LDCs is expected to have no immediate consequences for IP owners in Laos, which is a contracting member of the Berne Convention and the Paris Convention. These agreements are already reflected in the Law on Intellectual Property, which is the cornerstone of the IP legal framework in Laos. The government has also issued various regulations (for example, on patents and petty patents, industrial designs, layout designs of integrated circuits, geographical indications, and copyrights and related rights) in accordance with recommendations of international organizations such as WIPO.

Myanmar

For Myanmar, the extension of the TRIPS transition period for LDCs has broad implications, as implementation of four substantive IP laws (enacted in 2019) is still pending and the country thus still remains out of compliance with most TRIPS requirements.

Implementation work has begun for only one of these four laws: the Trademark Law. The newly formed Intellectual Property Department (IPD) launched the “soft-opening period” of the law on October 1, 2020, accepting applications for the refiling of existing marks in Myanmar to be re-filed under the Trademark Law. The full implementation of the law has been delayed, and no date has yet been fixed. The Ministry of Commerce has indicated that they expect implementation of the other three laws to take place only after the Trademark Law has taken effect.

In the meantime, new marks can still be recorded via a Declaration of Ownership under the old system, while protections for industrial designs, patents, and copyrights continue to proceed under the common law system and related existing laws.

Pharmaceuticals

This extension of the TRIPS general transition period does not affect the separate TRIPS Council waiver regarding pharmaceutical products, which exempts LDCs from protecting pharmaceutical patents and test data until January 1, 2033. That waiver also requires them, in the meantime, to allow “mailbox applications” to meet countries’ priority deadlines, whereby the country’s intellectual property authority will accept the application but not examine it until the pharmaceutical transitional period ends. Protection can then be granted for the remainder of the patent term, calculated from the filing date.

Conclusion

While this extension of the TRIPS transition period for LDCs is not the kind of legal or policy change that requires an immediate response, it is a good reminder for companies operating in LDCs such as Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar to take stock of their intellectual property in each jurisdiction and consider whether alternate protection strategies may be necessary based on the continued application of local laws that may not comply with the TRIPS Agreement. With the proper approach, rights holders can often achieve satisfactory levels of protection for their intellectual property in these jurisdictions despite the persistence of legal or administrative hurdles.

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.
July 24, 2026
For businesses in Thailand’s regulated industries, the problem of “too many licenses” is one of the most familiar hurdles to getting a product to market. Take a simple example: importing the materials necessary to sell teriyaki chicken skewers. To legally do this, a business may need approvals from several different agencies—separate permits for the chicken (Department of Livestock Development), the dipping sauce (Thai FDA), the wooden skewers (Department of Forestry), and other ingredients, each under a different authority. This kind of overlap is often cited to argue for a “regulatory guillotine”—a systematic review to cut outdated or duplicative rules that slow investment and business activity. The Facilitation of Licensing and Public Service Consideration Act B.E. 2569 (2026) (Licensing Facilitation Act 2026) is Thailand’s most significant response yet to that concern. This article looks at the Facilitation Act 2026 through a life sciences and regulatory affairs lens—what it may mean for the manufacturers, importers, and distributors of food, drugs, medical devices, cosmetics, and similar products who routinely deal with several regulators to bring a single product to market. The Super License: One Approval Standing in for Many The reform with the clearest potential for regulated-product businesses is the law’s “super license” mechanism, referred to as a “main license” in the statute. Once a business obtains the main license for a regulated activity, it is automatically deemed to hold all related sublicenses issued by other agencies for that same activity, provided the activity has been designated as eligible in the Government Gazette. The Licensing Facilitation Act 2026 also creates a central application center, allowing applicants to submit a single application and pay all relevant fees at one point of contact, with the center routing the application to each agency through a shared information system. The potential benefits of this for businesses
July 13, 2026
Indonesia’s Halal Product Assurance Agency (BPJPH) has issued new regulations establishing clearer procedures for imposing administrative sanctions on businesses that violate halal product assurance requirements. BPJPH Regulation No. 2 of 2026 on the Imposition of Administrative Sanctions for Violations of Halal Product Assurance Implementation, issued on June 5, 2026, strengthens Indonesia’s halal compliance framework, as mandated under Law No. 33 of 2014 on Halal Product Assurance and Government Regulation No. 42 of 2024 on the Implementation of Halal Product Assurance. BPJPH Regulation No. 2/2026 also supports the upcoming mandatory halal compliance deadline of October 17, 2026, which will apply to a broad range of products and services, including imported food and beverages, slaughtering products and services, natural and quasi-drugs, health supplements, cosmetics, chemical and genetically engineered products, clothing and accessories, household goods, prayer equipment, stationery, and class A medical devices. Scope BPJPH is authorized to impose administrative sanctions for violations of halal product assurance requirements committed by businesses, halal inspection agencies (LPH), halal auditors, halal product process companion institutions (lembaga pendamping PPH), and halal product process companions (pendamping PPH). The head of BPJPH has authority to determine, cancel, or amend the imposition of administrative sanctions, including upon receipt of objections. This authority covers revocation of Halal Certificates (including foreign halal certificate registration numbers), withdrawal of goods from circulation, freezing of LPH operations, freezing of halal product process companion institutions, revocation of PPH companion institution registration numbers, revocation of halal auditor registration numbers, and revocation of LPH accreditation status. Administrative Sanctions Businesses may be subject to any of the following administrative sanctions: Written warning; Administrative fine; Revocation of the halal certificate, including revocation of foreign halal certificate registration numbers; and Withdrawal of goods from circulation. The regulation sets out the types of violations that may trigger these sanctions, with each
July 8, 2026
On July 7, 2026, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) issued a press release announcing the establishment of two new subcommittees designed to intensify oversight of digital platforms and modern trade businesses. The formation of the digital platform subcommittee marks a significant escalation in competition enforcement following the TCCT’s Guidelines on Multi-Sided Platforms and E-Commerce Businesses, which took effect on March 25, 2026. Platform operators, sellers, and related service providers should expect heightened regulatory scrutiny and potential investigations into practices already flagged under the March guidelines. Two Dedicated Enforcement Bodies The first new body is the digital platform subcommittee—formally the Subcommittee on Supervision, Monitoring, and Prevention of Trade Conduct in Digital Platform Business. It is tasked with driving intensive oversight of digital platform businesses. It will coordinate with government agencies, the private sector, business operators, and other relevant stakeholders to supervise and prevent trade conduct that may affect competition, and to promote free and fair competition in the digital platform sector. The subcommittee will be composed of TCCT members and representatives from the Department of Internal Trade. The second body—the Subcommittee on Determining Guidelines and Action Plans Concerning Competition Conditions in Modern Wholesale and Retail Business—will study, analyze, and monitor market structure in modern wholesale and retail businesses, compile databases to analyze retail business concentration, assess impacts on small-scale operators, and propose supervisory measures for the retail sector. TCCT members will serve on the subcommittee alongside experts from government and private organizations, including the Office of Industrial Economics, the Office of Small and Medium Enterprises Promotion, the Thai SME Federation, and the Thai SME Council. Operational Impact for Industry Participants These subcommittees provide the TCCT with a focused mechanism to investigate various trade practices deemed unfair, and the TCCT has authority under the Trade Competition Act to issue cease-and-desist