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 25, 2014

The Four Basics to Reap the Benefits of Intellectual Property

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

As a business owner or manager, you need to know the basics of intellectual property (IP) protection. Otherwise, you may fail to put in place adequate safeguards for securing IP rights, and you may not be able to fully derive the benefits of exploiting your intellectual assets.

In order to realise the benefits of IP fully, you should take it upon yourself to gain a complete understanding of the IP protection system.

There are several pertinent questions you should address prior to even creating your IP, to ensure you obtain the best protection available for safeguarding your rights under the law. In light of this pressing need, in the following article we delve into four basic concepts of IP protection that every IP owner should be familiar with.

What types of IP protection are available?

The types of IP protection available include patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets. These can be broken down in the simplest terms, as follows:

  • Patent is used to protect a new invention or a novel product design;
  • A trademark is for the protection of a product brand;
  • A copyright mainly offers protection for an aesthetic creation such as literature, art or music; and
  • A trade secret protects trade information beneficial to the business of the owner.

It is important you determine which types of protection are attributable to your IP creation. Some creations are eligible to be protected by more than one of the above types, so the most beneficial type of protection should be identified and obtained as soon as possible.

Depending on which type of IP you decide to pursue, you will need to fulfil specific legal requirements. For example, a product seeking patent registration must be seen, in the eyes of the law, as new, having an inventive step and being capable of industrial application.

It may not, however, be an absolute necessity for you to understand the fine details of these requirements. These issues are better answered by IP professionals. Most important is that you thoroughly address these issues before you seek protection.

Where should I protect my IP?

In general, protection of IP is limited to the territory in which the IP is registered.

A trademark registered in Thailand is protected only within Thailand. Therefore, it may not be sufficient for you to seek IP protection in just one country. You will need to ensure your IP is protected in all the countries where the business interests of that particular IP will be exploited.

When should I protect my IP?

You will also need to decide when to seek protection before you take action to exploit your IP, particularly when the asset is protectable under the patent system, which requires the product or design to be new.

It is futile to try to obtain a patent after you have manufactured and sold your innovative product you have spent valuable resources in developing, as the distribution of the product before filing the patent application has already negated its novelty.

Seeking protection for your IP sooner rather than later may be very beneficial, as it may save you from unnecessary stress and costly legal disputes about who is the legitimate owner.

Experienced IP lawyers often see their clients encounter problems with their trademarks being stolen by other parties who registered the trademarks in their own name, and eventually the legitimate owner is required to pursue litigation against such party or pay a considerable amount of money to purchase a trademark that was rightfully theirs in the first place.

How should I obtain protection?

In order to obtain legal protection, certain types of IP such as patents and trademarks are required to be registered with the relevant authority. On the other hand, some types such as copyrights and trade secrets are automatically protected.

Systems for recording the ownership of such IP are available as well.

You can submit an application for registration of your IP on your own without the help of an experienced IP practitioner, and some corporations may find this to be more cost-effective.

You should be aware, however, of possible difficulties during the registration process and of the challenges in trying to understand how to obtain the most beneficial protection for your IP.

In the worst-case scenario, you may find the protection you obtained is insufficient due to its narrow scope, resulting from a lack of understanding of the registration process. This could cause difficulties when you want to enforce your rights against an IP infringer.

Although some of these questions may involve complicated legal issues, corporations operating in markets where they rely on IP as a competitive edge cannot afford to ignore them.

It is unlikely, if not impossible, for a business to be able to fully enjoy the benefits of its IP without a proper understanding of IP protection and how to maximise IP rights.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

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
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