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

January 15, 2017

Geographical Indications in Laos: A Boon for Local Producers and Investors?

Subscribe to Updates

The Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) in Laos has, at long last, issued a decision on the Implementation of Geographical Indications under the Law on Intellectual Property No. 1119/MOST, dated October 25, 2016. The decision allows both local and foreign geographical indications (GIs) to be registered in Laos, and it outlines a number of matters concerning GIs that had not previously been included in the Law on Intellectual Property No. 01/MOST of 2011, such as registration processes and remedies.

Background

A GI is a sign used on a product that has a specific geographical origin and quality, or a reputation derived from that origin. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the Agence Française de Développement (AFD), both of which are international organizations focused on alleviating poverty, are assisting Laos to implement a legal framework for GIs.

The FAO and the AFD were closely involved in drafting the decision, and in shaping guidelines used to prepare a book of specifications which sets out standards to efficiently implement a GI framework and guarantee that products under a GI certification meet sufficiently high standards of quality in order to be compliant with global GI standards.

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has also contributed to Laos’ GI framework. The ADB has conducted a study on the feasibility of GIs in Laos and has advocated the benefits that GIs have on local communities. The ADB’s support has been welcomed as a part of a larger scheme to help and support the development of SMEs in the country through programs such as the Support for Post-Private Sector and the Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises Development Program Partnership Framework. Accordingly, the ADB has provided technical assistance to enhance and support the national SME strategy and has helped train GI experts.

In a country where economic growth is highly dependent on natural resources, Laos is looking to diversify. The Lao government has recognized GIs as a way to promote local products with a certification trusted worldwide, and thus bolster exports and fuel economic growth.

Requirements to Register GIs

Under Articles 6 and 7 of MOST’s decision, “producer groups, operators, institutions, and/or interested persons” that want to apply to register a GI must establish a GI association. The association is responsible for ensuring that all of its members follow and comply with the book of specifications. In addition, the association has to inform the Lao Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) of any change in the list of producers/operators of the GIs, protect and valorize GIs, and implement any regulation relating to GIs. The DIP has the authority to examine and approve the registration of GIs.

The decision also allows a single producer/operator, either an individual or a legal entity, to register its product(s) and receive a GI certification after going through the application process. The decision states, however, that this represents only a very few “exceptional cases.”

Article 10 of the decision sets out a list of documents and other requirements that must be provided and fulfilled in order to register a GI with the DIP. The requirements are as follows:

  • Geographical indication application form;
  • Name of the geographical indication;
  • Name and address of the applicant;
  • Name and address of the representative and a power of attorney, if the application is filed through a representative;
  • Type of goods covered by the geographical indication application;
  • Book of specifications;
  • Summary of the book of specifications;
  • Receipt of payment of fee and service fee;
  • Any other relevant documents in relation to the geographical indication application.

In the case of registering a foreign GI, the applicant has to substantiate and verify that the foreign GI is currently protected in its country of origin. The term of protection for GIs is unlimited and commences from the filing date, which is determined as the date of submission of the complete set of documents above, and when payment of the fee and service fee is completed.

Once the application has been submitted, the DIP will conduct a preliminary examination of the application within 60 days of the filing date. If the application fulfills all of the requirements, the DIP will issue an acknowledgment to the applicant. If not all of the requirements have been fulfilled, the DIP will notify the applicant through a letter, detailing any points that need to be corrected.

After preliminary examination, substantive examination may take place. This includes, among other things, extensive research on the product’s origin and particulars, its reputation, whether any other existing GIs can be identified, or whether there are similarities to prior-registered trademarks.

If the DIP deems that the application complies with all of the requirements, the DIP will proceed to the next step of registering the GI. If the substantive examination requirements have not been met, a notification will be sent to the applicant, who will have 90 days to respond to the DIP’s request for further clarification or modification.

Amendments to an application may be allowed during the application period. It is possible to make these amendments without incurring a fee if the amendments are minor. Under Article 17 of the decision, minor amendments do not include:

  • Introducing new goods to the application;
  • Changes that relate to the essential characteristics or nature of the product;
  • Altering the “link” referred to in the book of specifications (i.e., any “details establishing the link between a given quality, the reputation or other characteristic of the product and the geographical origin”);
  • Changes to the name, or to any part of the name, of the product;
  • Changes that affect the defined geographical area; or
  • Changes that increase restrictions on trade in the product or its raw materials.

The application can be made with English-language documents. However, these documents will need to be translated within 90 days of the date of the submission of the application. Therefore, applicants should bear in mind additional cost incurred by said translation.

When the registration process is complete, the GI will be registered and published in the Industrial Property Gazette, and a certificate will be issued to the applicant—all in this order.

For local GIs, it may take 12 to 18 months from the filing date to the issuance of the GI certificate. For foreign GIs, this duration may differ, depending on whether the GI has been previously registered in a country with which Laos has signed a Memorandum of Understanding in order to specifically ease and speed up the examination process.

To date, Laos has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Cambodia, Vietnam, Japan, and Singapore. If an applicant has proof that its GI has been registered in one of these countries, a certificate may be issued in a shorter amount of time—possibly one to three months.

Looking Forward

Laos has developed a strategic plan in support of GIs, which sets out objectives until the year 2025. The plan aims to: (1) develop a more affluent socioeconomic middle-class populace; (2) uplift rural areas that do not yet take part in or benefit enough from the country’s current inflow of foreign direct investment; and (3) foster a more sustainable economy.

Laos is currently carrying out surveys to identify local products that could be suitable for GI certification and facilitating easier access to credit, in order to allow local producers to register their local GIs abroad. This process is in its very early stages and the government has yet to provide further clarification, but it appears to be a step in the right direction in terms of positioning Lao products in the international market and supporting local producers.

The Lao government has demonstrated its commitment to protecting and promoting IP assets not only through GIs, but also through international commitments like the Madrid Protocol, which entered into force in Laos on March 7, 2016. This has sent a positive signal to investors, which has bolstered Laos’ reputation as an attractive destination for investment.  It may take some time, however, before local producers become aware of the potential boon that GIs offer.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 24, 2026
Patent enablement requirements are provided under Article 102 of Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property (IP Law). In particular, a patent specification must “fully and clearly disclose the nature of the invention to such an extent that, based on the specification, a person having ordinary skill in the relevant art can implement the invention.” In pharmaceutical and biotechnology patents, this requirement is more complicated and subject to more rigorous assessment. The Patent Examination Guidelines (Guidelines) of the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IP Office) were amended in March 2026 to introduce Annexes III and IV for the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors, in which Annex III provides detailed guidelines on the assessment of specification requirements. These amendments were made under a project for strengthening capacity in industrial property examination between the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the IP Office. Annex III provides detailed instructions on how examiners assess enablement in a pharmaceutical or biotechnology application, and offers examples of acceptable and unacceptable descriptions with regard to the enablement aspect. Enablement Requirements in Pharma and Biotech Patents Article 12.7 of Circular 10/2026/TT-BKHCN (Circular 10) adds to the requirements of Article 102 of the IP Law that the description must demonstrate the novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability of the technical solution. For pharmaceutical composition subject matters, Article 12.9 of Circular 10 sets out that the description must present the results of clinical trials and/or the pharmacological effects of the claimed pharmaceutical composition, and must include at least the following information: Substance/mixture used. Testing method (system) employed. Information on the test results. Correlation between the pharmacological effects obtained from the tests and the application of the pharmaceutical product in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases. The Guidelines note that pharmacological study results should be presented in a quantified manner, and pharmacological
Read More
June 16, 2026
Since the implementation of the Trademark Law 2019 on April 1, 2023, Myanmar has operated under a modern first-to-file trademark system that brings its registration framework closer to international practice. As the new regime continues to develop in practice, applicants are increasingly required to navigate formal examination requirements, substantive objections, and procedural deadlines with greater precision. This article provides a high-level review of the trademark examination process in Myanmar, focusing on the principal stages from initial review to approval, the types of objections commonly raised by the Intellectual Property Department (IPD), and the key considerations for responding effectively. A clear understanding of these issues is essential for applicants seeking to secure registration efficiently and to mitigate avoidable delays or refusals. Examination Process: Key Stages Trademark applications filed with the IPD undergo two stages of review. Formality Examination The IPD first verifies compliance with procedural requirements, including: Correct Nice Classification Clear mark representation Accurate applicant details Clearly defined goods or services Representative details, if the application is filed by a representative Other formality requirements cover translation and transliteration of any non-English or non-Myanmar elements in the mark, color claim details, applicable disclaimers, and payment of official fees. Deficiencies result in an office action requiring correction within 30 days, which may be extended upon request. Registrability Examination The IPD also assesses registrability. A mark may be refused if it: Lacks distinctiveness Is descriptive or generic Misleads the public or violates public order/morality Contains prohibited state symbols Only compliant applications proceed to publication. Responding to Office Actions Applicants must respond within 30 days of notification from the IPD. Depending on the nature of the objection, strategies may include submitting legal arguments for distinctiveness, providing evidence of acquired distinctiveness, filing appropriate disclaimers, clarifying descriptions such as color claims, or amending the listed goods
Read More
June 15, 2026
The surge in AI development has led to a desperate demand for large, high-quality training data. However, real-world data can be expensive to collect, difficult to access, and often subject to strict privacy and regulatory constraints. Synthetic data, which consists of artificially generated records that replicate the statistical properties of real-world data without reproducing specific individuals’ information, provides an appealing solution by generating artificial datasets at scale without relying on identifiable personal information. It combines speed, cost efficiency, and regulatory compliance, making it a sensible alternative for organizations seeking to reduce risks while maintaining data utility. When properly anonymized, synthetic datasets may fall outside the scope of laws such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), reducing compliance burdens while still supporting high-quality model training. However, relying on synthetic data without rigorous legal due diligence could be a strategic mistake. It replaces one set of known risks (scraping, direct privacy liability) with a new set of complex liabilities. The narrative that synthetic data is a “silver bullet” for privacy and IP compliance is dangerous and could be misleading. While synthetic data addresses data scarcity, it also introduces new legal uncertainties. Legal counsel should anticipate downstream risks arising from compromised data sources. Models trained on unlawfully obtained data may need to be decommissioned, even if their outputs appear lawful. What is synthetic data? Synthetic data refers to artificially generated information created using AI techniques such as deep learning and generative models. Instead of copying real records, it reproduces the statistical patterns and relationships found in the original dataset. Synthetic data generally falls into three categories: Fully synthetic data – Entirely new data points generated from learned patterns. The model studies the structure of the original data and produces records that resemble real-world
Read More
June 10, 2026
In March 2026, the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IP Office) issued a decision refusing a trademark application after considering an opposition based primarily on copyright grounds. The outcome is noteworthy because the foreign brand owner had neither trademark registrations nor applications in Vietnam at the time the opposition was filed, and the IP Office has historically applied a stringent approach to oppositions relying on copyright. The Opposition Maurten is a well-known Swedish sports nutrition brand recognized globally for its innovative hydrogel technology, which is designed to help endurance athletes fuel more effectively without gastrointestinal discomfort. The brand’s distinctive logo is characterized by clean lines and a bold black-and-white color scheme, and has long been associated with the company’s performance products. The brand’s logo is displayed above. An identical mark was filed for registration by a Vietnamese trademark squatter. In 2023, a Vietnamese individual filed an application for registration of an identical mark (Application No. 4-2023-38668), a practice commonly observed in Vietnam as trademark squatting. The brand owner engaged Tilleke & Gibbins to assist with strategy and filing an opposition to the mark. At the time, Maurten had no trademark rights or meaningful use in Vietnam, and global marketing data showed only modest figures without any local presence. Thus, to convince the IP Office to refuse the squatter’s application, instead of relying on trademark rights or use evidence, the opposition strategy centered on the copyright protection of the logo itself, as copyright arises automatically in Vietnam upon creation of the work and does not require registration. (It is worth noting, however, that the IP Office has traditionally been cautious in accepting copyright as a basis for refusing trademark applications.) On September 24, 2024, an opposition was filed on three main grounds: confusing similarity, copyright infringement of the artistic work,
Read More