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

May 28, 2024

Laos Issues Updated Law on Intellectual Property

On March 1, 2024, the Lao official gazette published the newly amended Law on Intellectual Property No. 50/NA, dated November 20, 2023 (the “2023 Law on IP”). The timing of this update is consistent with Laos’ history of providing regular revisions to the country’s IP legislation since the enactment of the first Law on Intellectual Property by the National Assembly in 2007 (the “2007 Law on IP”). These revisions include amendments in 2011, 2017, and now 2023.

Prior to 2007, intellectual property (IP) protection was granted through decrees issued by the prime minister’s office for selected types of IP: trademarks, patents, petty patents, and industrial designs. The 2007 Law on IP marked a significant shift by introducing comprehensive legislation to protect industrial property rights, new plant varieties, copyright, and related rights. It laid the foundations for IP legislation in Laos, with the primary objectives of promoting and protecting intellectual creativity and attracting foreign investment.

Since 2007, the enactment of new IP laws has not always entailed significant amendments to the existing IP framework; however, it frequently serves as an opportunity to introduce long-considered mechanisms. For example, the amended Law on Intellectual Property No. 38/NA, dated November 15, 2017 (“2017 Law on IP”) introduced, among other provisions, the possibility of opposition by a third party after the formal examination of a trademark application by the examiner.

The 2023 Law on IP brought additional changes and updates to the IP regulatory landscape in Laos. Some of the most notable of these are highlighted below.

Trademarks

While Laos already introduced a new mechanism for online trademark registration in November 2023—about a month before enacting the 2023 Law on IP—the new law did introduce some noteworthy changes.

Well-Known Marks

The 2023 Law on IP appears to ease the burden of proof for establishing that a mark is well known.

The 2017 Law on IP outlined several criteria for a trademark to be recognized as a well-known mark, thereby affording protection to these trademarks in Laos even in the absence of registration. One of the criteria was that the goods or services bearing the mark had to be widely circulated “within the territory.” However, the law did not define the phrase “within the territory,” leaving it open to interpretation. Consequently, this ambiguity may have restricted a trademark’s eligibility as a well-known trademark, potentially limiting its protection within Laos.

Another criterion was that consumers within the country had to widely recognize and acknowledge the reputation of the trademark. Once again, the term “within the country” was open to interpretation.

The 2023 Law on IP no longer includes the terms “territory” or “country,” eliminating doubts regarding potential interpretation that may have restricted the criteria to the Lao market only. Accordingly, evidence that a product is widely circulated, even worldwide, can now be used to demonstrate that a trademark is a well-known trademark. Additionally, the examiner may consider other criteria as well. However, the 2023 Law on IP does not state whether all criteria must be met or if only some are required.1

Trade Name Registration Requirement

Under the 2017 Law on IP, it was not necessary to register a trade name, such as the name of a legal entity registered with the Ministry of Industry and Commerce (MOIC). However, the 2023 amendment suggests that trade names must now be registered to be granted protection against third party infringement.

Industrial Property Rights

Cancellation of Trademarks, Industrial Designs, or Geographical Indications

The 2023 Law on IP outlines two distinct procedures for canceling these IP assets. Similar to under the 2017 Law on IP, third parties may file a request for cancellation with the MOIC within five years of the publication of registration in the official intellectual property gazette. In addition, a new amendment now explicitly provides the possibility of canceling trademark, industrial design, or geographical indication registrations that are deemed either “not correct” or made in bad faith. The MOIC assumes this power without defining these terms. As to bad faith, in practice, both before and after the 2023 Law on IP, examiners evaluate the good faith of applications prior to registration, despite the lack of specific authorizing provisions in legislation. The 2023 Law on IP has now expressly granted authorities the power to assess bad faith post-registration. This seems to be the prerogative of the Department of Intellectual Property to prevent Laos from becoming a refuge for bad-faith applicants, such as trademark squatters.

Exhaustion of Rights

The 2023 Law on IP introduces the concept of exhaustion of rights, which may be the most notable addition to the IP legislative landscape in Laos. The operative language in the law suggests that the rights of trademark owners are exhausted as soon as a product bearing their trademark is sold, thereby preventing the trademark owner from restricting the use or resale of the product.

This aspect may provide further insight into the stance of local authorities on parallel imports. Historically, Laos has maintained a tolerant approach toward parallel imports, though its legality may be questionable. With exceptions for specific products necessitating a specific license from a licensor to a designated licensee with the right to sell the products domestically (e.g., drugs, medicine, cars), the legality of parallel imports remained uncertain.

However, the 2023 Law on IP has not amended provisions that could be cited to argue against the legality of parallel imports. The law still allows trademark or geographical indication owners to prevent third parties from using, selling, importing, or exporting goods bearing a trademark identical or similar to a registered trademark. This appears to present a potential conflict with the provisions on exhaustion of rights mentioned above, and it may require further clarification in the future.

Industrial Designs

Under the 2017 Law on IP, one of the requirements for protecting an industrial design was to provide evidence that the design was new and not formerly disclosed.

The 2023 Law on IP provides greater clarity on the methods of disclosure. While it remains essential for an industrial design to be novel, the revised law specifies that the industrial design must not have been disclosed to the public through “print media, electronic mediums, practical use, exhibitions, or any other means in Laos” prior to the priority date or the actual filing for registration. Accordingly, the law now explicitly recognizes the use of electronic media, such as websites and social media, as forms of disclosure.

Patents and Petty Patents

Means of Disclosure to the Public

The 2023 Law on IP provides similar updates regarding disclosure of patents and petty patents. It explicitly recognizes electronic media as a means of disclosure that may undermine the requirement of novelty. Previously, the law merely stated that the patent or petty patent should not have been known by the public, without providing further details. The 2023 Law on IP now stipulates that patents and petty patents must be inventions that have not been disseminated via publication in writing (e.g., newspapers), online media, actual use, or any other forms in Laos during the year before the application. The amendment provides good clarifications, as we can now say with certainty that an invention disseminated on the internet through a domain that is accessible in Laos is not eligible.

Required Information for Patent and Petty Patent Applications

As part of the application, the applicant previously had to include a thorough description of the invention or utility innovation that clearly explains its benefits and how to use it. The 2023 Law on IP now provides that for inventions derived directly or substantially from genetic resources or traditional know-how, the origin, name of the community, or ethnic group must also be disclosed.

Geographical Indications

The protection of a geographical indication now starts from the filing date of the application instead of from the date of registration.

Copyright

Protection Extended to Other Works of Art and Electronic Works

The 2017 Law on IP provided a list of works eligible for copyright protection. The list included:

  • Drawings, paintings, carvings, lithography, tapestries, embroidery, and other works of fine art;
  • Sculptures, engravings, and other works of sculpture;
  • Designs of buildings or construction, internal or external decorations, designs, and other architectural works;
  • Photographs produced using technical methods and works expressed by an analogous process;
  • Illustrations, maps, plans, sketches and three-dimensional works related to geography, topography, architecture, or science;
  • Dramatic-musical works, pantomimes or dramas, choreographic works, and other works created for performance purposes;
  • Musical compositions, with or without lyrics, including edited notes or tunes;
  • Phonograms;
  • Works of applied art; and
  • Films or other cinematographic works, or works expressed by an analogous process, including audiovisual works consisting of a sequence of images that can be continuously projected as a moving picture and can be recorded with other materials so as to be continuously projected as a moving picture, including their soundtracks.

To this list, the 2023 Law on IP adds “other works of art,” expanding the scope of protection to encompass a broader range of artistic creations. In addition, the law specifies that creations can be tangible or electronic in nature.

Protection Term

Previously, the term of protection for applied art and pictures was 25 years from the date of creation. This term has now been extended to 30 years.

General Prohibition

As a general prohibition, the 2023 Law on IP now expressly prohibits counterfeiting, modifying, or using intellectual property rights of another person for commercial gain without authorization from the rightful IP owner. Accordingly, the use of counterfeit goods for personal use only, without any intent of engaging in a commercial activity, may now be accepted in Laos.

Conclusion

The 2023 Law on Intellectual Property introduces significant updates and enhancements to Laos’ IP regulatory framework, marking a pivotal step in the country’s ongoing commitment to robust intellectual property protection. Noteworthy changes include streamlined criteria for well-known trademarks, mandatory registration of trade names, and clarified disclosure requirements for industrial designs and patents. The law also introduces the concept of exhaustion of rights, potentially influencing parallel import practices. By expanding the scope of copyright protection to include electronic works and extending the protection term for applied art, the new law reflects Laos’ dedication to fostering innovation and safeguarding intellectual creativity. These amendments aim to attract foreign investment and align Laos’ IP laws with international standards, ensuring comprehensive protection for creators and innovators.

1 The criteria are as follows: (1) the relevant sector of the public recognizes the trademark through trade, use of the trademark on or in connection with goods or services, or in advertising; (2) the products, goods, or services bearing the trademark are widely circulated; (3) sufficient volume of goods sold or services provided; (4) regular and continuous use of the trademark; (5) goodwill associated with use of the trademark with the goods or services, based on factors such as good quality, service, or popularity; (6) consumers widely recognize the reputation of the trademark; and (7) high value of investment in the trademark, such as investing in the advertisement and distribution of the main trademark.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 6, 2026
Introduction: A Trademark Paradox in Sustainable Packaging Walk into any Thai supermarket, and the label-free water bottle is no longer a novelty. Thailand’s packaging market, valued at approximately USD 15.68 billion in 2025, is shifting toward minimalist, plastic-light designs as ESG pressures reshape how brands present their products. The country generated roughly 5.68 million tons of plastic waste in 2021, with a recycling rate of only 19 percent, and regulators are now considering rules that would allow label-free bottled water relying on embossing, laser printing, or QR codes instead of wrap-around labels. As packaging itself becomes the brand identifier, a paradox emerges: designs built to say the least often struggle hardest for protection under Thai intellectual property law. The Trademark Barrier: When Shape Is Not Enough Section 7, paragraph 2(10) of the Thai Trademark Act deems a shape distinctive only if it is not the natural form of the goods, is not necessary to achieve a technical result, and does not add value to the goods. The Department of Intellectual Property’s 2022 examination guidelines apply this test conservatively, as the following examples illustrate. A plain water bottle relying on subtle contours to signal its brand is typically read as just another bottle, not a source identifier. Acquired distinctiveness offers a theoretical escape route, but it demands extensive evidence of sales, advertising, and consumer recognition—an especially heavy burden for new entrants whose minimalist packaging has not yet achieved market prominence. The result is a structural bias against precisely the design innovation that sustainability goals are meant to encourage. Design Patents: A Partial, Imperfect Substitute Design patent protection, covering a product’s shape, configuration, or ornamentation, appears to offer an alternative route. In practice, it is constrained by the same forces driving the minimalist trend. Because many brands converge on similar solutions—clear
August 4, 2026
Intellectual property (IP) protection sometimes hinges on fame and recognition. However, this alone will not always be sufficient to overcome an IP dispute when it involves contractual obligations or registered rights. Below are five cases from around the world that tackle some of the basic issues in IP registration, ownership, commercialization, and enforcement. 1. USA: Taylor Swift Trademark Application Refused Taylor Swift recently filed a trademark application to register “The Life of a Showgirl,” which is the title of her 12th studio album. When examining a trademark application, the examiner considers various factors before deciding whether it should be registered. One of these factors is whether there is a likelihood of confusion (i.e., would a regular consumer mistake the origin of the trademark). In Taylor Swift’s case, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) decided that that there would be a risk of confusion. This decision was based on the existing registered trademark, “Confessions of a Showgirl,” owned by Maren Wade, which was registered in 2015. The USPTO refused Taylor Swift’s application based on the shared key distinctive element “of a showgirl,” the lack of sufficient distinguishing terms, the marks being used in overlapping markets (entertainment and performances), and because consumers may assume a common commercial source. Maren Wade then filed a lawsuit in California against Taylor Swift and her affiliated companies, arguing that Taylor Swfit’s branding is confusingly similar in structure, wording, and overall commercial impression to her registered mark. She is also drawing on the USPTO’s refusal of Taylor Swift’s application to support her argument of a likelihood of confusion. A judgment has not yet been reached in this case, but it serves as an important reminder of the importance of satisfying the essential elements required for IP registration. 2. Australia: Katy Perry v. Katie Perry In
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
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 on the Chambers and Partners website.