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

February 14, 2018

Madrid Application Receiving Office Established in Thailand

Informed Counsel
With Thailand’s accession to the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks (Madrid Protocol) in November 2017, the Thai government is moving forward in supporting international registration of trademarks in the nation.
 
In early January 2018, the Ministry of Commerce organized an opening ceremony for its new Madrid Application Receiving Office at the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP), with the event witnessed by the Deputy Minister of Commerce, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Commerce, Director General of the DIP, and other high-ranking government officials. 
 
The office will be tasked with receiving and examining international applications using the Madrid system—inbound and outbound—and will also act as a center for disseminating knowledge about the Madrid system, including supporting brand owners in the international registrations of their trademarks.
 

Examination Guidelines

Pursuant to the Ministerial Regulation regarding the Madrid Protocol that was published in the Government Gazette on December 18, 2017, and came into force on November 7, 2017, once the DIP receives an international application from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) indicating Thailand as the designated country, the office will translate all the necessary information, such as the applicant’s name and address, the list of goods and services, etc., from English into Thai. At that point, the office will issue a domestic application number, distinct from the international application number, and proceed with the examination process.
According to section 18 of the Ministerial Regulation, the rules and procedures for Thai trademark applications will be applied to Madrid international applications. Given this fact, all the examination rules and procedures, including the interpretation of distinctiveness, examination for similarity, prohibition of marks, clarification of the specifications of goods and services, etc., will be based on local laws and practices, the same as for Thai applications.
 
If, upon examination, the office finds any irregularities in the international application that would trigger any grounds for refusal (e.g., nondistinctiveness of the mark) the office will issue a notification of provisional refusal to the applicant. To respond to the notification, the international applicant is required to appoint a local representative and provide a response within 60 days after receipt of the notification.
 
When the international application has been correctly amended and accepted, the office will publish the international application in the Thai Trademark Journal, the same as for applications filed via the national route. If a third party files an opposition against the registration of the international application, the office will not proceed with the registration of the opposed mark. At that stage, the international applicant must appoint a local representative and file a counterargument to the office within 60 days after receiving the opposition notice.
 
Timeline
 
As Thailand has adopted into law the declaration set out under Articles 5(2)(b) and (c) of the Madrid Protocol, the examination process for international applications using the Madrid system must be completed within 18 months; otherwise, the international application will automatically be deemed to be accepted for registration. However, in the case where an opposition action is raised by a third party, the office may still inform WIPO of a notification of refusal after the expiry of the 18-month time limit. In comparison, registration under the national route takes approximately 12–15 months before an applicant receives the first notification or notice of publication. 
 
It is important to note that, while the Madrid Protocol is an attractive option for foreign companies and trademark owners who seek trademark registration internationally due to the cross-border convenience in filing, renewing, and transferring rights it provides, the examination rules and procedures for international applications designating Thailand will not be less stringent.
 
Conclusion
 
Since the Madrid Protocol entered into force in Thailand, the nation has been receiving much attention from applicants in other countries seeking to register their marks in Thailand. The office has received 166 international registrations/applications designating Thailand as of January 15, 2018. Additionally, there are currently 20 international applications filed with the Thai DIP seeking IP protection in other member countries under the Madrid Protocol.  
 
These application figures are likely to increase in the near future with the removal of Thailand from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s Priority Watch List on December 15, 2017. Thailand is therefore likely to gain increased prominence among business owners and investors interested in expanding the protection of their brands, whether through the Madrid route or the national route. 

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 31, 2026
Vietnam’s most recent amendment of the Law on Intellectual Property (amended IP Law), passed by the National Assembly on December 10, 2025, and effective from April 1, 2026, represents one of the most significant updates to the IP Law in recent years. This amendment modernizes the IP framework, moving a step closer to international standards, while addressing the realities of Vietnam’s booming digital economy, e-commerce growth, and increasing foreign investment, which is crucial for Vietnam’s objective of complete economic transformation. For trademark practitioners, brand owners, and businesses, the changes are largely positive, as they promise faster processes, stronger enforcement tools—especially for online actions—and better commercialization options. However, they also introduce stricter requirements and a need for proactive preparation. Below are some of the most noteworthy changes in the amended IP Law related to trademarks. Significantly Shortened Timelines and Introduction of Fast-Track Examination The statutory timelines under the amended IP Law have been notably reduced: Substantive examination for trademarks is shortened from 9 months to 5 months (from the publication date). The publication period is shortened from 2 months to 1 month. A new fast-track mechanism allows substantive examination in as little as 3 months for qualifying applications (e.g., marks in actual use, facing infringement threats, or meeting government-specified criteria; details to be clarified in implementing regulations). The opposition period is shortened from 5 months to 3 months from publication. This is arguably the most welcome change. Vietnam’s IP Office has long faced criticism for lengthy backlogs, often stretching the trademark registration process to 18–24 months or more. The new timelines bring Vietnam closer to efficient systems. The fast-track option is particularly smart for high-value or urgent cases such as counterfeit threats on e-commerce platforms. However, careful preparation is mandatory for flawless applications from the start to maximize fast-track eligibility.
March 16, 2026
Indonesia’s Ministry of Law has introduced a new framework for patent applications that tightens filing requirements and introduces formal mechanisms for accelerated examination. Minister of Law Regulation No. 6 of 2026 on Patent Applications, which was issued on January 13, 2026, and took effect on February 23, 2026, serves as the implementing regulation for Law No. 65 of 2024 on Patents. It replaces the previous patent application framework (under Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 38 of 2018, as amended by Regulation No. 13 of 2021), which was considered no longer aligned with current legal, institutional, and technological developments. The regulation also reflects the institutional restructuring of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights into the Ministry of Law. Patent applications filed on or after February 23, 2026, must fully comply with the new regulation. Applications that were filed before this date will continue to be examined and processed under the previous regulation, pursuant to transitional provisions. Substantive Changes Definition of Invention The definition of “Invention” now explicitly includes systems, methods, and uses, in addition to products and processes. This expansion creates broader protection opportunities, particularly for software-enabled, digital, and method-based technologies, although it may also result in closer scrutiny during substantive examination. Excess Claims Fee Excess claims fees must now be paid at the time of filing. Failure to pay excess claims fees at filing results in the application being deemed withdrawn. There is no longer an option to defer payment to the substantive examination stage. This amendment forces applicants to face higher upfront costs. Patent claim strategy must be finalized prior to filing, reducing flexibility at later stages. Procedural and System Changes Fully Electronic Filing Patent applications must be filed electronically via the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) online filing system. Assisted filings to
March 13, 2026
For decades, intellectual property rights holders seeking to eliminate counterfeit goods from the Thai market have relied primarily on criminal raid actions to seize infringing products and hold infringers accountable. The deterrent value of this approach is typically threefold: imposing criminal liability on infringers, removing counterfeit goods from circulation, and subjecting violators to imprisonment and fines. However, these outcomes often fall short of fulfilling brand owners’ broader objectives. In many cases, those prosecuted are merely staff or intermediaries rather than the principals orchestrating the infringing operations. Moreover, any fines imposed are remitted to the Thai government—not to the rights holders who have suffered commercial harm and invested substantial resources in investigation and coordination with law enforcement authorities. As in other jurisdictions worldwide, rights holders seeking monetary compensation for IP infringement in Thailand have traditionally pursued separate civil litigation. Before initiating such proceedings, a brand owner must gather sufficient evidence to establish both the infringement and the resulting damages. Notably, Thai law does not recognize punitive damages; courts award only actual damages proven by the claimant. In the absence of seized infringing goods, the damages awarded in such cases are typically minimal. This all leaves rights holders with limited recourse despite possibly having suffered significant commercial injury. In 2005, Thailand amended its Criminal Procedure Code to introduce Section 44/1, which enables rights holders to claim damages within criminal proceedings at the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court prior to the evidentiary hearing. In practice, this mechanism allows an injured party to submit a petition for civil damages directly within the criminal case initiated by the public prosecutor. Historically, rights holders in Thailand have been reluctant to use Section 44/1 because the compensation awarded by courts was often insufficient to justify the effort. However, recent years have seen a notable shift
March 13, 2026
Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property (IP Law) has undergone continuous amendment in recent years, with the latest amendment issued at the end of 2025. Among the amended and supplemented provisions, the regulation that has perhaps attracted the most attention is a provision relating to the use of protected IP objects by artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Specifically, Article 7 of the 2025 IP Law introduces a completely new Clause 5, which reads in full as follows: “Organizations and individuals are permitted to use texts and data relating to intellectual property objects that have been lawfully published, and which the public is allowed to access, for the purposes of scientific research, experimentation, and training of artificial intelligence systems, provided that such use will not unreasonably affect the legitimate rights and interests of the authors and intellectual property rights holders in accordance with this Law. With respect to texts and data that are objects protected by copyright and related rights, the use of the texts and data as set forth herein must also be in accordance with the regulations of the Government.” Analyzing this newly added provision in the context of how it was conceived, as well as the challenges that still lie ahead, can provide some interesting insights. From Aspirations to Flight in Science and Technology From the end of 2024 and throughout 2025—the 50th anniversary of the country’s reunification—Vietnam witnessed numerous sweeping changes in many areas, including legislative development. It could be said that no sessions of the National Assembly have ever adopted as many laws, resolutions, and major policies as this one. The aspirations of the highest-level leadership have been concretized into major law and policy projects, which were drafted, developed, and passed at record speed. All of this was aimed at building a foundation for Vietnam to achieve