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

December 14, 2012

Managing Intellectual Property for Entrepreneurs

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

On September 10, 2009, the Thai government established the National Creative Economy Policy Committee to set guidelines and translate policy into action by various government agencies. This led to the Creative Thailand program, which was intended to encourage the growth and competitiveness of businesses through creativity and research and development. Intellectual property rights (IPRs) play a crucial role in moving this policy forward.

Although the government has attempted to promote IPRs to the public through several channels, including publications and conferences, many business owners—especially entrepreneurs and new ventures—fail to understand the key link between IPRs and the success of their enterprise. If you are an entrepreneur or new venture, this article will provide you with guidelines for effectively managing your IPRs.

Guidance for IPR Users

Some companies develop their own IPRs, while others are simply IPR users. The latter model does not rely on creating IPRs; instead, the company may seek permission from the rights holder to use the rights. For businesses such as distributors and franchisees that rely on this model, there are two important keys to be considered:

• Conduct an IP survey: Entrepreneurs and new ventures should supplement their standard market surveys by conducting an IP survey in order to understand what IPRs already exist in the market and how to avoid infringing them.

For example, if you are going to use a new brand with your products, you should conduct a trademark search at the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) to determine whether anyone has already registered the same or a similar mark in Thailand. When introducing a new technology, a patent search will show whether your new product—or the technology involved in producing it—is already protected as a patent in Thailand. For complex technologies, a more thorough “Freedom-to-Operate” report from an IP lawyer may be required to make sure your product does not infringe an existing patent registration.

• Register your licensing agreement: If your business operates by using IPRs owned by others, you need to register your trademark licensing agreement or patent licensing agreement with the DIP. If you fail to do so, the agreement will be void and non-enforceable between the affected parties.

In a franchise agreement that includes a clause for the franchisor to grant trademark or patent rights to the franchisee, the franchise agreement should similarly be registered as a licensing agreement.

By registering the licensing agreement, you will protect your company when you use or sell products bearing the registered IPR, and the licensee or franchisee can fully exercise the rights under the law.

Additional Steps for IPR Owners

Companies that move beyond merely using IPRs and begin to innovate will likely hold a wide range of IPRs—not only trademarks, copyrights, patents, and trade secrets, but also domain names, websites, know-how, and more. These IPRs are important company assets and must be managed effectively so they can contribute to revenue growth and profitability. Companies that are creating their own IPRs should be sure to take the following four steps:

1. Take an initial inventory: Knowing what IP you have, what your IPRs are worth, how your IPRs are protected, and how they should be protected will help you get the maximum value from your creation and development. This can be difficult for a new venture, which may not know much about IP law and the scope of IPR protection. At this first stage, you may need to consult with your company’s legal adviser. Then you can evaluate the IPRs within the company’s broader portfolio of assets and implement the proper measures to manage them.

2. Ensure compliance: By obtaining full protection of your IPRs under the law, you can ensure compliance while also contributing to your company’s bottom line. For example, if you create a new trademark or brand, you should register the trademark or brand with the DIP. If you come up with a unique idea or invention, obtaining patent protection will give you the exclusive right over the invention and prevent unauthorized use by your competitors. Your company may consider recording copyrighted works with the DIP to prove the company’s IPRs more easily in the future.

Without the proper protection, some IP may be walking right out the company’s door through employees, former employees, or visitors who are using e-mail, data storage devices, the telephone, or just taking things home. Today’s employees may be tomorrow’s competitors.

3. Create an IP portfolio: After initially managing your IPRs, collecting and keeping evidence to prove that your company is the true owner of these IPRs is necessary so that you will be prepared in the event of any infringement or opposition in the future. Trademark owners should collect documents demonstrating the use of the trademark in Thailand, such as advertisements, invoices showing sales figures of the mark, etc., to prove the well-known status of the mark in Thailand. It is also crucial to manage the deadline or expiration date for each of your IPR registrations to ensure timely payment of annuity fees or renewal fees.

4. Enforce and exploit rights: Monitoring and enforcing your IPRs is also essential, as the more popular your products become, the higher the chance your IPRs will be infringed. If you learn that a competitor has infringed your IPRs, you should enforce your rights through the relevant government authorities such as through raids against infringers or administrative methods, such as sending a cease-and-desist letter or mediation through the DIP.

By taking the simple steps outlined above, you can ensure your IPRs are well protected, which in turn will set a strong foundation for future innovation, faster growth, and improved profitability.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

October 23, 2025
Myanmar’s customs authorities have introduced new procedures allowing copyright holders to protect their intellectual property from infringing goods at the border. The Ministry of Finance and Revenue issued Notification No. 107/2025 on September 11, 2025, establishing rules and requirements for customs recordation under the Copyright Law of 2019. The notification includes eight official forms for copyright-related customs matters—three for applicants and five for the Customs Department. This was followed by Customs Department Announcement No. 1/2025, dated September 29, 2025, which details the security required for suspended goods. Customs recordation provides a proactive mechanism for rights holders to prevent importation of pirated works. By registering their works with the Customs Department, rights holders gain access to enhanced border enforcement measures, empowering customs officials to identify and intercept pirated goods before they enter the market. While copyright protection in Myanmar arises automatically under the Copyright Law of 2019, a registration certificate for copyright or related rights is required to apply for customs recordation. Customs Recordation Registered copyright and related rights holders can apply directly or through authorized legal representatives for customs recordation to prevent cross-border trade in pirated works. Applications must use the prescribed form and include all supporting documentary evidence specified in the form. The Customs Department will notify applicants within 15 days of receiving their application. Each recordation remains valid for two years from the date of acceptance and may be renewed for successive two-year periods by submitting a renewal application at least 30 days before expiration. Rights holders whose works are recorded must notify the Customs Department within five days of any amendment or withdrawal of information at the Intellectual Property Department. Suspension Orders Registered copyright and related rights holders can request a suspension order to prevent release of pirated goods into free circulation, regardless of whether they
October 3, 2025
In Thailand, the rise in online intellectual property infringement has prompted authorities to strengthen enforcement efforts, including the use of website-blocking orders under Section 20(3) of the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2560 (2017) (CCA). This provision authorizes the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES), with court approval, to block or remove computer data that constitutes a criminal offence under IP law. Since its implementation, the procedure has undergone several developments, which is an encouraging sign of progress. Website-blocking procedure In practice, website-blocking orders under Section 20(3) of the CCA are primarily used for copyright and trademark infringement. While such orders are legally applicable to patent infringement, their use remains challenging due to the difficulty of proving infringement through administrative procedures. The website-blocking procedure begins when an IP owner identifies online infringing content. For copyright infringement, which is considered a compoundable offence, the IP owner is required to first file a police report with the specialized police unit known as the Economic Crime Suppression Division (ECD) prior to filing the website-blocking application with the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP). For trademark infringement cases, the application can be filed directly with the DIP without a prior police report. The DIP reviews the evidence and, if infringement is confirmed, forwards it to the MDES for further consideration. If the case is deemed valid, the MDES requests a court order to block the infringing website. Once granted, the MDES notifies the internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to the specified website. Website blocking procedure in Thailand Recent advancements in website-blocking actions Seamless collaboration through digital integration. Thailand has made significant progress in digitizing its website-blocking procedures to improve efficiency and transparency. At present, all website-blocking applications and supporting evidence must be submitted in electronic format. These systems have significantly reduced processing
September 24, 2025
Online shopping in Thailand is more accessible than ever, with global platforms, local social media shops, and entertainment-driven social commerce enabling instant purchases. However, this convenience comes with rising concerns over digital intellectual property (IP) infringement, including counterfeit goods, pirated content, and unauthorized brand usage. At first glance, online platforms appear to offer quick solutions. Most major e-commerce sites, social media channels, and social commerce platforms provide “notice and takedown” systems, where IP owners can file complaints and request the removal of listings that infringe IP rights, such as trademarks and copyrights. These tools are certainly useful, as seeing a fake product vanish from a platform feels like progress. But the reality is less reassuring. The counterfeit goods themselves remain in warehouses, markets, or shops, ready to be resold. Sellers whose accounts are taken down often return within days under new names or accounts. In other words, a takedown is like cutting weeds without pulling out the roots: they always grow back. While notice and takedown tools are widely available and can be managed internally by most IP owners, their impact is often short-lived. IP owners seeking more effective, lasting protection need to take a more strategic and multilayered approach. The same applies to online piracy. Unauthorized streaming websites that offer free access to movies, TV shows, or sports broadcasts have become widespread in Thailand. To combat this, rightsholders can request website blocking under the Computer Crime Act, through the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society and the courts. Once requests are approved, internet service providers are ordered to block access to infringing sites. Blocking orders can be effective in disrupting large-scale piracy operations, but they also face limitations—pirate sites frequently reappear under new domains. Strategic Protection Whether the infringing material is physical counterfeit goods or intangible streaming content,
September 4, 2025
On June 6, 2025, the Superior People’s Court in Hanoi overturned a non-use cancellation decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam, a rare and impactful occurrence. In a ruling that may help clarify the enforcement of Vietnam’s IP Law, the court held that valid trademark use can be established through commercial arrangements where the brand owner maintains actual control over the use of the mark, and is not confined to relationships governed by a so-called “formal license agreement. Background: Cross-Border Use, Local Challenge A Singapore company owns a well-known brand of consumer products that has gained recognition across Southeast Asia. In recent years, the brand has been targeted by several unauthorized trademark filings in Vietnam. In one such instance, a local Vietnamese trading company—previously linked to the production and export of counterfeit goods to neighboring countries—filed a non-use cancellation against the Singapore company’s mark and sought to register it under its own name. If the cancellation had been upheld, it would have enabled a complete hijacking of the brand. The IP holder operates in Vietnam through a structured cross-border supply chain. Under an agreement between two related foreign entities, one of which managed regional operations, production orders were placed through a designated Vietnamese company. While the Vietnamese manufacturer was not a party to the agreement, its role in using the mark was recognized and governed by internal and commercial documentation. The Vietnamese manufacturer lawfully obtained the necessary permits, regulatory approvals, and customs clearances for producing the goods in Vietnam. These activities were supported by banking records and internal communications, evidencing active, continuous use of the mark in Vietnam. However, the IP Office concluded that this use did not meet the statutory criteria because the Vietnamese manufacturer did not have a direct license agreement with the brand owner, as