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

September 25, 2019

Myanmar’s New Trademark Law: What Foreign Business Owners Need to Know

The Myanmar Trademark Law 2019 was finally enacted on January 30, 2019. This is an important step in the government’s efforts to attract foreign investment into Myanmar, as the new Trademark Law establishes a framework for a comprehensive trademark registration and protection system to both foreign and domestic trademark owners. In this article, we will address some of the common questions raised by foreign business owners in Myanmar.

What are trademarks?

Under the new Myanmar Trademark Law 2019, trademarks are defined as any visually perceptible sign that distinguishes the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings. This includes an individual’s personal name, letters, numerals, graphical representations, and combinations of colors. Nevertheless, it is important to note that not all trademarks are registrable. For example, an application to register trademarks that are deemed to lack distinctiveness, or are directly descriptive of goods or services, will be refused. An application may also be rejected if the trademark is applied for in bad faith, or is identical or confusingly similar to a third party’s trademark.

I have already registered my trademarks in my home country. Why do I need to file new applications in Myanmar?

Trademark rights are territorial in nature. This means that the ownership of a registered trademark in another country will not be sufficient for you to establish grounds for trademark infringement, if your trademark is used by an unauthorized third party in Myanmar. If you are using (or if you are planning to use) your trademark in Myanmar, it is highly recommended for trademark protection to be sought here. You may also wish to consult your trademark agent on the possibility of claiming the priority date of your foreign trademark applications in Myanmar.

I have already recorded my trademarks in Myanmar using statutory declarations in the past, and I have also published trademark notices in the Myanmar newspapers for many years. How does this new law affect me?

In accordance with the Myanmar Trademark Law 2019, trademark owners who have previously recorded their trademarks with the Office of Registration of Deeds are required to apply for registration under the new law in order to enjoy statutory trademark rights. Proof of existing registrations under the old framework can be submitted at the time of application. In other words, upon the entry into force of the new law, existing trademark declarations and trademark notices will no longer be sufficient to demonstrate ownership of trademarks in Myanmar.

I am using the trademark under a license. Can I file an application for the trademark, too?

This will depend on the contractual arrangement between you and your trademark licensor. Nonetheless, the new Myanmar Trademark Law 2019 requires all trademark licenses to be recorded with the Trademark Office. If you are a trademark owner, it is important to note that all licenses granted should be recorded, as unrecorded trademark licenses will be deemed void under the law.

How do I file a trademark application under the new system?

Although the Myanmar Trademark Law 2019 has been officially approved and signed, the effective date has yet to be announced. The government is currently working on the establishment of administrative bodies and the drafting of implementing regulations to support the new system, aiming for completion by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the Myanmar Trademark Law 2019 requires the following for a trademark application: 

  • The application request in the form designated by the Trademark Office;
  • The name and address of the applicant for registration (or the representative’s name and address if submitted by a representative);
  • A clear and complete representation of the trademark to be applied for; and
  • A description of goods and/or services requested for registration in accordance with the stipulated international trademark classification. (This is expected to be the Nice International Classification, but is not yet finalized.)

In addition, the following should be provided where applicable:

  • The registration number, type, and country of origin of the entity, if the applicant is applying on behalf of a legal entity;
  • Documents supporting, describing, and requesting the claim of priority right, if the applicant requests such right;
  • Documents supporting, describing, and requesting exhibition priority right, if the applicant requests such right;
  • A certificate of registration (Declaration of Ownership), if the trademark has been recorded at the Myanmar Office of Registration of Deeds; and
  • Other requirements that may be set from time to time by the Trademark Office.

I have a limited budget. Can I file applications by myself?

While this is not prohibited under the Myanmar Trademark Law 2019, it is expected that foreign applicants will have to appoint a local representative to file applications. This is a common practice in many jurisdictions, and will be further clarified through implementing regulations to be issued in

due course. Assuming such rules are adopted, it will be necessary to seek professional assistance in submitting an application—which actually increases the likelihood of application approval anyway. An experienced trademark practitioner will be able to assist in building and maintaining your portfolio. This may include conducting pre-filing clearance checks, ensuring that the scope of goods and services applied for is appropriate so as to reduce the likelihood for an invalidation action based on non-use, avoiding or arguing against the imposition of trademark disclaimers, the monitoring of third-party trademarks, the maintenance of deadlines, and more. A customized and well-designed trademark prosecution strategy will reduce or anticipate the possibility of costly objections, rejections, and third party oppositions—and is a more cost-effective option for trademark owners in the long run.

Since the law is not yet effective, what should I do in the meantime?

Pending the effective date of the new Myanmar Trademark Law 2019, you should begin collating all evidence of existing use of your trademark, including past trademark notices, advertisements, invoices, catalogues, office stationery, and other clear evidence of use of your trademark in Myanmar. It is important to ensure that all such materials are dated. For trademark owners whose existing marks are subject to licensing arrangements in Myanmar, these too should be audited and checked for up-to-date and accurate depictions of the relationship with licensees, to avoid any ambiguities when evidencing use.

Meanwhile, it is recommended that you continue maintaining your trademark registrations under the current recordal system, especially if the trademark in question has not been used in the course of trade in Myanmar. Similarly, trademark owners can continue to publish trademark notices in local newspapers.

The intellectual property rights protection framework in Myanmar is undergoing an overhaul, due to the recent enactment of the Myanmar Trademark Law 2019, alongside three other pieces of legislation—the Patents Law, the Industrial Designs Law, and the Copyright Law. Coming at a time when Myanmar’s government is in the process of opening the country to foreign investment and greater involvement from overseas businesses, this raft of legislation is an indicator of the government’s intention to create a fair, modernized system that will be welcoming to intellectual property owners. Investors and entrepreneurs should take note of these developments, which collectively are a positive sign of where the business environment in Myanmar may be headed.

For more information on protecting intellectual property in Myanmar, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins’ Yangon office at [email protected].

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 14, 2026
Myanmar’s first-to-file trademark registration regime under the Trademark Law 2019—which became fully operational in April 2023—provides mark owners with enhanced legal protection compared with the country’s former system. Correspondingly, the current system imposes more rigorous statutory requirements for obtaining, maintaining, and enforcing rights in marks. In this first-to-file trademark registration system, however, evidence of use remains particularly significant, as it may establish acquired distinctiveness, support a claim that a mark is well-known, and strengthen the owner’s position in both registration and enforcement proceedings. Accordingly, it can be said that this framework is underpinned by three key concepts: distinctiveness, well-known status, and, importantly, use of the trademark. Trademark Distinctiveness Under the Trademark Law, signs that lack distinctiveness are generally ineligible for mark protection. These signs include generic terms, basic shapes, unstylized single letters or numerals, and signs that merely describe the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, production time, or other characteristics of the relevant goods or services. However, a mark that would otherwise be refused on distinctiveness or descriptiveness grounds may be registrable if it has acquired distinctiveness through its use prior to the filing date. To show this, the applicant must demonstrate that the mark became distinctive to relevant consumers through continuous, exclusive, and good-faith use in trade within Myanmar. The burden of proving acquired distinctiveness rests with the mark owner. Accordingly, sufficient evidence demonstrating both use of the mark and the level of consumer recognition attained should be prepared in advance. Well-Known Mark Criteria Myanmar’s Trademark Rules, which govern the substantive examination of mark registration applications, establish criteria for determining well-known marks, aligned with international standards. Where an applicant claims well-known status—whether to overcome a refusal on relative grounds or to oppose a third party’s registration—the registrar will assess the claim based on the following
September 14, 2026
On August 23, 2026, Vietnam’s National Assembly passed Law No. 11/2026/QH16, amending the country’s Customs Law with effect from March 1, 2027. The amendments represent a substantial reform of Vietnam’s customs-based intellectual property enforcement regime. The reforms come amid considerable external pressure. In its 2026 Special 301 review, the US Trade Representative (USTR) designated Vietnam a “priority foreign country,” citing widespread counterfeiting, weak border enforcement, limited ex officio customs powers, and the absence of controls over goods in transit. Vietnam’s legislative response signals a commitment to bringing its border enforcement practices into line with international expectations. For IP rights holders operating in or through Vietnam, the amended law introduces several tools that substantially strengthen enforcement options at the border. Closing the Transit Gap One of the most consequential amendments is the extension of IP-related customs enforcement to goods in transit. Previously, Vietnam’s customs regime applied IP controls only to goods being imported or exported, a gap the USTR had specifically identified as enabling infringing goods to pass through Vietnamese ports with impunity. Vietnam’s geographic position as a logistics hub for Southeast Asia means that substantial volumes of goods transit its ports and free-trade zones. Extending enforcement to cover these shipments brings Vietnam closer to the standard set by the EU’s customs enforcement regulation and addresses a longstanding concern of multinational brand owners whose goods are frequently counterfeited in the region. Strengthened Suspension and Ex Officio Powers The amended law introduces a dual-track suspension mechanism (Article 73(2)). Customs authorities will suspend clearance upon request by an IP rights holder (or authorized representative) who provides evidence of IP ownership, evidence of infringement, and a financial guarantee. Customs can now proactively suspend clearance on an ex officio basis if, during inspection and monitoring, they discover “clear grounds” to suspect that imported, exported,
September 7, 2026
Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi) has reinstated a key provision limiting pharmaceutical patent protection, signaling a renewed commitment to balancing patent rights with public access to medicines. In its ruling to Case No. 255/PUU-XXIII/2025, the court partially granted a petition for judicial review of Law No. 65 of 2024, which had amended the country’s Patent Law, and ordered the restoration of a provision that had excluded certain pharmaceutical inventions from patentability. The decision took effect immediately upon its pronouncement at the court’s plenary session on August 28, 2026. Background The petition challenged the removal of article 4(f) from Law No. 13 of 2016 concerning Patents (Patent Law), as amended by Law No. 65 of 2024. Article 4(f) had excluded from patentability certain inventions relating to new uses of known substances. The petitioners argued that removing this provision would open the door to patent protection for second medical use inventions and facilitate patent evergreening—practices that can extend exclusivity periods, delay generic market entry, and reduce public access to affordable medicines. The petitioners included several patient advocacy and public-interest organizations: the Indonesian Dialysis Patients Community Association, the Indonesian Association of Drug Abuse Victims (PKNI), the Indonesian Pulmonary Hypertension Foundation (YHPI), the Rekat Peduli Indonesia Foundation, and the Indonesian Positive Women’s Association (IPPI), along with the Indonesia for Global Justice Association and four individual petitioners. The petitioners also challenged the constitutionality of the phrase “interested party” in article 70(1) of the Patent Law, arguing that it should be construed expressly to clarify who has standing to appeal a decision to grant a patent before the Board of Patent Appeal, and to allow a broader range of parties—such as patent holders, licensees, consumer organizations, prosecutors, aggrieved third parties, and others who may suffer direct or indirect harm from the grant of a patent—to
September 2, 2026
Thailand and China have a longstanding and significant trade relationship, which increasingly extends to e-commerce and digitally enabled supply chains. While these channels create new opportunities for businesses to reach consumers across borders, their growth also brings greater exposure to intellectual property (IP) infringement across jurisdictions and online platforms. Effective cooperation between the two countries’ enforcement authorities has therefore become increasingly important. To strengthen cooperation in this area, Thailand and China signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on IP enforcement in Beijing on July 20, 2026, during the Thai prime minister’s official visit to China. Officially titled “Memorandum of Understanding Between the State Administration for Market Regulation of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Commerce of the Kingdom of Thailand on Cooperation in the Field of Intellectual Property Enforcement,” the MOU forms part of a broader bilateral agenda covering industrial and supply chains, participation by micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), cooperation associated with the ASEAN–China Free Trade Area 3.0, and progress on the registration of Thai geographical indications in China. The MOU establishes a bilateral framework for cooperation and coordination in five broad areas: Strengthening dialogue in IP enforcement; Enhancing information sharing; Facilitating the enforcement of IP rights in cases arising in the parties’ domestic markets and on online platforms, in accordance with their respective domestic laws; Promoting cooperation in IP enforcement training and human resource development; and Undertaking other cooperation activities agreed upon by both sides. The Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) will serve as the principal coordinating agency for Thailand, while the Bureau of Law Enforcement and Inspection in China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) will serve in that role for China. The framework is particularly relevant to the growth of e-commerce, as it covers infringement in the domestic markets and on