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

March 31, 2022

Online Sales of Counterfeit Life Sciences Products in Thailand: Rise and Suppression

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing safety measures, many Thai retailers have shifted their sales toward online platforms. Unsurprisingly, counterfeiters have followed suit. The online sale of counterfeit healthcare and other life sciences products (e.g., food, cosmetics, and medical devices) is an area of significant concern, as it is particularly prevalent, damaging, and complex in relation to Thailand’s laws. This article outlines this type of counterfeiting activity in Thailand and explains some important tools brand owners have for fighting it.

Counterfeiting Operations

Although illicit operations seek to avoid being identified by authorities and brand owners, investigations by law enforcement and Tilleke & Gibbins on behalf of clients have yielded some insights into how these illegitimate sellers typically operate.

Often, consumers are first exposed to these counterfeit life sciences products by paid social media advertisements that link to social media accounts set up by sellers impersonating brand owners. This brand impersonation may include unauthorized use of a trademark or trade name as part of the account name, and unauthorized reproduction of official advertisement artwork or product descriptions, taken directly from the official social media account. From the fake social media account, consumers are usually directed to a merchant website that contains consumer reviews, which are entirely fabricated.

While not every counterfeiting operation follows this exact blueprint, employing some variation of these methods lends counterfeiting platforms the ability to proliferate through multiple iterations, as well as believability in the eyes of consumers.

How Brand Owners Can Take Action

Life sciences brand owners often discover that their products have been targeted by counterfeiters when a counterfeit item injures or negatively impacts a consumer. Thinking that the product is genuine, the consumer may then complain to the brand owner, or worse, file a complaint with the authorities. Many times this has resulted in brand owners being surprised by an inquiry from Thailand’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or police looking to investigate a case by interrogating the brand owner and other relevant parties.

Once they are aware of the counterfeiting situation, brand owners can fight the counterfeiting operation via a number of legal pathways.

The typical methods that counterfeiting operations employ (as described above) likely violate provisions of many different laws. Furthermore, in most cases, the counterfeit items are produced in or imported into Thailand without marketing approval from the Thai FDA, which is an offense under the FDA laws for different product classes, such as the Food Act, Cosmetics Act, or Medical Device Act. Aside from producing or importing, the marketing of unsafe products amounts to an even more serious offense under these laws, punishable by fines and imprisonment.

Additionally, unauthorized use of a registered trademark is trademark infringement under the Trademark Act, while unauthorized use of an unregistered trademark may violate the Penal Code. Unauthorized reproduction of an advertisement image or a product description may be enforced under the Copyright Act. Thailand’s intellectual property laws are enforced through the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) and the Economic Crime Suppression Division of the Royal Thai Police.

Furthermore, infringement online may trigger the Computer Crime Act, which can lead to website blocking by court order. Petitions under the Computer Crime Act must be filed with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society through the review of the IPR Enforcement Affairs Office of the DIP.

Brand owners tend to view the variety of relevant laws and enforcement authorities differently. Some may appreciate the freedom to strategize using the enforcement options the laws provide; others may find those options simply overwhelming. However, experienced advisors in Thailand will be able to help in either scenario—either by executing the selected strategy efficiently and effectively, or by helping brand owners sort through their options and recommending the method with the highest likelihood of success.

Key Takeaways for Brand Owners

First, brand owners can be confident that the Thai authorities take their anticounterfeiting duties seriously. This is shown most clearly by the frequent Thai FDA and police press conferences declaring successful raids and apprehension of suspects. The press conferences are reported almost weekly, with one of the most recent (March 18, 2022) involving THB 70 million worth of allegedly infringing cosmetic products.

Second, cooperation with the authorities is always wise. The authorities expect to be provided with any helpful information that the brand owner can give, including identification of the counterfeit products and further witness statements. Besides helping authorities in their enforcement activities, cooperation is also the best way to establish the brand owner’s non-involvement with the allegedly defective or counterfeit products.

Finally, participating in enforcement, either through cooperation with authorities or through private actions, is encouraged. Although online infringers are elusive, making instant success unlikely, continuous enforcement sends a strong message to the market, contributes to a good reputation among consumers, and raises infringers’ risks and costs (e.g., the risk that the paid ads may be taken down).

With vigilance and persistent action, the fight against counterfeiters of healthcare and life sciences products is a battle of attrition that will prove beneficial in the long run.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 24, 2026
For businesses in Thailand’s regulated industries, the problem of “too many licenses” is one of the most familiar hurdles to getting a product to market. Take a simple example: importing the materials necessary to sell teriyaki chicken skewers. To legally do this, a business may need approvals from several different agencies—separate permits for the chicken (Department of Livestock Development), the dipping sauce (Thai FDA), the wooden skewers (Department of Forestry), and other ingredients, each under a different authority. This kind of overlap is often cited to argue for a “regulatory guillotine”—a systematic review to cut outdated or duplicative rules that slow investment and business activity. The Facilitation of Licensing and Public Service Consideration Act B.E. 2569 (2026) (Licensing Facilitation Act 2026) is Thailand’s most significant response yet to that concern. This article looks at the Facilitation Act 2026 through a life sciences and regulatory affairs lens—what it may mean for the manufacturers, importers, and distributors of food, drugs, medical devices, cosmetics, and similar products who routinely deal with several regulators to bring a single product to market. The Super License: One Approval Standing in for Many The reform with the clearest potential for regulated-product businesses is the law’s “super license” mechanism, referred to as a “main license” in the statute. Once a business obtains the main license for a regulated activity, it is automatically deemed to hold all related sublicenses issued by other agencies for that same activity, provided the activity has been designated as eligible in the Government Gazette. The Licensing Facilitation Act 2026 also creates a central application center, allowing applicants to submit a single application and pay all relevant fees at one point of contact, with the center routing the application to each agency through a shared information system. The potential benefits of this for businesses
July 13, 2026
Indonesia’s Halal Product Assurance Agency (BPJPH) has issued new regulations establishing clearer procedures for imposing administrative sanctions on businesses that violate halal product assurance requirements. BPJPH Regulation No. 2 of 2026 on the Imposition of Administrative Sanctions for Violations of Halal Product Assurance Implementation, issued on June 5, 2026, strengthens Indonesia’s halal compliance framework, as mandated under Law No. 33 of 2014 on Halal Product Assurance and Government Regulation No. 42 of 2024 on the Implementation of Halal Product Assurance. BPJPH Regulation No. 2/2026 also supports the upcoming mandatory halal compliance deadline of October 17, 2026, which will apply to a broad range of products and services, including imported food and beverages, slaughtering products and services, natural and quasi-drugs, health supplements, cosmetics, chemical and genetically engineered products, clothing and accessories, household goods, prayer equipment, stationery, and class A medical devices. Scope BPJPH is authorized to impose administrative sanctions for violations of halal product assurance requirements committed by businesses, halal inspection agencies (LPH), halal auditors, halal product process companion institutions (lembaga pendamping PPH), and halal product process companions (pendamping PPH). The head of BPJPH has authority to determine, cancel, or amend the imposition of administrative sanctions, including upon receipt of objections. This authority covers revocation of Halal Certificates (including foreign halal certificate registration numbers), withdrawal of goods from circulation, freezing of LPH operations, freezing of halal product process companion institutions, revocation of PPH companion institution registration numbers, revocation of halal auditor registration numbers, and revocation of LPH accreditation status. Administrative Sanctions Businesses may be subject to any of the following administrative sanctions: Written warning; Administrative fine; Revocation of the halal certificate, including revocation of foreign halal certificate registration numbers; and Withdrawal of goods from circulation. The regulation sets out the types of violations that may trigger these sanctions, with each
July 1, 2026
Obtaining marketing authorization is a fundamental requirement for bringing pharmaceutical products to the Thai market. Companies must navigate the Thai Food and Drug Administration’s registration procedures while also complying with post-approval pharmacovigilance obligations, licensing requirements for manufacturing and importation, data protection rules, and other regulatory requirements. This guide provides an overview of Thailand’s regulatory framework for pharmaceutical marketing authorization, including available registration pathways, review timelines, application fees, postmarketing surveillance obligations, licensing requirements, exemptions, data exclusivity, freedom of information, and parallel import considerations. It is intended as a practical reference for pharmaceutical companies, regulatory affairs professionals, and others involved in bringing medicinal products to the Thai market. Download the guide below for a concise overview of the current requirements and procedures governing pharmaceutical marketing authorization in Thailand.
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