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 21, 2018

Overview of the Myanmar Trademark Bill 2017

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

After much anticipation, the latest Myanmar Trademark Bill (the “Bill”) was published in the third quarter of 2017, alongside the Patents Bill, Copyright Bill, and the Industrial Designs Bill. The publication of the four bills marked the first development in the intellectual property sphere initiated by the National League of Democracy government since it entered into office in April 2016. In January 2018, the Union Minister for Education, Dr. Myo Thein Gyi, submitted the Bill to the Parliament for the Upper House’s consideration. 

Like previously published versions of the Bill, this latest version introduces a first-to-file trademark system in Myanmar, where a first-to-use system is currently adopted. A trademark office and specialized intellectual property courts, to hear intellectual property disputes, will also be established under the new trademark framework. This article will set out the main feature of the Trademark Bill.

Re-registration of Existing Trademarks

Existing trademark owners who have recorded their trademark rights at the Office of Registration of Deeds will be required to file new applications to enjoy trademark protection under the new trademark framework. The Bill provides that trademark owners who have existing declarations of ownership for their trademarks in Myanmar must provide copies of them when applying for trademark registration, but the Bill is silent on the weight these documents would carry in the examination of applications. Under the new framework proposed in the Bill, applications can be filed in English or Myanmar languages, and each registered trademark will be valid for an initial term of 10 years, renewable for additional terms of 10 years each.

Recognition of Priority Rights

Although Myanmar is not yet a member of the Paris Convention, the Bill contains provisions allowing trademark owners who have filed their trademarks in a Paris Convention or World Trade Organization member state to claim priority rights when filing trademarks in Myanmar within six months from the date of their first application in a foreign member state. The priority right also extends to exhibition priority.

Recognition of Well-Known Marks

The Bill explicitly recognizes the concept of well-known marks, providing a definition of well-known marks and the protection offered to them. Nonetheless, the current Bill does not contain provisions addressing how a mark would be declared as a well-known mark. This is expected to be clarified in rules and regulations issued after the Bill is enacted into law.

Mandatory Registration of Trademark Licenses

The recordal of trademark licenses is compulsory under the Bill. A certified true copy of the trademark license must be submitted to the trademark office, and licenses that are not recorded with the trademark office will be deemed ineffective in Myanmar.

Introduction of Substantive and Procedural Examination Processes

Notably, the Bill streamlines the trademark prosecution practice in Myanmar, bringing it in line with those of other jurisdictions, by introducing substantive and procedural examination processes. Trademark applications will be subject to substantive examination against both absolute and relative criteria for refusal, as well as procedural checks, before they proceed to registration. For instance, trademarks that lack distinctiveness, that are generic through use of common vocabulary, or that adversely affect public order, morality, faith, or the dignity and cherished culture of Myanmar, are deemed as non-registrable marks under the Bill.

Availability of Opposition and Cancellation Actions

Under the Bill, aggrieved parties can also file opposition and cancellation actions against trademark applications and registrations by other third parties. This is in contrast with the existing framework, under which trademarks can only be removed from the register by filing a trademark cancellation action in court.

Registration of Geographical Indications

Geographical indications can also be registered under the Bill, and are accorded similar rights to trademarks. Each registered geographical indication is protected for an initial period of 10 years and is renewable for a term of 10 years at a time. The Bill does not distinguish the levels of protection for wines and spirits from those of other products, as per the obligations under the TRIPS agreement.

Protection of Trade Names

The Bill extends protection to unregistered trade names and offers protection against unauthorized use of a mark that is identical or similar to a trade name in a manner which may mislead members of the public.

New Border Control Measures

Rights holders can also apply to the Myanmar Customs Department for a suspension order to prevent the entry of counterfeit goods into Myanmar. Each order, if granted, is valid for a period of six months. Items brought into Myanmar for personal use by the traveler, items that are not for commercial purposes, or items imported in small quantities are exempted from such suspension orders. The Bill is silent on what constitutes “small quantities” and is also silent on the trademark recordal practice currently administered by the customs authorities in Myanmar.

Availability of Civil and Criminal Remedies

Both civil and criminal remedies for trademark infringement are available under the Bill. Civil relief available to aggrieved trademark owners includes temporary measures, such as ex parte orders, and the courts are empowered to order infringers to pay damages, court fees, and attorney fees. The Bill also stipulates criminal penalties in the form of imprisonment, fines, and the destruction of infringing goods.

Trademark owners are eagerly anticipating the enactment of the Bill into a law, as foreign investments continue to pour into Myanmar pursuant to the enactment of the new Myanmar Investment Law 2016 and Myanmar Companies Law 2017. While there are references to the protection of intellectual property rights in various statutes, it is time for Myanmar to introduce its very first trademark law to adequately address trademark protection needs and the concerns of foreign and local businesses alike.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 13, 2026
When Decree No. 186/2026/ND-CP (Decree 186) takes effect on July 15, 2026, it will introduce the most significant reform of Vietnam’s administrative IP enforcement framework since Decree 99/2013/ND-CP was issued in 2013. These changes are expected to make administrative enforcement faster, more accessible, and better suited to the realities of modern IP disputes. Below are the principal reforms and their practical implications for rights holders and enforcement practitioners. The End of Notarization and Consular Legalization Among the most welcome procedural changes is the abolition of the notarization and consular legalization requirement for powers of attorney (POA) submitted in administrative enforcement proceedings. Under the previous regime, foreign rights holders were generally required to execute a POA, then have it notarized and consular legalized (if seeking customs recordal). In practice, this process frequently delayed enforcement by four to eight weeks, often long enough for infringing goods to disappear before authorities could intervene. Decree 186 removes this bottleneck, now requiring only an original or certified copy of the POA. If the document is in a foreign language, a Vietnamese translation is sufficient, provided it is certified by a competent authority or confirmed by the authorized Vietnamese IP representative. Consular legalization and notarization are no longer required. For rights holders, the practical impact is substantial. Administrative enforcement files that previously took weeks to prepare can now be completed in a matter of days, allowing much faster responses in time-sensitive matters such as warehouse raids, border interventions, and trade-fair enforcement. The decree also introduces a useful administrative simplification. Where an original POA has already been submitted to the same enforcement authority and remains valid, applicants may rely on a copy of that earlier submission by identifying the previous case file. This eliminates unnecessary duplication for rights holders pursuing multiple enforcement actions before the same
Read More
July 9, 2026
Recycling, upcycling, and refill-packaging models are now widely promoted as ways to reduce waste, lower carbon emissions, and respond to consumer demand for sustainable products. However, complications arise when these environmentally driven trends intersect with intellectual property law—particularly where reused or altered packaging continues to display third parties’ registered trademarks. Adding to this complexity, Thailand’s draft Sustainable Packaging Management Act aims to introduce new environmental compliance obligations that businesses must navigate alongside existing trademark concerns. Recycling and upcycling packaging may infringe trademark rights, especially in cases not protected by the first-sale doctrine—the principle that a trademark owner’s rights over a particular mark-bearing product end once the owner first sells it. Furthermore, even refill packaging carries legal risk due to specific statutory prohibitions under Thai law. Compounding these challenges, the draft Sustainable Packaging Management Act will impose extended producer responsibility (EPR) obligations on manufacturers and brand owners, requiring them to manage packaging throughout its lifecycle. These overlapping legal frameworks could deter manufacturers from pursuing ESG-aligned business models unless businesses understand how to navigate both trademark and environmental requirements. Under Thai law, this issue remains uncertain because the Trademark Act does not expressly codify the first sale doctrine, also known as the exhaustion of trademark rights. Generally, this doctrine provides that once a trademark owner has lawfully sold goods bearing its trademark, the owner’s right to control further resale of those particular goods is exhausted. The rationale is that the owner has already received commercial benefit from the first authorized sale; therefore, the purchaser should be free to resell or otherwise dispose of the goods. Although the doctrine is not expressly codified in the Trademark Act, Thai courts have recognized it in relation to genuine goods and parallel imports, as seen in a Supreme Court Judgment No. 2817/2543 in which the
Read More
July 6, 2026
Indonesia’s regulation on reporting online intellectual property (IP) infringement provides comprehensive procedural guidance for IP rights holders and their licensees in reporting online infringement complaints. Issued in December 2025 by the Ministry of Law as Regulation No. 47 of 2025 regarding Handling of Intellectual Property Infringement Reports in Electronic Systems, this regulation covers all types of IP rights. It also specifies documentation when reporting infringement, and lays out the procedures for examination, verification, and enforcement actions. Submission of Complaints Complainants may submit reports through the online system of the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) or in person at the DGIP office. Complaints may also be filed through an authorized proxy. Under the regulation, complainants are required to provide the following information and documents: Personal details of the complainant; Brief description of the protected work or subject matter (i.e., type of IP and name or address of the infringing website, portal, account, or application, or a link to the location of the infringing content); Complete description of the alleged infringement; Certificate of registration or recordal of the relevant IP; Recordal of IP license agreement, if any; and Other supporting evidence. Verification and Examination Process Upon receiving a complaint, the responsible formality officer may request clarification or additional supporting documents. In the latter case, the complainant must then submit the necessary administrative documents within 14 days of the notification date. Once the documentation is deemed complete and sufficient, the case will be formally registered. Subsequently, the DGIP will establish a verification team to handle online IP violations, which will include the Civil Servant Investigator (PPNS), the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs, experts with relevant expertise in IP, and representatives from related associations such as AVISI (Indonesian Video Streaming Association). After examining the report, the team will prepare the Minutes
Read More
June 30, 2026
Customs recordation is an enforcement mechanism in Myanmar that enables intellectual property (IP) rights holders to seek prevention of the cross-border movement of infringing goods. The enactment of Myanmar’s IP laws in 2019 has enabled customs recordation for registered marks and copyrights under the Trademark Law 2019 and the Copyright Law 2019. By contrast, the Patent Law 2019 and the Industrial Design Law 2019 do not provide a practical framework for customs recordation, and accordingly such rights are not subject to the customs recordation regime. Under the Trademark Law 2019, rights holders may apply for customs recordation and may also ask the Customs Department to suspend the release of goods suspected of bearing counterfeit marks. Likewise, the Copyright Law 2019 allows for customs intervention in relation to pirated works. These provisions reflect Myanmar’s gradual alignment with international standards on border measures, although the implementation framework remains at a relatively early stage of development. Customs Recordation Pursuant to the Trademark Law 2019 and the Copyright Law 2019, the relevant authorities have issued customs rules concerning the protection of registered marks and copyrights. In practice, the process generally begins with the submission of an application to the Customs Department together with supporting documentation. This typically includes proof of registration in Myanmar; details of the rights holder, applicant, and any authorized representative; and a comprehensive description of the genuine goods. Product identification materials—such as photographs, packaging samples, and distinguishing features—are particularly important in helping customs officers identify suspected infringing goods. A recordation remains valid for two years from the date of approval. It may be renewed for additional two-year terms, provided that the renewal application is filed within the thirty days prior to expiry for marks and up to thirty days in advance of the expiry date for copyrights, in accordance with
Read More