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

May 15, 2023

Patenting AI Technology and Software in Southeast Asia

Subscribe to Updates

Southeast Asia’s remarkable growth as a destination for foreign investment—including a 42 percent increase in 2021, according to a joint ASEAN-UNCTAD report—has brought with it innovation as well as the desire to protect that innovation. Investors are increasingly seeking to patent the proprietary technology that is a crucial component of so many businesses today, and a burning question for patent applicants is whether artificial intelligence (AI) technology and software are patentable in Southeast Asia. The short answer is that it depends, as the patent laws in Southeast Asia are not uniform.

Is it Patentable?

While AI tools tend to be newer, the older and more familiar question is whether computer software is patentable, and many jurisdictions do have specific rules on this issue. Pure software, or software characterized only by source code, may not be patentable, but it can be protected under copyright laws.

AI-related software may involve complex algorithms, datasets, and training methodologies that can be challenging to disclose in a manner that satisfies the enablement requirement in practice. Algorithms, mathematical methods, and abstract ideas are often considered non-patentable subject matter in many jurisdictions. While software implementing AI may involve innovative algorithms, securing patents for algorithms alone can be challenging in some jurisdictions.

Also, the patent laws of Indonesia, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam specifically list computer programs as unpatentable subject matter. However, a possible workaround would be to describe the software as connected to a tangible medium. This method could overcome an unpatentable subject matter rejection during substantive examination. Furthermore, in Indonesia, a computer program can be patentable if its characteristics (i.e., instructions) have a technical effect and function to solve a tangible or intangible problem.

The most liberal of Southeast Asia’s patent regimes—Singapore’s—even addresses AI innovations. The country has a special fast-track scheme for examining AI patent applications called Accelerated Initiative for Artificial Intelligence. Under this scheme, a patent application can be granted six months from the filing date.

Patent Drafting

Drafters of patent applications in Southeast Asia need to be aware of the patentability requirements specific to AI technology and software inventions in each Southeast Asian country. When drafting AI technology and software patent applications, one option for the drafter to keep in mind is that the description should mention the connection between the software and the tangible medium. If the software can be linked to a tangible medium, the invention could be patentable.

Even if the claims of the patent application in other regions (such as the United States) do not have to show a connection with a tangible medium, when the application enters Southeast Asia, the claims can be amended to include this connection without expanding the scope of the application if the information already exists in the description.

This means that AI technology and software could be patentable as a part of a wider patentable invention.

Prosecution Strategy

In looking to patent AI innovations—or any other tools—applicants should explore possibilities for speeding up the prosecution process. For instance, ASEAN member countries have agreed to accept one another’s examination results in a scheme called the ASEAN Patent Examination Cooperation, and many Southeast Asian countries have an agreement to accept patent examination results from another country, through arrangements referred to as “patent prosecution highways” (PPHs). Cambodia has a special agreement to validate European patents without further examination. Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam have a PPH with Japan. Under this PPH, patent applicants can use the examination result of a corresponding patent application in Japan that has already been granted to speed up the examination process in Indonesia, Thailand, or Vietnam. Although the examiner in the other country will still examine the application to make sure it does not violate that country’s patent laws, the examination result from Japan should help speed up the examination process.

Outlook

Patenting AI technology and software in Southeast Asia requires a nuanced approach that takes into account both existing laws and procedures, as well as new considerations that arise with the advent of cutting-edge technology. As businesses continue to innovate and create proprietary technology, it is critical to develop a comprehensive strategy for protecting these valuable assets through patents. By staying up to date with the latest developments in the field and working closely with experienced legal professionals, businesses in Southeast Asia can navigate the complex patenting process and secure the protection they need in order to maintain a competitive edge in the rapidly evolving global marketplace.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Intellectual Property

Locations

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 9, 2026
Vietnam has taken a decisive step into the global artificial intelligence regulatory landscape with the promulgation of the Law on Artificial Intelligence No. 134/2025/QH15 (AI Law), adopted on December 10, 2025, and effective from March 1, 2026. As one of the earliest comprehensive, standalone AI statutes in Southeast Asia, the AI Law signals Vietnam’s ambition to position itself as both an innovation-friendly and governance-conscious AI market. In doing so, the legislature has also streamlined Vietnam’s AI regulatory architecture. The AI Law repeals most AI-related provisions previously embedded in the Law on Digital Technology Industry No. 71/2025/QH15, consolidating AI governance under a single, unified legal framework. This structural move underscores an intent to provide greater regulatory clarity and coherence for businesses operating across the AI value chain. Against this backdrop, the key question for AI developers, providers, deployers, and governance teams is how the new risk-based framework will shape compliance expectations, operational decisions, and governance design in practice. This article examines the new AI Law through that practical lens, focusing on what it means for AI businesses operating in or into Vietnam. Scope of Application The AI Law applies broadly to Vietnamese organizations and individuals, as well as foreign entities that participate in AI-related activities within Vietnam. The law expressly excludes AI activities conducted solely for national defense, security, and cryptography purposes. A defining feature of the AI Law is that it regulates by role, not by industry. It distinguishes between: Developers, who design, build, train, test, or fine-tune AI models and have direct control over the technical methods, training data, or model parameters; Providers, who place AI systems on the market or put them into use under their own names; Deployers, who use AI systems under their control in professional, commercial, or service-provision activities; Users, who interact with AI
Read More
January 9, 2026
Thailand continues to advance its legal and regulatory framework for the technology sector, with several key laws undergoing review and proposed amendments. These developments reflect Thailand’s broader efforts to ensure that its regulatory landscape keeps pace with rapid technological change and aligns more closely with international standards and best practices. The following are key legal developments and proposed legislative reforms in 2026 that are expected to impact businesses operating in the technology sector and the broader Thai business landscape. Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) Following the full enforcement of Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) in June 2022, businesses and practitioners have identified practical implementation challenges and interpretative issues. These challenges were reflected in an effectiveness assessment conducted by the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) in late 2024. The PDPC published a set of principles for public consultation to identify issues and directions for potential amendments to the PDPA. Key issues: Emerging issues include clarifying the definitions of “data controller,” “data processor,” and “criminal record”; revisiting the scope of sensitive personal data to better reflect Thailand’s context; proposing amendments to the hierarchy of legal bases to avoid misconceptions of consent as the default legal basis; and clarifying the required level of expressiveness for explicit consent, as well as rules for collecting personal data from other sources. Current status: The first round of public consultation has concluded. Next steps: The proposed amendments are proceeding to a revised draft following the consultation outcomes. Cybersecurity Act B.E. 2562 (2019) Thailand is moving forward with proposed amendments to enhance the effectiveness of its national cybersecurity framework, as evolving digital technologies bring new risks such as misinformation, system intrusions, and attacks on critical infrastructure, making cybersecurity a national priority. Key issues: The amendments aim to clarify and strengthen
Read More
January 8, 2026
Thailand’s Digital Government Development Agency (DGA) has proposed new standards that would require government agencies to select cloud services exclusively from a preapproved shortlist of providers. The draft Digital Government Standards re: Cloud Service Provider Standards aims to strengthen procurement confidence and reduce risks associated with selecting cloud service providers that do not meet the required standards. A public hearing period on these standards concluded on December 27, 2025. The DGA will now review submitted comments and consider revising the standards accordingly. Shortlisted Cloud Service Provider Tiers The draft standards establish three tiers of cloud service providers based on their assessed service capability levels, core qualifications, and certifications. The DGA sets qualification requirements for each tier, and it is at the discretion of each agency to select the tier of cloud service provider that best suits its operational needs, as follows: Tier 1 cloud service providers are suitable for providing services involving disclosable official data. Tier 2 cloud service providers are suitable for handling official data and protected data, such as personal data, which requires a high-security public cloud (e.g., virtual private cloud). Tier 3 cloud service providers are suitable for providing services to agencies with specific regulatory and security requirements that handle highly protected data, such as the national security system. These providers must offer sovereign or hybrid cloud as stipulated by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society. All tiers of cloud service providers must be legal entities incorporated under Thai law and can be authorized distributors of offshore cloud service providers. However, each tier will be subject to different requirements, including infrastructure obligations. Government agencies are encouraged to select a cloud service provider appropriate for their intended use. For example, if a government agency intends to procure cloud services for operating applications that process personal data,
Read More
January 8, 2026
Thailand has enacted comprehensive sexual harassment legislation that significantly expands criminal penalties and creates new compliance obligations for online platform operators. The Act Amending the Penal Code (No. 30) B.E. 2568 (2025), enacted on December 29, 2025, and taking effect the following day, introduces a comprehensive definition of sexual harassment, establishes new criminal offenses with graduated penalties, and imposes content removal obligations on social media platforms and computer system service providers. The amendment, which establishes a comprehensive framework for addressing sexual harassment in both physical and digital environments, significantly expands legal exposure for online service operators. It also grants courts authority to order takedowns of violating data accessible to the public. Definition of Sexual Harassment The law introduces “sexual harassment” as a distinct statutory concept covering physical conduct, verbal conduct, sounds, gestures, expressions, postures, communications, surveillance, stalking, and acts committed through computer systems or electronic devices. Conduct qualifies as sexual harassment when it is sexual in nature and likely to cause the victim distress, annoyance, embarrassment, humiliation, fear, or a sense of sexual insecurity. Criminal Offenses and Penalties The amended Penal Code establishes graduated penalties based on the severity and context of the harassment—including enhanced penalties for public or online conduct. For instance: Basic sexual harassment is punishable by imprisonment for up to one year, a fine of up to THB 20,000, or both. Continuous or repeated harassment that prevents normal life escalates penalties to imprisonment for up to two years, a fine of up to THB 40,000, or both. Critically for online operators, harassment committed in public places, in the presence of the public, or through computer systems accessible to the general public triggers imprisonment for up to three years, a fine of up to THB 60,000, or both. Acts of harassment committed by supervisors, employers, or others
Read More