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

July 12, 2013

Patents as a Tool for Business and Innovation

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

Almost everyone nowadays is familiar with the words “intellectual property” and “patents.” This is largely because intellectual property (IP) is a vitally important part of developing and maintaining a profitable business.

Having recognized the importance of IP protection, you also need to understand the types of protection you can obtain and the benefits of each. There are several types of IP—including patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets—each of which offers different legal rights and protections.

For instance, copyright protection and patent protection are very different. If you are thinking about “filing” or “registering” your IP, you are probably thinking about obtaining a patent as opposed to a copyright. Why? Because registration is required only for patent and trademark protection, not for copyright and trade secret protection.

Another key point is that patents only give you legal protection in the country where they are registered. There is no such thing as an “international patent” that will give you protection in every country in the world. This means a patent must be applied for in each country where you aim to obtain legal protection.

The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) system, which Thailand recently joined, allows you to apply for a patent in several PCT member countries by submitting a single application via the PCT system. Although this is certainly helpful for businesses, it does not actually give you an “international patent,” as you still need to pursue patent registration in each country separately.

Once the patent is granted (the process usually takes a few years), the patent owner will enjoy the exclusive right (i.e., monopoly) to exploit the patented invention in the country in which the patent has been granted for a specified period of time. In Thailand, the total protection period is 20 years from the filing date for an invention patent and 10 years from the filing date for a petty patent or design patent.

From a business perspective, patent protection should be viewed as a tool for achieving specific business goals. The question is how to apply this potentially available tool productively and efficiently. Remember, filing and maintaining patents costs money, so the proper management of patents is crucial. The questions that business owners need to ask themselves include:

  • How can a company generate and identify new ideas and innovation that would be worth patenting?
  • How is patent ownership determined?
  • How do employee-inventor(s) get rewarded?
  • How can the company profit from the patent to protect and grow the business?

The main benefit of having a patent is to give your company limited-time exclusive rights to the patented invention and, in turn, prevent your competitors from copying the invention, entering the market, or otherwise competing with your company. This benefit can only be fully realized, however, if your company has a strong patent (patents are best drafted by professionals) and has an effective patent enforcement plan in place so that the company can quickly detect and take legal actions against an infringer.

In any event, it is important to keep in mind that without being able to reap the benefits a patent can offer, an issued patent is merely a piece of paper that costs money to maintain year after year.

Patent ownership and employee remuneration is another big issue. Section 11 of the Thai Patent Act clearly stipulates: “The right to apply for a patent for an invention made in the execution of an employment contract or a contract for performing a certain work shall belong to the employer or the person having commissioned the work unless otherwise provided in the contract.”

This means the patent rights to an invention created within the course of employment belong to the company unless the company and the employee-inventor(s) have agreed otherwise. This point must be clearly communicated to all employees to prevent any misunderstanding. In some cases, employees may think they own the invention.

But companies also need to be aware of Section 12 of the Thai Patent Act, which stipulates: “In order to promote inventive activities and give a fair share to the employee, the employee-inventor shall have the right to remuneration other than his regular salary if the employer benefits from the invention.”

Therefore, even though the company owns the patent rights, the employee-inventor is entitled to extra remuneration, provided that the company benefits from the patented invention created by the employee. In light of this legal obligation, companies may consider putting in place a well-designed reward system to create incentives for employees to come up with innovative ideas and inventions that would benefit the company’s business growth and development.

Undoubtedly, with careful planning and effective management, patents will be a very useful tool to drive business and foster innovation.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 27, 2026
Vietnam’s new E-Commerce Law, which took effect on 1 July 2026 along with its implementing Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP (Decree 248), marks a significant development in the country’s approach to online intellectual property (IP) enforcement, reflecting a clear shift from a reactive model of intermediary liability to one that expects platforms to play a more active role in preventing infringement. From notice-and-takedown to platform responsibility The most significant change introduced by the E-Commerce Law is the transformation of the legal role of e-commerce platforms. The existing safe harbor provisions under the IP Law and the copyright notice-and-takedown regime established by Decree 17/2023/ND-CP (Decree 17) largely required intermediaries to act only after receiving notice of infringement. Once infringing content had been removed, the platform’s legal obligation was generally considered fulfilled. The new legislation adopts a fundamentally different approach. Article 17 of the E-Commerce Law requires intermediary platforms to screen information relating to goods and services before publication in order to prevent listings involving counterfeit or IP-infringing goods, and goods of unknown origin. Rather than relying exclusively on complaints from rights holders, platforms are now expected to implement preventive measures before infringing listings become publicly available. Decree 248 further requires platforms to update keyword filters based on recommendations issued by competent authorities. These filtering mechanisms are intended to prevent prohibited listings from appearing on the platform and represent a further move away from a purely complaint-driven enforcement model. The legislation also introduces Vietnam’s first statutory stay-down obligation. Under the E-Commerce Law and Decree 248, major digital platforms must maintain automated systems capable of reviewing, warning against, and removing unlawful listings while also implementing measures to prevent repeat violations, defined under Decree 248 as conduct that has previously been identified and handled by the platform, but continues to recur. This obligation addresses one
Read More
July 27, 2026
Tilleke & Gibbins’ intellectual property specialists have authored the Thailand chapter of Trade Secrets 2026 from Chambers and Partners. This global guide examines the legal frameworks governing trade secret protection, enforcement, and litigation across jurisdictions worldwide. The Thailand chapter provides a comprehensive overview of the country’s legal regime for protecting confidential business information, covering the legal framework, trade secret misappropriation, litigation procedures, remedies, and dispute resolution. Some topics covered include: Protectable trade secrets Reasonable measures to maintain secrecy Employee confidentiality Trade secret licensing Civil and criminal remedies Litigation procedures and injunctions Damages and other remedies Mediation and arbitration The guide also examines practical issues relating to safeguarding trade secrets, defending against allegations of misappropriation, and managing trade secret disputes in Thailand. Chambers and Partners’ Global Practice Guides provide in-house counsel with authoritative commentary on practical legal issues affecting business, enabling readers to compare legislation and procedures across multiple jurisdictions. The Thailand chapter of Trade Secrets 2026 is available as a PDF through the button below. The full guide can be accessed for free on the Chambers and Partners website.
Read More
July 27, 2026
In March 2025, Thailand’s Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court (IP&IT Court) issued a landmark judgment in favor of Luckin Coffee, China’s leading retail coffee chain. The judgment marked a significant turnaround following earlier trademark litigation involving Luckin Coffee from 2021 to 2023 that had generated widespread public attention and raised questions about the protection available to legitimate foreign brand owners in Thailand. In a significant subsequent development, Thailand’s Court of Appeal for Specialized Cases has now affirmed the IP&IT Court’s judgment in its entirety. The appellate decision brings clarity to one of Thailand’s most closely watched trademark disputes. Significantly, this is the first case in Thailand to formally recognize the trademark squatting principle. The Court of Appeal confirmed that Luckin Coffee has a better right to the disputed mark and ordered cancellation of the defendants’ trademark registration—a key application of the “better right” doctrine. The court also upheld the substantial damages awarded at first instance, providing important guidance on assessing harm from systematic trademark squatting. Award-Winning Judgment Affirmed in Its Entirety The significance of the first-instance judgment extended beyond the outcome for Luckin Coffee. The IP&IT Court judgment was subsequently recognized in the IP&IT Court’s Distinguished Judgment Awards in 2025, reflecting the complexity, novelty, and legal significance of the issues considered in the case. The defendants nevertheless appealed the judgment, challenging several key aspects of the IP&IT Court’s decision. Luckin Coffee continued to entrust Tilleke & Gibbins as their sole attorney to pursue the case at the appellate level. After considering the defendants’ appeal and Luckin Coffee’s submissions in response, the Court of Appeal affirmed the first-instance judgment in its entirety. The judgment was announced on July 8, 2026. Better Right to the Marks The Court of Appeal confirmed Luckin Coffee’s superior rights. The orders include cancellation
Read More
July 24, 2026
As food innovation continues to accelerate, manufacturers are increasingly introducing ingredients derived from new sources, produced using novel technologies, or lacking a significant history of human consumption. While these innovations create new opportunities for the food industry, they also raise important questions regarding consumer safety. For this reason, many jurisdictions, including Thailand, the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, Canada, and Singapore, require a premarket safety assessment for novel food ingredients before they can be placed on the market. The objective of this assessment is to ensure that each ingredient is safe for its intended use and level of consumption, does not present toxicological, allergenic, microbiological, or nutritional concerns, and will not mislead consumers. Scientific authorities typically evaluate the ingredient’s identity, manufacturing process, composition, specifications, anticipated dietary exposure, toxicological information, nutritional impact, and history of use before determining whether it can be marketed. Against this background, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently took an important step toward improving regulatory transparency by publishing, for the first time, a consolidated public list of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process, including substances determined to be novel foods and those determined not to fall within the novel food category. The list identifies the approved substances, the corresponding manufacturers or importers, approval dates, and the approved conditions of use. Although the publication does not change the existing legal framework governing novel food approvals, it provides businesses with greater visibility into the Thai FDA’s regulatory precedents and the types of substances that have previously been accepted through the safety assessment process. The full announcement is available on the Thai FDA’s website. As the list is now publicly available, it also provides useful insight into the types of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process.
Read More