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

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.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

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
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
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
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