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

September 28, 2023

Registering Industrial Designs for Household Appliances in Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand

Protecting the aesthetic features of consumer items, such as household appliances, is essential for businesses looking to gain a competitive edge, particularly in the dynamic markets of Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand. Industrial design registrations (or design patents in Thailand) provide an effective means to protect the unique and ornamental designs of products, ensuring that their distinctive appearance is not imitated by competitors. This article provides a general overview of design systems in Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand, as well as some key considerations for businesses and rights holders.

All three of these countries use an examination system for assessing applications to protect designs. While all three jurisdictions are members of the Paris Convention, only Vietnam has fully completed the process of becoming a member of the Hague Agreement. The table below offers a general comparison of the three countries’ design systems, with additional details provided in the subsequent sections.

Vietnam

Owners of a household appliance design may seek design rights in Vietnam by filing a national design application at the Vietnam IP Office or by filing an international design application designating Vietnam either directly with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) or indirectly through the office of the applicant’s contracting party under the Hague Agreement.

Vietnam’s 2022 IP Law redefines “industrial design” as the external appearance of a product or part thereof to be assembled into a complex product, represented by shapes, lines, colors, or a combination thereof, and visible in the process of exploiting the utility of the product or complex product.

The two options for obtaining design rights in Vietnam are detailed below.

Vietnam National Design Application

As Vietnam is a signatory to the Paris Convention, applicants are entitled to a six-month convention priority period from the filing date of the corresponding application in another jurisdiction. Under Vietnam’s IP Law, an applied-for industrial design is deemed not to have lost its novelty if in the preceding six months it was published without permission from the person with the right to register it, was published by that person in a scientific presentation, or was displayed by that person at a national exhibition in Vietnam or at an official or officially recognized international exhibition.

Design applications must include clear and detailed drawings or photographs of the design, along with a description of the design. The title of the design must also identify the article under the industrial design application.

A valid design application can be published and then substantively examined in Vietnam. After being granted, a design certificate is valid for five years from the filing date, renewable for two consecutive five-year terms.

International Design Application Designating Vietnam

The Hague Agreement concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs (Geneva Act of July 2, 1999) officially took effect in Vietnam on December 30, 2019. Hague System users can now designate Vietnam in an international design application.

Vietnam does not publish international design registrations in its own official gazette. However, an international design application can be substantively examined in Vietnam. If the IP Office finds any defects, it will issue a notification of refusal within six months of the international publication date. The applicant then has three months to file a response to the refusal, with the possibility of a single three-month extension.

The IP Office will issue a statement granting protection of the design if no defects are identified or if all identified defects have been remedied. The term of protection is 15 years from the registration date.

The international design application option for Vietnam contrasts with Thailand and Indonesia, which are currently not available as designated countries under the Hague System. Applications for these countries must be filed through their respective national pathways, as further explained below.

Indonesia

Industrial design applications in Indonesia are substantively examined for novelty. An industrial design is novel if on the filing date it is not the same as any previous disclosure—that is, any disclosure before the filing date or priority date of another application within or outside of Indonesia.

Indonesia does offer multiple-design applications covering a set of industrial designs that constitute a unified industrial design or that are within the same classification. Different embodiments of the same industrial design must be filed in separate applications.

Partial design applications are also available. The part of the design that is not claimed should be indicated with dashed lines.

There is a six-month grace period before the filing date of an industrial design, during which it is considered to still maintain its novelty. To benefit from this grace period, the industrial design must have been displayed in a national or international exhibition that is official or deemed to be official, or the industrial design may have been used by the designer in an experiment for education, research, or development purposes.

There is no annuity fee for industrial designs, and the protection period is 10 years from the filing date. There is no protection for unregistered industrial designs in Indonesia.

Thailand

Design patent applications in Thailand are subject to an examination system. The protection term for a design patent is 10 years from the filing date. A novelty requirement is an essential element of design patent applications. Thai examiners conduct a search and determine the novelty of a design, along with other requirements. An examiner who deems that a design lacks novelty may issue an examination report along with a rejection decision, potentially leading to an appeals process before the Board of Patents. To avoid this complication, applicants should safeguard the novelty of their design by retaining confidentiality and conducting a prior-art search for the design.

Unlike in Indonesia, neither multiple nor partial design applications are available in Thailand. The grace period mechanism, which allows inventors to disclose their work publicly for a limited time without forfeiting novelty, is limited to exhibitions that have been sponsored or authorized and held in Thailand by the Thai government. Therefore, the grace period cannot be applied to publication by inventors or applicants on any other channels. While there are proposed amendments to the Patent Act that would allow partial or related design applications and expand the grace period mechanism, these are still working their way through the legislative process.

In recent years, requisitions with regard to formality examinations for design patent applications have grown stricter. Examiners may issue an office action requesting that drawings be amended so the lines are sufficiently sharp and clear, with no blurriness or shaded areas. For designs related to appliances, there might also be requisitions concerning both the title of the design and the title indicated in the claims to ensure that the title is directed at an essential feature of the design. Applicants can mitigate these potential issues by researching generally accepted titles using an online database or consulting local counsel.

Why Register Designs?

In the rapidly evolving landscape of household appliance innovation, safeguarding the distinctiveness and uniqueness of designs is an important consideration. Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand, as regional drivers of industrial growth and technological advancement, present significant opportunities for manufacturers and designers to secure their creative assets through registration. Beyond legal protection, a registered industrial design can be a catalyst for market differentiation, bolstering brand identity and consumer loyalty. By investing in the protection of their industrial designs, companies secure a competitive edge. The future of the household appliance industry hinges not only on technological advancement but also on the foresight to protect the aesthetics that define it.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 4, 2021
E-commerce platforms have become some of the most significant marketplaces in Thailand, with millions of daily business transactions and huge numbers of online users. The increasing number of online shops operating on e-commerce platforms requires new techniques to be employed in online IP rights infringement cases. Both the private sector and the government have developed tools to enhance online IP enforcement, including ones using the latest legal technologies and artificial intelligence (AI). Many legal technologies and AI operations are still nascent and typically do not yet offer the best approach for online IP rights enforcement. For example, AI and other technologies available today are still unable to consistently differentiate between original and counterfeit products from the images and information displayed on the e-commerce platforms and the internet. Therefore, some of the most effective measures for online IP enforcement still involve manual online searches by experienced local investigators with deep understanding of the behaviors of local users (both sellers and buyers) and the ability to link relevant information across online platforms. Thailand’s Department of Intellectual Property (DIP), as the governmental office responsible for IP-related matters in Thailand, has initiated its new Memorandum of Understanding on the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights on the Internet. This memorandum of understanding (MOU) does not create additional rights for IP owners, but acts as a mechanism to gather all the relevant stakeholders to address issues related to online IP infringement in a unified, mutually agreeable manner. The signatories of the MOU fall into four categories: Governmental authorities: DIP, Department of Business Development, and Department of International Trade Promotion; E-commerce platform operators: Lazada, Shopee, and JD Central (the most popular e-commerce platforms in Thailand); IP rights holders: Particularly including trademark owners facing ongoing counterfeiting problems in Thailand; and Law firms. Although the MOU is not
March 4, 2021
Vietnam has become a big player in the global fashion industry. Garments made in Vietnam now appear all over the world, especially in the U.S. and the EU. In this value chain, however, Vietnamese companies usually play the role of garment processors, fulfilling the orders of big brands for immediate export purposes. While the goods bearing the registered marks are made in Vietnam by local companies, the brand owners are often overseas or global corporations. As a brand owner can lose protection of its mark in Vietnam due to non-use, this situation leads to the question of what constitutes “use” of a mark when the mark-bearing goods are processed for export only, and not sold in the Vietnam market. Article 124.5 of Vietnam’s IP Law provides that: Use of a mark means the performance of the following acts: Affixing the protected mark on goods, packaging, business facilities, means of service provision, or transaction documents in business activities; Circulating, offering, advertising, or stocking for sale goods bearing the protected mark; Importing goods or services bearing the protected mark. At first glance, the above provision seems quite clear. While importing goods appears on the list, exporting goods is conspicuously absent, and therefore it is not an act of use. However, it is also clear that for the purpose of exporting, a product should go through a manufacturing or processing stage in which the mark will be physically affixed to the product or its packaging. For fashion goods, this could be in the form of a removable tag or package, a tag sewn onto the item, or a fundamental part of the garment’s design (such as a T-shirt emblazoned with a brand name, or a shoe featuring a distinctive logo). Then, the question becomes whether this act of affixing the mark on
March 4, 2021
Myanmar, which is now more than halfway through the scheduled soft opening of its Intellectual Property Department (IPD) under the country’s New Trademark Law, is well on its way to the full realization of its plans for a modernized IP system operating on par with international standards. As the first of four IP-related laws passed in 2019, the ongoing implementation of the Trademark Law affects definitions of trademarks and types of trademark applications. Section 2 of the law defines a “mark” as “either a visible sign or a combination of signs, including one’s own names, alphabet letters, numbers, graphical representations, or compositions of color and tints to distinguish the goods or services of an enterprise from those of another enterprise. Within this scope, trademark, service mark, collective mark and certification mark are also included. The ‘series mark’ consists of a number of these marks, which resemble each other on the material particulars, but may differ in some aspect—for instance, a mark with different color variations. However, there is no specific definition of what makes up a series mark in the Trademark Law itself, and there has also not yet been any clear guidance on the issue. The Trademark Rules, which set the guidelines for the trademark application and registration procedures, are still in the process of being finalized, are expected to include information on the possibility of filing series marks under the soft opening period. On December 29 2020, the IPD held a workshop to clarify various issues, and informed attendees that applications containing more than one trademark in a single application are prohibited under the new system. However, this seemed to contradict the Ministry of Commerce’s Order No. 63/2020, which had declared that the refiling of old marks under the soft opening period of the new Trademark Law