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

August 25, 2016

Suppression of Intellectual Property Infringement Subcommittee

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

Thailand 4.0 is the next step in Thailand’s evolution, according to Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha. Thailand 4.0, an economic model that aims to develop Thailand into a valued-based economy, would bring about a number of changes. For example, traditional methods of farming would gradually be replaced by “precision agriculture,” also known as “smart farming;” SMEs would develop into “smart enterprises” with capabilities to process and analyze big data; and services would advance to offer “high-value services.” To facilitate this, the government embarked on a sortie of economic reform, and set up a 20-year national strategy which includes strategy related to intellectual property.

In order to comply with the government’s national strategy, the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) has drafted an IP Roadmap that sets out its long-term operations, from 2016 to 2036. The IP Roadmap covers the following main issues: (1) creation of IP; (2) utilization of IP in business; (3) protection of IP; (4) enforcement of IP; and (5) promotion  of protection for geographical indications.

Earlier this year, the Prime Minister set up the Suppression of Intellectual Property Infringement Subcommittee to solve issues on preventing IP infringement, reduce problems for IP rights holders, increase IP protection in accordance with international standards, and build Thailand’s image as an IP-friendly country.

As a result of this new subcommittee being established, the National Intellectual Property Center for Enforcement, established by the DIP in 2013, was disbanded. During its operation, it promoted cooperation among the 25 government agencies responsible for enforcing IP rights in significant cases, such as cases involving organized and transnational criminals.

The new subcommittee is tasked with promoting cooperation among 16 government agencies and individuals, as follows:

  • Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan
  • Minister of Commerce or Assigned Deputy Minister of Commerce
  • Permanent Secretary Ministry of Commerce
  • Permanent Secretary Ministry of Information and Communication Technology
  • Commander in Chief, Royal Thai Army
  • Secretary of Internal Security Operations Command
  • Secretary of Food and Drug Committee
  • Attorney General of the DIP and International Trade
  • Director General of the Customs Department
  • Director General of the Department of Special Investigation
  • Secretary of the Prevention and Suppression of Money Laundering Committee
  • Secretary of the National Broadcasting, Television, and Telecommunications Committee
  • Commissioner-General, Royal Thai Police
  • Assigned Deputy Commissioner-General, Royal Thai Police
  • Director General of the DIP
  • Deputy Commissioner-General of the Police Strategy Division Office

In addition, the subcommittee has responsibilities to frame the structure and timelines of the National IP Suppression operational plan, and ensure that it complies with the plan; direct, control, accelerate, examine, follow up, and evaluate governmental operational parts, as well as other organizations involved in IP suppression; appoint a working group to be responsible for certain matters or assign government sectors, officers, employees, or officials to proceed as instructed; invite experts, government  officers or employees, or involved persons to declare or give information, facts and opinions, and documents or evidence; distribute news and promote IP suppression operations; periodically report performance results to the President of the subcommittee and Cabinet; and proceed with assignments as instructed by the National IP Policy Committee.

These efforts to strengthen the suppression of IP infringement and improve the overall environment for IP rights represent an important step as Thailand develops into a valued-based economy. With proper planning and execution, Thailand 4.0 may not be far off.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 16, 2026
Indonesia’s Ministry of Law has introduced a new framework for patent applications that tightens filing requirements and introduces formal mechanisms for accelerated examination. Minister of Law Regulation No. 6 of 2026 on Patent Applications, which was issued on January 13, 2026, and took effect on February 23, 2026, serves as the implementing regulation for Law No. 65 of 2024 on Patents. It replaces the previous patent application framework (under Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 38 of 2018, as amended by Regulation No. 13 of 2021), which was considered no longer aligned with current legal, institutional, and technological developments. The regulation also reflects the institutional restructuring of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights into the Ministry of Law. Patent applications filed on or after February 23, 2026, must fully comply with the new regulation. Applications that were filed before this date will continue to be examined and processed under the previous regulation, pursuant to transitional provisions. Substantive Changes Definition of Invention The definition of “Invention” now explicitly includes systems, methods, and uses, in addition to products and processes. This expansion creates broader protection opportunities, particularly for software-enabled, digital, and method-based technologies, although it may also result in closer scrutiny during substantive examination. Excess Claims Fee Excess claims fees must now be paid at the time of filing. Failure to pay excess claims fees at filing results in the application being deemed withdrawn. There is no longer an option to defer payment to the substantive examination stage. This amendment forces applicants to face higher upfront costs. Patent claim strategy must be finalized prior to filing, reducing flexibility at later stages. Procedural and System Changes Fully Electronic Filing Patent applications must be filed electronically via the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) online filing system. Assisted filings to
Read More
March 13, 2026
For decades, intellectual property rights holders seeking to eliminate counterfeit goods from the Thai market have relied primarily on criminal raid actions to seize infringing products and hold infringers accountable. The deterrent value of this approach is typically threefold: imposing criminal liability on infringers, removing counterfeit goods from circulation, and subjecting violators to imprisonment and fines. However, these outcomes often fall short of fulfilling brand owners’ broader objectives. In many cases, those prosecuted are merely staff or intermediaries rather than the principals orchestrating the infringing operations. Moreover, any fines imposed are remitted to the Thai government—not to the rights holders who have suffered commercial harm and invested substantial resources in investigation and coordination with law enforcement authorities. As in other jurisdictions worldwide, rights holders seeking monetary compensation for IP infringement in Thailand have traditionally pursued separate civil litigation. Before initiating such proceedings, a brand owner must gather sufficient evidence to establish both the infringement and the resulting damages. Notably, Thai law does not recognize punitive damages; courts award only actual damages proven by the claimant. In the absence of seized infringing goods, the damages awarded in such cases are typically minimal. This all leaves rights holders with limited recourse despite possibly having suffered significant commercial injury. In 2005, Thailand amended its Criminal Procedure Code to introduce Section 44/1, which enables rights holders to claim damages within criminal proceedings at the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court prior to the evidentiary hearing. In practice, this mechanism allows an injured party to submit a petition for civil damages directly within the criminal case initiated by the public prosecutor. Historically, rights holders in Thailand have been reluctant to use Section 44/1 because the compensation awarded by courts was often insufficient to justify the effort. However, recent years have seen a notable shift
Read More
March 13, 2026
Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property (IP Law) has undergone continuous amendment in recent years, with the latest amendment issued at the end of 2025. Among the amended and supplemented provisions, the regulation that has perhaps attracted the most attention is a provision relating to the use of protected IP objects by artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Specifically, Article 7 of the 2025 IP Law introduces a completely new Clause 5, which reads in full as follows: “Organizations and individuals are permitted to use texts and data relating to intellectual property objects that have been lawfully published, and which the public is allowed to access, for the purposes of scientific research, experimentation, and training of artificial intelligence systems, provided that such use will not unreasonably affect the legitimate rights and interests of the authors and intellectual property rights holders in accordance with this Law. With respect to texts and data that are objects protected by copyright and related rights, the use of the texts and data as set forth herein must also be in accordance with the regulations of the Government.” Analyzing this newly added provision in the context of how it was conceived, as well as the challenges that still lie ahead, can provide some interesting insights. From Aspirations to Flight in Science and Technology From the end of 2024 and throughout 2025—the 50th anniversary of the country’s reunification—Vietnam witnessed numerous sweeping changes in many areas, including legislative development. It could be said that no sessions of the National Assembly have ever adopted as many laws, resolutions, and major policies as this one. The aspirations of the highest-level leadership have been concretized into major law and policy projects, which were drafted, developed, and passed at record speed. All of this was aimed at building a foundation for Vietnam to achieve
Read More
March 10, 2026
Indonesia’s trademark prosecution process has been significantly streamlined with Ministry of Law Regulation No. 5 of 2026 (MOLR 5/2026) coming into effect on February 23, 2026. In straightforward cases without opposition, applicants may now see their trademarks proceed to registration within three months from filing—a substantial improvement over previous practice. The regulation also introduces detailed procedures for recording changes of name and address and for transferring rights over pending applications. It enhances the role of the Ministry of Law’s regional offices in assisting local individuals and SMEs, adds provisions governing force majeure situations, implements new requirements for collective trademarks, and formalizes several practices already in place. Substantive Examination Acceleration The most significant change under MOLR 5/2026 concerns substantive examination. The regulation now explicitly requires that applications be published within 15 days of filing, followed by a two-month publication period. Oppositions must be filed only within this window; late submissions will not be processed, even if the system accepts payment. The new regulation requires the Trademark Office (TMO) to forward copies of any opposition to applicants within 14 days of receipt. If no opposition is filed, substantive examination begins immediately after the publication period ends and will be completed within 30 days. If an opposition is filed, the examination is to be finalized within 90 days of the counterstatement filing date. These timelines enable unopposed applications to move from close of publication to final decision in roughly one month. If an application is provisionally refused during ex officio examination, the applicant has 30 working days from the date of notification to file a response. However, the regulation does not specify the timeline for subsequent reexamination after the response is filed. In recent practice, the TMO has been completing reexamination within approximately two to three months. Ownership Recordals May Pause Substantive
Read More