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

October 18, 2013

Thailand Paving the Way Toward an Innovation-Driven Economy

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

Industry Minister Prasert Boonchaisuk recently reiterated the government’s determination to continue promoting the Thailand Creative Economy initiative. In an attempt to rally support for Thailand’s transition to an innovation-driven country, he used rousing words such as “creative” and “sustainable” to describe his latest strategy. A three-stage, 20-year plan is now being drawn up, but it is not without its challenges.

The Three Stages

The first stage involves establishing a leading production base within ASEAN. The particular industries to be targeted have yet to be specified, but they are likely to be those related to agricultural products, energy, automotives, and electronics.

In the second stage, Thailand will develop its own intellectual property (IP) and will apply these innovations to improve production capabilities. In this way, it is hoped that Thailand can become a regional trade center from where production can be effectively managed and serviced. Additionally, Thai brands will be promoted on an ASEAN level.

The third stage involves the international development of Thai technology and brands through the support of local and regional production networks.

Potential Hurdles

The major challenge to this strategy is that foreign companies own most of the technology used in many of Thailand’s large-scale production sectors. To develop its own technologies, Thailand needs to partner with foreign companies in joint ventures or independently improve its technologies through incremental innovation.

An opportunity exists for companies in Thailand to obtain beneficial terms in partnerships with European companies through the Thai-EU Free Trade Agreement, which is now under negotiation. European owners of technology are keen to see an improvement in the IP landscape before investing further. For Thai companies, a strong IP system will provide a stable basis for growth for all, regardless of where the owner of the technology is based.

Opportunities

Thailand’s innovation must also come from within. Large enterprises such as PTT and SCG will play a key role in developing “Thai-owned” IP. They could gain an advantage over their ASEAN neighbors in the energy, chemicals and construction industries with a focus on rubber, petrochemicals and plastics, biodiesel, and ethanol.

The food science market is also an area in which Thailand can potentially dominate further. Thailand’s food export market is very strong, and global demand for consistent and reliable food sources is rising. To quote the Thai government’s Competitiveness Report of 2012:

“Research focuses on food processing and bio-based industries such as rubber and oil palm. National research centers concentrate their R&D efforts on seeds, rice, cassava, algae, post-harvest processing, greenhouse farms, longer shelf-life packaging and quality assurance. Higher-quality corn, cucumber, chili and tomato seeds have been developed for export under a Thai brand name. New types of virus-resistant prawn feed and tiger prawn brood stock have also been created.”

Innovations in crop science, food production, and supply could enable Thailand to utilize that IP itself, but also to license it to other countries. Such investments in agriculture will certainly support the “sustainability” element of the project.

Foreign pharmaceutical companies also will want to partner with local companies or the Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GPO) to produce medicines for a rapidly expanding ASEAN medical market. Bangkok is already a hub for medical tourism and improvements in medicine production, and investment in incremental innovation in this field could serve Thailand very well. Such partnerships could ensure high-quality medicines are produced, and could foster greater competition that would reduce prices. The Thai government could then embark on projects beneficial to the community, at a lower cost and with better medicines.

Ideas for the Future

To enable this to happen, the IP landscape and attitudes toward IP need to change. If IP owners cannot reasonably expect to obtain patent protection for their innovations in Thailand, then they will simply invest elsewhere. This includes Thai as well as foreign companies. Therefore, an efficient and internationally compliant patent filing system plays a significant role in moving from an efficiency-driven to an innovation-driven economy.

Incremental innovation is also best achieved by analyzing current patent landscape, followed by improvements made to “prior art” technology. Regulations must also seek to enable fast registration of products that are regulated (e.g., by the Food and Drug Administration) across all product types (and importantly, across ASEAN).

It is imperative that IP enforcement in Thailand improves, as well. We all know counterfeits of every variety are readily available in Thailand, which undeniably harms the country’s image as a destination for FDI.

In addition to legal improvements, if Thailand is to keep hold of its innovations, it must ensure that it offers favorable tax regimes for R&D and also to IP as an asset and the royalties it earns. Singapore offers lower tax rates in this regard, and Thailand may wish to follow suit to prevent businesses shifting IP assets out of the country. Certain tax breaks are already offered at the Thailand Science Park, but this policy should be expanded.

Finally, it is important that all stakeholders, including the policymakers, cooperate. The Commerce Ministry, which oversees the Department of Intellectual Property, must collaborate with the ministries of Finance, Science and Technology, Information & Communication Technology, and Public Health, to name a few. IP is present in every industry and a strong commitment to government agency cooperation improves lines of communication and presents a consistent commitment to an innovation-driven economy.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

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.
July 24, 2026
Indonesia has updated its fee framework for intellectual property (IP)-related government services, with implications for IP owners, licensees, lenders, digital platforms, and businesses operating in the country. Government Regulation No. 30 of 2026 on Types and Tariffs of Non-Tax State Revenue Applicable to the Ministry of Law (GR 30/2026) was promulgated on July 2, 2026, and will take effect on August 1, 2026. Key Takeaways GR 30/2026, which replaces the relevant IP service fees under Government Regulation No. 45 of 2024, reorganizes the fee schedule into separate categories for copyright, industrial designs, patents, layout designs of integrated circuits, trade secrets, trademarks, geographical indications, IP enforcement, and other categories. The most commercially relevant changes include a new copyright recordation tariff exemption for songs and music, higher fees for several trademark and geographical indication services, new IP enforcement service fees, and a new fee type for registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects. In addition, this is the first major update for trademark fees in approximately 10 years. GR 30/2026 is significant not only as a fee update but also as a further indication of Indonesia’s increasing recognition of IP as a financeable commercial asset. By expressly assigning fees to the registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects, the regulation places IP-backed collateral filings within the Ministry of Law’s administrative service framework. While GR 30/2026 does not create a new secured-transactions regime, this development is relevant for lenders, borrowers, and IP owners structuring financing arrangements secured by trademarks, patents, copyrights, industrial designs, or other registrable IP rights in Indonesia. Copyright: New Fee Exemption for Songs and Music Recordation For copyright, GR 30/2026 creates a fee-exempt category for recordation of works or related-rights products for songs or music, while maintaining a separate category for other works and related-rights products. It
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
July 15, 2026
Ambush marketing refers to a strategy in which a business associates itself with an event, campaign, or brand without paying for official sponsorship rights. The tactic is most visible in sports, concerts, and festivals, where official sponsors have invested substantially for exclusivity. Ambush marketers may use suggestive wording, event-themed imagery, athlete endorsements, venue-adjacent promotions, or social media campaigns implying a commercial connection with the event. Common Forms of Ambush Marketing Ambush marketing typically takes one of the following forms: Direct ambushing: using event names, logos, or mascots suggesting authorization Coattail ambushing: sponsoring an athlete or broadcaster connected with the event Subtle ambushing: themed advertising, venue-adjacent campaigns, or similar visual cues The legal analysis in each case turns on whether the marketing crosses from permissible event-based advertising into infringement, passing off, deception, or wrongful exploitation of goodwill, and the risk assessment is necessarily fact-specific. Thailand has no dedicated ambush marketing statute, so legality depends on execution. A campaign that merely comments on a public event may be permissible, but one that uses protected marks, creates consumer confusion, misrepresents sponsorship status, or makes unsubstantiated claims may trigger liability under various Thai laws, as laid out below. Ambush Marketing and Thailand’s Trademark Act The Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) is the primary tool for addressing campaigns that use registered trademarks, event names, logos, mascots, or confusingly similar signs. The law gives registered trademark owners the exclusive right to use their mark for registered goods, and infringement risk arises when a nonsponsor uses an event mark or a confusingly similar sign in advertising. Even referential or playful use may create liability if it causes public confusion as to sponsorship or commercial connection. The law also preserves passing-off claims for unregistered marks. This matters because event names, taglines, or mascots may not always be