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

June 3, 2016

Trademark Act Amendments Usher in Thailand’s Accession to the Madrid Protocol

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

Amendments to Thailand’s Trademark Act were published in the Royal Gazette on April 29, 2016. The amendments will become effective on July 28, 90 days after the publication date. Among the amendments is a new chapter on trademark registration which introduces a number of changes that set the stage for Thailand to accede to the Madrid Protocol in 2016.

The Department of Intellectual Property is currently preparing a draft Ministerial Regulation that will allow Thailand to become a member of the Madrid Protocol, and it is preparing a new team of Trademark Registrars with responsibilities to: (1) take charge of filing International Applications at WIPO; and (2) accept and handle examinations of international registrations designating Thailand from WIPO.

The significant amendments to Thailand’s Trademark Act are discussed below.

Sound marks. The definition of “mark” under Section 4 will include “sounds.” Sound marks will be registrable. (The protection of smell marks was considered in the proposed amendments but was not included due to conflicting opinions over their inclusion.)

Distinctive marks. The criteria that constitute distinctiveness for different types of marks are clearly stated in Section 7(2), which includes shapes or three-dimensional objects that are not the natural shapes of the applied goods, are not functionally necessary, and do not add value to the goods. In addition, sound marks must not be descriptive of the applied goods.

Marks that are considered as not sufficiently distinctive may be registrable if they are proved to be substantially sold, distributed, or advertised in Thailand.

Multiple-class applications. Multiple-class applications will be allowed.

Oppositions and responses to official actions. The allowed period for responses to official actions and appeal petitions against orders from Registrars, the publication period for oppositions, and the period to file counterstatements to oppositions will be reduced from 90 days to 60 days.

The allowed period for registration fee payment, however, will increase from 30 days to 60 days. Responses to official actions regarding the assignment of marks must be completed within 60 days—otherwise, the application for assignment will be deemed abandoned.

Partial assignment. Partial assignment for some or all registered goods or services will be allowed.

Abolishment of requirement to register associated marks. The requirement to register associated marks will be abolished. All registrations of associated marks under the previous Trademark Act will be cancelled as if they were not registered as associated marks.

License agreements. A license agreement will not be terminated as a result of the transfer or inheritance of the right of the mark for which the license agreement is made unless there is a provision in the agreement to the contrary.

Expiry grace period. After the expiry date, there is a grace period of six months to renew the registration of a mark. A surcharge of 20 percent of the government renewal fee must be paid by the end of the grace period.

Government fees. The government fees for certain transactions have been revised. Government fees will not be calculated for every item of goods in filing a new application.

The new government fees for filing a new application, registration, and renewal are as follows:
 

New application: For goods/services of up to five items
For more than five items of goods/services
 		 THB 1,000 (per item)
THB 9,000
 
Registration: For goods/services of up to five items
For more than five items of goods/services
 		 THB 600 (per item)
THB 5,400
 
Renewal: For goods/services of up to five items
For more than five items of goods/services
 		 THB 2,000 (per item)
THB 18,000
 

Refilling. The offense of refilling has been added to Section 109/1 of the amended Trademark Act. It stipulates that a person who reuses or refills packaging or containers bearing another’s registered trademarks to mislead the public into believing that the goods are of the trademark owner will be liable for imprisonment of up to four years and/or a fine of up to THB 400,000.

The amended Trademark Act introduces a new trademark filing system to prepare Thailand for its accession to the Madrid Protocol. The system allows trademark owners to file and protect their marks in multiple countries that belong to the Madrid Protocol by filing a single application. Not only does this save applicants time and costs, but it also harmonizes Thailand’s trademark protection procedures and system with international practices.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

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
Read More
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
Read More
June 16, 2026
Since the implementation of the Trademark Law 2019 on April 1, 2023, Myanmar has operated under a modern first-to-file trademark system that brings its registration framework closer to international practice. As the new regime continues to develop in practice, applicants are increasingly required to navigate formal examination requirements, substantive objections, and procedural deadlines with greater precision. This article provides a high-level review of the trademark examination process in Myanmar, focusing on the principal stages from initial review to approval, the types of objections commonly raised by the Intellectual Property Department (IPD), and the key considerations for responding effectively. A clear understanding of these issues is essential for applicants seeking to secure registration efficiently and to mitigate avoidable delays or refusals. Examination Process: Key Stages Trademark applications filed with the IPD undergo two stages of review. Formality Examination The IPD first verifies compliance with procedural requirements, including: Correct Nice Classification Clear mark representation Accurate applicant details Clearly defined goods or services Representative details, if the application is filed by a representative Other formality requirements cover translation and transliteration of any non-English or non-Myanmar elements in the mark, color claim details, applicable disclaimers, and payment of official fees. Deficiencies result in an office action requiring correction within 30 days, which may be extended upon request. Registrability Examination The IPD also assesses registrability. A mark may be refused if it: Lacks distinctiveness Is descriptive or generic Misleads the public or violates public order/morality Contains prohibited state symbols Only compliant applications proceed to publication. Responding to Office Actions Applicants must respond within 30 days of notification from the IPD. Depending on the nature of the objection, strategies may include submitting legal arguments for distinctiveness, providing evidence of acquired distinctiveness, filing appropriate disclaimers, clarifying descriptions such as color claims, or amending the listed goods
Read More
June 15, 2026
The surge in AI development has led to a desperate demand for large, high-quality training data. However, real-world data can be expensive to collect, difficult to access, and often subject to strict privacy and regulatory constraints. Synthetic data, which consists of artificially generated records that replicate the statistical properties of real-world data without reproducing specific individuals’ information, provides an appealing solution by generating artificial datasets at scale without relying on identifiable personal information. It combines speed, cost efficiency, and regulatory compliance, making it a sensible alternative for organizations seeking to reduce risks while maintaining data utility. When properly anonymized, synthetic datasets may fall outside the scope of laws such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), reducing compliance burdens while still supporting high-quality model training. However, relying on synthetic data without rigorous legal due diligence could be a strategic mistake. It replaces one set of known risks (scraping, direct privacy liability) with a new set of complex liabilities. The narrative that synthetic data is a “silver bullet” for privacy and IP compliance is dangerous and could be misleading. While synthetic data addresses data scarcity, it also introduces new legal uncertainties. Legal counsel should anticipate downstream risks arising from compromised data sources. Models trained on unlawfully obtained data may need to be decommissioned, even if their outputs appear lawful. What is synthetic data? Synthetic data refers to artificially generated information created using AI techniques such as deep learning and generative models. Instead of copying real records, it reproduces the statistical patterns and relationships found in the original dataset. Synthetic data generally falls into three categories: Fully synthetic data – Entirely new data points generated from learned patterns. The model studies the structure of the original data and produces records that resemble real-world
Read More