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

December 3, 2014

Update on Thailand’s Intellectual Property Regime

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

Subsequent to the installation of a new government in Thailand on September 15, 2014, a number of important updates have been made to the country’s intellectual property (IP) regime. Amidst the changes, General Chatchai Sarikalya, Commerce Minister, and Ms. Apiradee Tantraporn, Deputy Commerce Minister, were promoted and designated to take charge of the Ministry of Commerce, and thus, made responsible for directing the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP)—one of several departments within the Ministry. In addition, after a one-year vacancy, the DIP has appointed a new Director General, Ms. Malee Choklumlert, who came into office on October 1, 2014.

The DIP’s Backlog

Of the many policies shouldered by the new Director General, perhaps the most notable is her mandate to urgently rectify the protracted periods of pendency for IP registration which have beset the DIP for numerous years. Expediting the time spent on registering trademarks, designs, patents, and copyright is to be implemented as soon as possible by trademark registrars, patent examiners, and other relevant DIP officers.

A plan is in place to clear the current backlog of trademark and patent design applications by the first quarter of 2015. Recordals of copyright are set to be completed within a few days’ time. For the backlog related to the granting of patents, the new Director General has recognized that it will take a relatively longer period of time to clear, due to the inherently complicated nature of patents and the low number of examiners—currently, there are only 41 examiners responsible for handling the more than 20,000 pending applications. In order to cope with this problem, the Director General has requested that more patent examiners be recruited, and she has thoroughly discussed the issue with the current patent examiners.

We are pleased to say that there have already been early signs of improvement since the new Director General took office.

Amendment of Intellectual Property Laws

Among the various IP laws that have undergone revisions—including the Copyright Act, Trademark Act, Trade Secret Act, draft of the Anti-Camcorder Act, Computer Crime Act, Patent Act, and the draft of the Landlord Liability Act—progress has been most notable for the following three IP laws:

  • Copyright Act: Two sets of amendments to the Copyright Act were approved by the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) in November 2014 and are now awaiting the King’s signature to be effective. The first set of amendments relate to copyright offenses, penalties for copyright infringement, and exemptions from copyright infringement for disabled people. The second set consists of a framework to account for technology changes, Rights Management Information, and Technological Protection Measures.
  • Trademark Act: Two sets of amendments to the Trademark Act are currently under review by the Cabinet. Upon passing this review, they will further proceed for consideration by the NLA. The first amendment provides additional mark protection for sounds and smells, allows multiple class applications, and provides for a grace period. The second amendment allows Thailand to become a member of the Madrid Protocol and to implement the Madrid System’s procedures and requirements. The original plan for Thailand to become a member of the Madrid Protocol has not changed. 
  • Trade Secret Act: Amendments to the Trade Secret Act were approved by the NLA in November 2014 and now await the King’s signature to have effect. The main amendments relate to the Trade Secrets Board’s composition, qualifications, terms of office, causes to vacate the position, methods to conduct meetings, and cancellations of prohibited conditions of being a Trade Secret Board member.

This progress is a good sign that Thailand is on track and ready to move forward into the ASEAN Economic Community. Any further updates on IP laws and practice in Thailand will continue to be reported in our future editions of Informed Counsel.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

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.
Read More
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
Read More
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
Read More
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
Read More