A decade ago, intellectual property lawsuits were rarely handled by Vietnamese courts. They have become more common in recent years, but almost always with overseas IP owners in the plaintiff role, charging local Vietnamese entities with infringement, piracy, or counterfeiting. However, in the course of its rapid economic and technical development, Vietnam has emerged as a legitimate brand creator and content generator, and it appears that the tables may have turned. A good example of this shift is a high-profile copyright infringement lawsuit filed in mid-September at the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City by TV production company Vie Channel against the online streaming music giant Spotify. Vie Channel specializes in the design and development of game shows such as “Rap Viet” and “Who Is Single Vietnam,” popular programs on Vietnamese TV. The company has charged Spotify with extracting audio files from these shows—19 recordings from each—to broadcast on Spotify’s free and paid platforms without Vie Channel’s permission. Vie Channel sent several letters of notification to Spotify’s headquarters in Sweden before initiating the proceedings, and also clearly confirmed that there is no business relationship between Vie Channel and Spotify; therefore, these acts are deemed to infringe the protected moral rights and economic rights attached to the two programs. In its lawsuit, Vie Channel is requesting that Spotify terminate all acts of infringement and make a public apology, and is also seeking compensation for damages provisionally calculated at nearly VND 10 billion (USD 433,000), a massive amount in the context of Vietnam. The case presents many interesting legal issues to be settled by the court, such as the determination of the Vietnamese courts’ jurisdiction in lawsuits with foreign elements. Particularly, although the defendant in this case is “present” in Vietnam through its online music platforms, it has never been “present” in Vietnam in

Tilleke & Gibbins’ intellectual property team in Bangkok has provided the latest updates to the Thailand chapter of Practical Law’s IP in Business Transactions Global Guide, a high-level comparative overview of intellectual property laws and regulations across 37 jurisdictions worldwide. The IP in Business Transactions overview focuses on business-related aspects of intellectual property, such as the value of intellectual assets in M&A transactions, and the licensing of IP portfolios. The topics covered include the following: The main types of IP rights in Thailand and their registration, maintenance, and exploitation Assignment and licensing Taking security over IP rights IP rights in the context of mergers and acquisitions Joint ownership of IP Competition law and advertising in relation to IP Ownership of IP created by employees and consultants Tax matters, cross-border issues, and potential reforms To read the full Thailand overview, please visit the Practical Law website.

Thailand’s Trade Competition Commission (TCC) has issued new rules governing business relations between food delivery platform operators and the restaurants operating through those platforms. The guidelines identify various arrangements, that are sometimes imposed upon restaurants by digital platforms, as unfair and damaging to restaurant operators, and restrict them accordingly. This is the fourth time that the TCC has deemed it necessary to intervene in a specific industry by restricting certain unfair trade practices in accordance with the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017) (TCA), and is indicative of the TCC’s greater drive to quell unfair practices using its powers under the TCA. It also shows their willingness to react quickly to new developments in the market—in this case, the substantial increase in restaurant operators selling their products through online platforms in recent months. The Guidelines on Unfair Trade Practices between Digital Platform Operators for Food Delivery and Restaurants were published in the Government Gazette on November 23, 2020, and take effect on December 23, 2020. Key Definitions Digital platforms mean online services which establish a trade linkage between restaurant businesses, food deliverers, and consumers—in other words, applications or websites that allow consumers to use restaurants via food deliverers. Digital platform operators for food delivery means the business operators that provide digital platform services, acting as an intermediary to accept the purchase order and deliver food between restaurant operators, food delivery service providers, and consumers; or between restaurant operators and consumers in accepting the purchase order for food. Put simply, they are the companies operating food delivery platforms. Unfair Conduct  The main principle set forth in the TCC’s food delivery guidelines is that business conduct between food delivery platform operators and restaurant operators must respect the freedom of each party; must be fair, noncompulsory, and nondiscriminatory; and must not obstruct another party’s business operations. Relevant terms and conditions

With virtually all business operations in Thailand affected by the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government has been keen to provide relief measures to limit the economic damage. In addition to implementing broad economic relief, this has also meant changes to the government’s own internal operations, and in recent months, the Public Procurement and Supplies Administration Ruling Committee has issued two circular letters prescribing guidelines on how government authorities should handle their procurement operations during this period. The circulars, which were issued under the Public Procurement and Supplies Administration Act B.E. 2560 (2017), detail the relief measures for government procurement contracts that cannot be fulfilled because of the disruptive effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most significantly, the circulars clarify that the impact of COVID-19 should be deemed force majeure under government procurement contracts and government procurement law, which affects the penalties levied on contractors for late performance of required duties under government procurement contracts. The Ruling Committee specified the start of the force majeure period as March 26, 2020 (the date when the government first announced a nationwide state of emergency). This official designation enables contractors to cite disruption from COVID-19 when requesting additional time to perform their duties under a contract, or exemption from or reduction of penalties incurred due to the delay. For contracts that have not yet reached their maturity date, the Ruling Committee granted relief measures by directing the relevant government authorities to count the number of days that COVID-19 has affected performance of the contract, and use this number as the basis for determining an extension of the timeframe for performing the contractual duties. For contracts that have already reached their maturity date, the contractual party that failed to perform according to the contract would normally be subject to an assessed fine for their non-performance.

On November 23, 2020, the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IP Office) issued Notification No. 13822/TB-SHTT tightening the requirements for

With technological advancements, business operators are able to access more varieties of data than ever before, and are able to use that data to assess the terms on which loans are provided. This means that they can provide services to consumers more efficiently and with lower operating costs. More importantly, however, it allows them to provide financial services to a broader range of consumers who would otherwise not be able to access vital funds. To facilitate this, on September 15, 2020, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) introduced a new type of personal loan—the digital personal loan—under BOT Circular Re: Rules, Procedures and Conditions for the Undertaking of Digital Personal Loan Business. Sometimes known as “quick loans” or “easy loans” in other jurisdictions, this new type of loan instrument is intended to promote Under the circular, a digital personal loan is defined as a personal loan for which business operators utilize digital technology and alternative data (e.g., utility and mobile phone bill payment records) to assess the borrower’s ability and willingness to repay. The digital personal loans do not include loans for which car registration is used as collateral. The key requirements for undertaking a digital personal loan business are as follows: Business operators are expected to use technology and alternative data to determine the customer’s risk profile, based on their ability or willingness to repay. The alternative data that is used must be from a trusted source and use a sensible hypothesis in assessing the customer’s credit profile. Such business operators may comply with the BOT’s information-based lending guidelines. Business operators must use electronic channels for both the provision and repayment of the loans. This may include disbursing and repaying by bank transfer, direct debit, or e-money to create a digital footprint in the financial sector for the customers. Business operators must disclose relevant

Thailand’s legal framework for preventing transactions that are deliberately designed to conceal the unlawful origin of funds is primarily contained within the Anti-Money Laundering Act B.E. 2542 (1999) (AMLA), as amended. As international money laundering practices evolve and emerge over time, prevention measures must evolve with them. Therefore the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recently recommended amendments to the AMLA, along with the Counter Terrorism and Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction Financing Act B.E. 2559 (2016) (CFTA), in order to be consistent with the latest international standards. The amendments passed through the public hearing stage on June 15, 2020, and the laws will now continue through the cabinet and parliament. Key Draft Amendments to the AMLA The definition of “financial institution” is expanded to include operators of many financial technology services, including: asset management and digital asset businesses; trustees in capital market trusts; derivatives businesses; authorized juristic persons under foreign exchange controls; personal loan businesses; nano- and pico-finance businesses; peer-to-peer lending businesses; crowdfunding platforms; regulated e-payment systems and services; non-bank credit card service providers; and additional businesses related to financial services or financial technology services at risk for money laundering (by further announcement in ministerial regulations). The definition of “professions” (formerly known as “section-16 professions”) is expanded to include additional occupations and businesses, such as accounting, auditing, auto trading and leasing, legal consulting, and additional professions at risk for money laundering (by further announcement in ministerial regulations). For cash transactions exceeding the prescribed threshold, parties in the listed professions are assigned recordkeeping duties in addition to their current reporting duties. The authority and power of the Anti-Money Laundering Office are expanded to include acting as a central financial intelligence agency to regulate, check, and rate the operations of companies and branches both within and outside of Thailand. Key Draft Amendments to the CFTA A channel is established for section-6 designated persons (i.e. people who have been

It is strongly recommended that entities which are considering entering the Thai cannabis market file applications to protect their marks and patents in Thailand as soon as possible. Cannabis Trademarks Thailand operates under a first-to-file trademark system. The Thai Trademark Office has verbally confirmed that trademark applications which include goods or services relating to medical cannabis are registrable. That being said, recent developments indicate that the Trademark Office will require applicants who file specifically for medical cannabis goods or services to submit proof that the applicant has permission to produce drugs containing cannabis from the Thai Food and Drug Administration. In addition, the Trademark Office is taking a conservative approach when it comes to the words and images that are registrable as trademarks. The Trademark Office has advised that words or images relating to cannabis will be refused based on Section 8(9) of the Thai Trademark Act, which states that a trademark that is contrary to public order, morality, or public policy shall not be registered. Given the above, applicants should carefully consider the trademarks that they would like to protect in Thailand to avoid unnecessary refusals. If the applicant does not yet have such permission from the Thai Food and Drug Administration, it is recommended that the applicant’s mark make no reference to cannabis, either visually or verbally, and that the list of goods and/or services does not specifically refer to cannabis or related terminology. In short, we urge applicants to enter into the Thai market early, with carefully-chosen marks and deliberately-worded descriptions of goods and/or services. Cannabis Patents Cannabis-related products and processes are now eligible for patent protection in Thailand, with some restrictions. A cannabis plant, including its parts and crude extract, are considered mere products of nature and thus not patentable. Another important restriction applies to an invention that is contrary to the