The Indonesian government has launched a number of strategic initiatives aimed at getting the country removed from the Priority Watch List in the US Trade Representative’s annual Special 301 Report on Intellectual Property Protection. In trying to leave behind this ignominious status—which has been stubbornly persistent for over 30 years—Indonesia’s Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) is leading an IP Operations Task Force consisting of five ministries and agencies, including the National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM), Customs, the State Police, and the Ministry of Communications and Information (MOCI). According to statistics from the task force, 554 infringement cases were handled by the police and the IP Office in 2019–2021, with trademark infringement and copyright infringement being most prevalent. Year on year, the number of trademark infringement cases increased from 90 in 2020 to 137 in 2021, while copyright infringement cases over the same period decreased slightly, from 42 to 38. While the cases occurring in physical markets remain high, the battleground has now expanded to online platforms and social media. Indonesia has embraced digital technology with enthusiasm, and the country’s citizens are among the world’s most avid users of e-commerce, social media, and other mobile apps. Research from Google, Temasek, and Bain & Company indicates sizable growth in Indonesia’s digital economy, from USD 47 billion in 2020 to USD 70 billion in 2021—a digital marketplace that now includes more than 158 million e-commerce customers. Separately, the MOCI reported suspension of 1,745 websites and other infringing online content from 2017 to 2019. Meanwhile, the DGIP banned hundreds of problematic e-commerce portals related to trademark infringement during 2019. There is no official report on recent online infringement cases; however, the numbers are predicted to rise in tandem with the increasing use of online platforms. Aside from these enforcement actions, authorities in Indonesia

TV game shows play an important role in the Vietnamese entertainment industry, as in the global market. Many well-known game shows from other countries have been franchised or licensed for broadcast in Vietnam, including Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, Vietnam’s Got Talent, and The Voice, drawing large audiences and generating billions of VND from commercialized activities. Other popular shows have been developed domestically—some wholly original, but many bearing a heavy resemblance to existing shows from other markets, with similar gameplay, similar sets, and even similar names. This raises an interesting question from the intellectual property perspective as to whether owners or creators of game shows can charge these copycat shows with infringement. In other words, are format rights recognized as a copyright and can a game show be protected under intellectual property law? Globally, this is a question without a clear and explicit answer. The Format Recognition and Protection Association (FRAPA), a trade association formed in 2000 to advocate recognition of television formats as intellectual property, strongly believes that format rights are protectable and has been working to convince courts and lawmakers around the world to define these rights under law. However, recognition of format rights is still very limited, and is often determined on a case-by-case basis. A common argument from legal experts is that because the format of a game show is only composed of ideas, which are not protected by law, it cannot be the subject of copyright (for reference, Green v Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand in 1989). However, others argue that if the format of a game show is an intellectual creation and contains key elements which have unique originality, and it is not just a combination of general and commonplace elements, it can be protected under copyright law (for reference, Meakin v BBC [2010] EWHC

The Thailand Research and Innovation Utilization Promotion Act B.E. 2564 (2021) (TRIUP Act), which is also referred to as the Thai Bayh-Dole Act, came into force on May 7, 2022. The enactment of the TRIUP Act is a culmination of years of deliberation by the Thai government and various stakeholders, and is modeled after the success of the adoption of the Bayh-Dole Act in other jurisdictions, such as the United States, Japan, and Korea. Under existing intellectual property laws in Thailand, patentable inventions are owned by the employer, hirer, or commissioning party by default, unless they explicitly agree to a different arrangement with the inventor. Public research organizations and government agencies in Thailand have always had their own institutional policies addressing the ownership, management, and exploitation of intellectual property rights. While certain government funding agencies may co-own such intellectual property rights with the relevant research institutes, some have adopted a more restrictive approach by retaining full ownership of any intellectual property rights arising from research and development efforts carried out using their funds. Instead of allowing the inventors to have full ownership rights over their inventions, these funding agencies would grant them a license instead. The promulgation of the TRIUP Act changes this. Under this new law, inventions made with the government’s funding belong to their inventors (e.g., universities and research institutes). Overview The TRIUP Act requires fund recipients and researchers (usually represented by their employing institution) who wish to own their research or innovation results to disclose them to the funding government agency or organization within a specified period, and to notify the funding party of their intention of ownership together with a commercialization plan. If a fund recipient or researcher fails to do so, the research or innovation results will belong to the funding party instead. The funding government agency or

On April 4, 2022, Myanmar’s State Administration Council (SAC) established the Foreign Exchange Supervisory Committee (FESC) to approve foreign currency conversion, make exemptions to foreign exchange restrictions, and permit overseas foreign currency transfers. The formation of the FESC was made official with the May 13, 2022, publication of the SAC’s Order 28/2022 in the Government Gazette, which appointed six individuals to the new committee. The FESC is the focal body tasked with implementing Myanmar’s recently adopted policy of requiring conversion of foreign currency transfers and balances to local currency. Since the policy was instituted in April 2022, the Central Bank of Myanmar issued further clarifications and instructions for banks authorized to handle foreign currency, responded to concerns from foreign investors by exempting certain foreign investment projects from the conversion requirement, and relaxed the currency conversion requirements for trade at the Chinese and Thai borders. The FESC supervises the flow of foreign currencies for domestic and foreign investment, manufacturing, exports and imports, and service businesses (including education- and health-related initiatives). The FESC is specifically responsible for considering and approving the use of foreign currency for the following: Importation of machinery, vehicles, equipment, and raw materials needed for the foreign investment and manufacturing; Importation of fuels, medicines, cooking oils, fertilizers, insecticides, and construction materials that are not available in the domestic market; Myanmar citizens’ social matters, such as going abroad for purposes of medical treatment, education, or religious activities; Importation of general goods, repayment of loan and interest payments to lenders in foreign countries, service payments, and repatriation of profits from investments; and Imports of various luxury products (e.g., brand-name goods, jewelry, sport cars, watches, etc.). The FESC will also perform other duties relating to foreign exchange management as assigned by the SAC. For more details on these foreign exchange developments, or on any aspect of financial regulations in Myanmar,

The presence of counterfeit goods in the Indonesian market is a stubbornly persistent challenge that has plagued the country for many years. The United States Trade Representative’s Special 301 Report, which is issued each year to assess intellectual property (IP) protection regimes around the world, has listed Indonesia on its “Priority Watch List” 23 times and on the “Watch List” 10 times. The 2021 report included the recommendation that Indonesia develop a specialized IP unit under the Indonesian National Police to focus on investigating domestic criminal syndicates behind counterfeiting and piracy. The police’s Special Crime Unit already handles IP matters and has been operating since long before 2021, but that year Indonesia also established its new IP Enforcement Task Force, which aims to improve intragovernmental coordination on enforcement. However, IP enforcement remains challenging in Indonesia. The police and the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) handled 346 total IP enforcement cases from 2020 through early 2022. While it is positive to see some enforcement activity, this is a rather low number, considering that the Indonesian market and its population are very large—and that counterfeiting is a widespread and persistent problem. Shopping for a Solution One way Indonesia’s Trademark Office is trying to address the country’s repeated problems with counterfeiting and piracy is by introducing a certification system for shopping centers and malls based on their support for intellectual property rights and standards. The certificates are intended to guarantee that the establishment hosts sellers of genuine products. Both physical markets—such as Pasar Tanah Abang and Mangga Dua, two known markets for counterfeit goods—and online shopping venues are eligible to obtain a certificate. Specifically, this includes department stores, shopping streets, supermarkets, social media, online marketplaces, and crowdsourcing websites that digitally collects information, ideas, opinions, or work from a group of people. However, the certification procedure

Following the positive response to the recent Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM) announcement on the exemption of certain foreign direct investment (FDI) projects from the foreign currency conversion requirements, the CBM issued a further exemption on April 26, 2022, for exporters and importers conducting trade at the China-Myanmar or Thailand-Myanmar border. The CBM’s directive (No. 7/2022) extends the currency conversion (THB-MMK or CNY-MMK) deadline to one month, meaning that foreign currency obtained from border trade with Thailand or China no longer has to be converted into Myanmar kyat (MMK) within one day. After export earnings flow into an exporter’s account at an AD bank (i.e., a bank licensed to deal in foreign currency), the exporter can use the foreign currency as desired or sell it to the bank at the official exchange rate within one month. After one month, any unused balance remaining will be sold to the bank. Hence, banks are authorized to directly transact in the foreign currency (i.e., CNY-MMK or THB-MMK) of exporters and importers conducting border trade at the China-Myanmar and Thailand-Myanmar borders. Designated banks may carry out foreign currency settlement for imports without seeking approval from the Foreign Exchange Supervisory Committee. Export earnings, on the other hand, are to be scrutinized by AD banks to ensure that these earnings are deposited into the relevant exporter’s bank account in Myanmar in compliance with stipulations under the Foreign Exchange Management Law and its related regulations. Foreign currency transactions conducted under the China-Myanmar and Thailand-Myanmar border trade programs must be reported to the Foreign Exchange Management Department via the Border Trade Module of the department’s electronic reporting system. The day after issuing the above directive, the CBM issued a separate press release warning relevant parties to strictly comply with the Foreign Exchange Management Law and its related regulations. In particular, holders of

To view this article in Vietnamese, please click here. In accordance with Article 59.2 of the Law on Intellectual Property issued in 2005, as amended and supplemented in 2009 and 2019 (“IP Law”), Vietnamese law currently does not recognize the protection of computer programs as inventions. However, in practice, if the subject-matter of an invention related to a computer program has technical characteristics and the program, when running on a computer, creates a further technical effect going beyond the usual physical interactions between a program and a computer, this subject-matter is likely to be protected as an invention. This condition is not codified, but is reflected in Article 5.8.2.5 of the patent examination guidelines issued in 2010, as amended and supplemented in 2020 – a reference document showing the guidance issued by the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (“IP Office”). Currently, at the formality examination stage, these “technical” conditions for inventions related to computer programs are quite easy to meet as it is only necessary to show that the subject-matter is a “Method performed by a computer for a purpose …”, “Processing apparatus…”, or “Computer-readable storage medium storing a program to perform the method…”. In the substantive examination stage, however, the “technical” condition is further scrutinized through the assessment of technical features stated in the subject-matter to determine whether the interaction between the program and the computer creates a further technical effect. The IP Office often issues office actions on substantive examination results because the computer-related patent application does not solve any technical problem and does not produce a further technical effect going beyond the normal interactions between the program and the computer. On December 31, 2021, the IP Office added to the patent examination guidelines mentioned above by issuing an annex with specific guidelines for examining patent applications relating to computer programs. The

2022年初頭、タイの知的財産局は、商標登録のための新しい審査ガイドラインを発行し、2011年からの従来のガイドラインを差し替えた。新しい審査ガイドラインは、商標登録官による商標出願の審査および通知の発行が、現行の慣行に沿って、かつ、統一された基準に基づいて、効率的で、的確に行われることを確保することを目指している。 新しいガイドラインでは、ブランドオーナーが関心を持つ問題の1つとして、3または4文字または数字のみで構成される商標の識別性が挙げられる。 タイ商標法第7条は、図案化された文字または数字を必須要素として含む商標は識別性を有すると述べている。過去において、商標登録官は、この規定を、単語を形成しないあるいは単語として発音することができない3または4文字・数字のみで構成される商標は、図案化された様式で表現されなければ登録することができないという意味であると解釈した。 しかしながら、新しいガイドラインでは、商標法の 「図案化された文字または数字」 という表現は、通常とは異なる方法で表現された（あらゆる言語の）文字または数字を指すと解釈される。さらに、新しいガイドラインでは、3つ以上の文字または数字 （またはそれらの組み合わせ）からなる珍しいシーケンスは、実際には識別可能であり、登録可能であると述べている。 新しい基準に対する一つの例外は、商品またはサービスの性質または特性を記述する商標は、識別性があるとはみなされないことである。新しいガイドラインでは、ビタミンのB 12、衣類のXXL、ブラジャーの34 B、メモリカードの32GBなど、この理由で登録できない商標の例を示している。 新しいガイドラインではまた、タイ語の文字や数字の音声表記は、識別性を有するものとはみなされないと明記されている。それにもかかわらず、ブランドオーナーは商標委員会、さらには知的財産国際貿易裁判所などに識別性に関する判決に対して訴える権利を有している。 新しいガイドラインはまた、タイ最高裁判所の判決に沿ったものであることを強調している。最高裁判所は、商標登録官と商標委員会による拒絶の後、当該商標の登録性を認めた。3文字商標の登録を認める多くの最高裁判決のうち、2つが新しいガイドラインで具体的に引用されている。 クラス7の様々な家庭用電化製品についての下記の商標に関する最高裁判所判決No 9480/2552: クラス9の携帯電話その他の通信機器についての下記の商標に関する最高裁判所判決No 13879/2556: 新しいガイドラインは、知的財産局が最高裁判所の判断と審査判断の実務を整合させようとしていることを示している。   備考：本和文は英文記事を翻訳したものです。原文については、以下のリンクをご参照ください。 New Trademark Examination Guidelines Recognise Distinctiveness of Marks Consisting of Letters and Numerals