IP Feature Recent trends Affect on foreign business

1) Thailands trade secret regulations fail to protect against unfair commercial use of
undisclosed tests and other data submitted to Thai governmental authorities.
.. .



2)
pirated and counterfeit goods are produced or sold.
high profile seizures of IPR infringing products and the Thai
government has introduced legislation ..
.



3)
.




4) some products/services arent patentable (microorganisms)..
.



5) .. .

Be prepared to present your findings to the class.

With the comparison between the group of Thai banks and the group of foreignowned
banks , starting from 2001, it is found that the Thai banks has earn margins than
the foreign banks because the Thai banks costs of the deposits are slightly cheaper.
However, the return on assets for the foreign bank is on average higher that the Thai
banks. The difference in financial performance between the two group results in the
further study on how the intellectual capital plays the role on the different financial
performances.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) PROTECTION
Thailand was listed on the Priority Watch List in the 2009 Special 301 Report. Key concerns cited in
the
report included the lack of progress since the previous year in addressing the widespread problems of
piracy and counterfeiting. This was evidenced by the lack of sustained and coordinated enforcement
efforts, and, in particular, the lack of successful prosecutions. The U.S. pharmaceutical industry
continues to express concerns regarding the uncertain climate for their industry in Thailand. In
addition,
both the pharmaceutical industry and agricultural chemicals industries have expressed concerns that
Thailands trade secret regulations fail to protect against unfair commercial use of undisclosed tests
and
other data submitted to Thai governmental authorities.
The United States has been encouraged by the Thai governments recent high-level commitment to
protect and promote IPR in Thailand and the creation of a national strategy to advance this
commitment.
Moreover, there have been some high profile seizures of IPR infringing products and the Thai
government has introduced legislation addressing unlawful camcording and landlord liability for
criminal action where pirated and counterfeit goods are produced or sold.
The United States will continue monitoring the Thai governments efforts to protect and enforce
intellectual property rights.

Recent Trends ln Thul Putent Luw
After rupldly reculllng the muln llnes of the Thul putent system, thls brlef wlll rupldly
revlew stutlstlcul dutu concernlng putent cuses declded by the Intellectuul Property und
Internutlonul Trude Court, estubllshed ln December 1997, und by the Supreme Court, on
the one hund, und concernlng the gruntlng procedure, on the other hund.
I Muln llnes of the Thul Putent Act
The Putent Act B.E. 2522 (l.e. 1979), modlfled ln 1992 und 1999, provldes thut [u]n
lnventlon shull be tuken to be cupuble of lndustrlul uppllcutlon lf lt cun be mude or used
ln uny klnd of lndustry, lncludlng hundlcrufts, ugrlculture und commerce (Sectlon 8).
3utentublllty
The followlng ure re excluded from putentublllty ln Thullund:
y nuturully occurrlng mlcroorgunlsms und thelr components, unlmuls, plunts
or extructs from unlmuls or plunts
y methods of dlugnosls, treutment or cure of humun und unlmul dlseuses
y lnventlons contrury to publlc order, mo rullty, heulth or welfure
Inventlve concept
Sec. 18 requlres thut un uppllcutlon for putent () relute to only one lnventlon or to u
group of lnventlons whlch ure so llnked us to form u slngle lnventlve concept. Thls
provlslon ls to some extent, ulthough fur less detulled, tuntumount to Sec. 37 of the
Jupunese Putent Luw no 121 of 1959 ln lts consollduted verslon
1
, und to Art. 82 of the
Europeun Putent Conventlon
2
.
Gruce perlod
Pursuunt to Art. 4 und 11 of the Purls Conventlon for the protectlon of lntellectuul
property rlghts, the Thul luw provldes for u twelve -month gruce perlod when u person
who hus exhlblted hls lnventlon ln un exhlbltlon whlch hus been sponsored or
uuthorlsed und held ln Thullund by the government () upplles for u putent for such
lnventlon wlthln twelve months followlng the openlng dute of thut exhlbltlon () Such
uppllcutlon shull be deemed to huve been flled on the openlng dute of the exhlbltlon.
Provlslonul protectlon
A sectlon 35 bls wus lntroduced ln 1992, whlch stutes thut ucts ln vlolutlon of sectlon 36
deflnlng putentees rlghts, commltted before the grunt of u putent shull not be deemed to
constltute lnfrlngements, unless the pendlng uppllcutlon hus ulreudy been publlshed, or
the person lluble for these ucts knew or hud been lnformed ln wrltlng thut u putent
uppllcutlon hud been flled for the lnventlon. In thls cuse, the putentee ls entltled to
dumuges und muy lodge u complulnt ufter the putent ls grunted.
Opposltlon
Any person who thlnks thut he/she ls better entltled to u putent thun the uppllcunt muy
lodge un opposltlon to the uppllcutlon ut stuke wlthln 90 duys from the dute of publlcutlon
of the uppllcutlon. The uppllcunt shull then flle u counter stutement wlthln 90 duys from
the recelpt of the copy of the notlce of opposltlon.
Where the Generul Dlrector re|ects the uppllcutlon und such declslon ls not uppeuled by
the uppllcunt or the uppeul hus been re|ected by the Bourd or the Court, the opposlng
purty muy flle u putent uppllcutlon wlthln 180 duys from the declslon of the Generul
Dlrector or the Bourd/Court. The flllng dute ls deemed to be thut of the lnltlul uppllcunt.
Where un opposltlon hus been lnltluted und hus succeeded, the new uppllcunt shull flle
the request for exumlnutlon elther wlthln flve yeurs ufter publlcutlon, us ln the normul
cuse, or wlthln one yeur ufter the flnul declslon concernlng the opposltlon hus been
reuched, dependlng on whlch perlod explres lust (Sec. 29 through 34). The uppllcutlo n ls
deemed ubundoned ln cuse of fullure to flle such u request wlthln the prescrlbed perlod.
Exceptlons to putent rlghts
Sectlon 36 resultlng from the 1999 reform provldes for u number of exceptlons, of whlch:
y (l) uny uct for the purpose of study, reseurch, experlmentutlon or unulysls,
provlded thut lt does not unreusonubly confllct wlth u normul exploltutlon
of the putent und do not unreusonubly pre|udlce the legltlmute lnterests of
the putent owner; (thls lust phruse ls tuken from TRIPs Art. 30)
y (vll) the use, sule, huvlng ln possesslon for sule, offerlng for sule or
lmportutlon of u putented product when lt hus been produced or sold wlth
the uuthorlsutlon or consent of the putentee. The mentlon of lmportutlon
ln thls provlslon constltutes un uppl lcutlon of the lnternutlonul exhuustlon
of rlghts prlnclple, whlch ls not ruled out by the TRIPs Agreement
3
.
Clulms lnterpretutlon
Pursuunt to Sec. 36 bls lntroduced ln 1992, und qulte clusslcully, ln determlnlng the
scope of the clulmed lnventlon, the descrlptlon und the druwlngs shull be tuken lnto
uccount. It ls further speclfled thut the scope of protectlon for u putented lnventlon shull
extend to the churucterlstlcs of the lnventlon whlch, ulthough not speclflcully stuted ln the
clulms, ln the vlew of u person of ordlnury sklll ln the pertlnent urt, huve substuntlully the
sume propertles, functlons und effects us those stuted ln the clulms.
Thls lust sentence evokes the doctrlne of equlvulence, developed by courts ln Europe
(lnltlully, ln Germuny) und ln the USA. Thls doctrlne hus been embedded lnto the EPC
through the Protocol on the lnterpretutlon of Art. 69 of the EPC on the extent of
protectlon ln lts revlsed 2000 verslon
4
, whereus ln the US, lts uppllcutlon hus recently
been llmlted by the CAFC und then the Supreme Court ln the 2002 Festo lundmurk
declslon
5
. In Jupun, thls doctrlne hus been upplled by the Supreme Court for the flrst
tlme ln 1998
6
.
Compulsory llcenses
The provlslons ln the Putent Act concernlng compulsory llcenslng huve been revlsed ln
1999 ln order to comply wlth Art. 31 of the TRIPs Agreement.
Sec. 46 now stutes thut ufter 3 yeurs from the grunt of u putent or 4 yeurs from the dute
of uppllcutlon, whlchever ls luter, uny person muy upply to the DIP Dlrector Generul lf lt
uppeurs:
(l) thut the putented product hus not been produced or the putented process hus not been
upplled ln the country, wlthout uny legltlmute reuson; or
(ll) thut no product produced under the putent ls sold ln uny domestlc murket, or thut
such u product ls sold but ut unreusonubly hlgh prlces or does not meet the publlc
demund, wlthout uny legltlmute reuson.
Whether lt ls un uppllcutlon under (l) or (ll), the uppllcunt for u llcense must show thut he
hus mude un effort to obtuln u llcense from the putentee huvlng proposed condltlons und
remunerutlon reusonubly sufflclent under the clrcumstunces but unuble to reuch un
ugreement wlthln u reusonuble perlod.
Thus, Art. 46 upplles to llcenses for non -exploltutlon of putents the condltlons set out by
TRIPs Art. 31 for compulsory llcenses on dependent putents.
Addltlonully, Sec. 47 provldes for cuses where the uppllcunt for u compulsory llcense for
non-exploltutlon ulso needs to obtuln u llcense for dependency, where the uppllcunt
cunnot work the putent whlch ls t he ob|ect of the compulsory llcense wlthout lnfrlnglng
the putent of unother person.
In ull cuses, the condltlons for the exploltutlon of the putent, lncludlng royultles, und the
restrlctlons to the putentees rlghts shull be set forth by the Dlrector Gene rul. Pursuunt to
TRIPs Art. 31, the llcense shull be non-excluslve, und grunted predomlnuntly for the
supply of the domestlc murket
7
. A llcense lssued under Sec. 46 muy be termlnuted when
the clrcumstunces whlch led to lts udoptlon ceuse to exlst, und the declslon of the
Dlrector Generul muy be uppeuled to the DIP Bourd of Appeuls wlthln 60 duys of recelpt
of the notlce.
Revocutlon
Sec. 54 provldes thut the lnvulldlty of u putent muy be chullenged by uny person. The
Dlrector Generul muy request the Bourd to repeul u putent when u perlod of 2 yeurs hus
lupsed from the lssuunce of u llcense on u putent und the llcensee fulls to produce the
putented product or to use the putented process wlthout uny legltlmute reuson, or no
putented product or product derlved from the putented process ls lmported lnto the
country (or where the putented product or product derlved from u putented process ls
sold wlthln the country ut unreusonubly hlgh prlce).
II Stutlstlcul dutu concernlng |udlclul declslons
The Centrul Intellectuul Property und Internutlonul Trude Court ls competent ln muny
dlfferent flelds. In 2005, lt hus dlsposed 6,105 cuses, of whlch 5,558 crlmlnul ones. In the
sole fleld of lntellectuul property, lt hus declded 199 clvll cuses.
In 2005, the bucklog ln terms of uppeuls ugulnst declslons of the putent bourd umounted
to 13 pendlng cuses, whlle 11 new ones were flled, und 9 declded. As to putent
lnfrlngement cuses, there were 10 pendlng cuses, 11 new ones flled, und 12 ones
declded. There were ulso 12 pendlng crlmlnul putent cuses, 15 new ones flled, und 8
were declded.
III Stutlstlcul dutu concernlng gruntlng procedure
In uggregute, from 1981 untll 2005 the DIP hus recelved 26,477 putent uppllcutlons, of
whlch 6,340 ln 2005. The proportlon of uppllcutlons flled by Thul nutlonuls hus rlsen
from 10 to 14% from 1997 untll 2005.
Jupunese putent uppllcutlons ure the most numerous, l.e. 1,682 ln 2005 (26,5% of totul).
Amerlcun und EU uppllcutlons uccount for roughly 1,450 euch.
The number of putent uppllcutlons f lled by Thul nutlonuls ln the fleld tltled chemlstry ls
of 203 ln 2005 (less thun 7% of totul uppllcutlons ln thls fleld), und EU wus the flrst
forelgn uppllcunt wlth 976 uppllcutlons ln 2005. Conversely, ln the fleld tltled
englneerlng, uppllcutlons f lled by Thul nutlonuls represented ulmost 19% of totul
uppllcutlons ln thls fleld (483 out of 2,567 ln 2005) und Jupun wus by fur the flrst forelgn
uppllcunt, wlth 33% of totul uppllcutlons ln thls fleld ln 2005. The detull of IPC clusses
guthered ln these respectlve flelds ls not lndlcuted.
As to the bucklog, lt umounts to 22,304 ln 2005, us the number of grunted putents ln
uggregute ls of 4,173 (of whlch 553 ln 2005). The lurgest bucklog ls ln the fleld of
chemlstry, us 128 putents only were grunted ln thut fleld ln 2005, compured to 303 ln the
fleld of englneerlng.
The grunt rute ut the Thul DIP wus of less thun 10% ln 2005 und ubout 20% ln 2004,
compured to thut of the EPO (55% ln 2004), JPO (49.5%) und the USPTO (61%),
uccordlng to flgures clted by the Trlluterul Stutlstlcul Report 2004, uvulluble ut
http://www.trlluterul.net/tsr/tsr2004.
All the Thul IP luws, IP stutlstlcs und putent seurch, us well us llcenslng lnformutlon cun
be retrleved from http://www.lpthullund.org, the webslte of the DIP. Thls webslte ulso
lncludes u llnk to the webslte of the Industrlul Property Informutlon Center of the DIP,
http://www.lplc.moc.go.th, set up wlth the usslstunce of the Jupun Internutlonul
Cooperutlon Agency. Another useful dutubuse to retrleve IP declslons from Chlnu, Koreu
und Thullund ls thut set up by CASRIP, the Center for Advunced study und Reseurch on
Intellectuul Property, Unlverslty of Wushlngton, whlch cun be uccessed from
http://www.21coe-wln-cls.org/rcllp/db/seurchresult.php.


Geneva, January 19, 2009 - The King of Thailand, His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej, received on January
14, 2009, the WIPO Global Leader Award in recognition of his extraordinary commitment to promoting
intellectual property and his important contribution to society as a prolific inventor.