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

May 23, 2013

IP Enforcement Training for Customs Across Thailand

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

Border measures are at the frontlines of IP enforcement efforts to stop the spread of counterfeit goods both domestically and internationally. By raising the awareness of Royal Thai Customs Department officials and educating them on how to verify genuine and counterfeit goods, brand owners can increase their effectiveness in taking aggressive actions against IP infringement.

With this goal in mind, Tilleke & Gibbins recently cooperated with 10–15 of our major clients, including companies focused on alcoholic beverages, apparel, electronics, and consumer products, to hold IP enforcement training sessions for three main Customs regions, covering 34 ports in total, located near Thailand’s borders with Laos, Myanmar, and Malaysia.

Northeastern Region

The training for Customs Region II in northeastern Thailand was held on March 12, 2013. Fifty-seven Customs officers attended the event, which was opened by Mr. Charnchai Chobcheunchom, Director of Customs Region II. This Customs region covers nine ports, all of which are located on the Thai-Laos border: Nongkai, Ta-li, Chiangkhan, Buengkan, Nakornpanom, Mukdaharn, Khemmarat, Phibulmungsaharn, and Chongjom.

In our experience, most counterfeit goods found and seized at these ports are carried over the border between Thailand and Laos by individual smugglers. Although the amount of counterfeit products smuggled into the country with each individual carrier is not significant, it is known that the illegal traders’ technique is to use tremendous numbers of people to cross the border several times a day, every day.

Northern Region

On March 14, 2013, we provided training for 52 officers from Customs Region III in northern Thailand, which covers nine ports: Maesai, Chaingkhong, Maesot, Chiangsan, Chiangmai Airport, Mae Hongson, Chiangdao, Maesariang, and Tungchang. This training was honored to have Mr. Seri Thaijongrak, Director of Customs Region III, give the opening speech for the event.

The northern region of Thailand is connected to Myanmar, and parts of Myanmar are connected to China. Reports indicate that many illegitimate manufacturers and exporters in China use Myanmar as a transit channel for counterfeit goods prior to transporting them to other countries, including Thailand, in order to cover up the origin of the goods, as they know that Customs officials in many countries are quite sensitive and suspicious about shipments arriving directly from China.

Southern Region

The training for Customs Region IV in southern Thailand followed on March 19, 2013. After an opening address by Mom Luang Sitthidej Suksawad, Chief of Sadao Customs Port, 54 officers participated in this training. Customs Region IV covers 16 ports: Padang Besar, Sadao, Sungaiko-lok, Songkla, Hadyai Airport, Phuket Airport, Phuket, Betong, Takbai, Satun, Kantang, Krabi, Nakorn Sri Thammarat, Pattani, and Sichon.

Feedback from Customs

All three of the Customs regional directors understand the problems of IP enforcement in Thailand and acknowledge that their units are important to stopping the flow of counterfeit goods. They committed to encouraging all of their officers to continue monitoring and assisting brand owners by taking aggressive action against counterfeit goods.

The officers who attended told us that this kind of training is very helpful to their work, as they learned interesting and useful information about the products of different brands and different industries, and how to detect counterfeit products themselves. They will also spread this knowledge to their colleagues who were unable to attend the training.

Customs officials are eager to participate in additional training sessions, as the more information we can provide, the more effective they can be in enforcing brand owners’ rights. They requested that we provide regular updates to them so that they can remain informed about new products, new trademarks, and new brand owners who are facing infringement challenges.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 7, 2026
Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi) has reinstated a key provision limiting pharmaceutical patent protection, signaling a renewed commitment to balancing patent rights with public access to medicines. In its ruling to Case No. 255/PUU-XXIII/2025, the court partially granted a petition for judicial review of Law No. 65 of 2024, which had amended the country’s Patent Law, and ordered the restoration of a provision that had excluded certain pharmaceutical inventions from patentability. The decision took effect immediately upon its pronouncement at the court’s plenary session on August 28, 2026. Background The petition challenged the removal of article 4(f) from Law No. 13 of 2016 concerning Patents (Patent Law), as amended by Law No. 65 of 2024. Article 4(f) had excluded from patentability certain inventions relating to new uses of known substances. The petitioners argued that removing this provision would open the door to patent protection for second medical use inventions and facilitate patent evergreening—practices that can extend exclusivity periods, delay generic market entry, and reduce public access to affordable medicines. The petitioners included several patient advocacy and public-interest organizations: the Indonesian Dialysis Patients Community Association, the Indonesian Association of Drug Abuse Victims (PKNI), the Indonesian Pulmonary Hypertension Foundation (YHPI), the Rekat Peduli Indonesia Foundation, and the Indonesian Positive Women’s Association (IPPI), along with the Indonesia for Global Justice Association and four individual petitioners. The petitioners also challenged the constitutionality of the phrase “interested party” in article 70(1) of the Patent Law, arguing that it should be construed expressly to clarify who has standing to appeal a decision to grant a patent before the Board of Patent Appeal, and to allow a broader range of parties—such as patent holders, licensees, consumer organizations, prosecutors, aggrieved third parties, and others who may suffer direct or indirect harm from the grant of a patent—to
Read More
September 2, 2026
Thailand and China have a longstanding and significant trade relationship, which increasingly extends to e-commerce and digitally enabled supply chains. While these channels create new opportunities for businesses to reach consumers across borders, their growth also brings greater exposure to intellectual property (IP) infringement across jurisdictions and online platforms. Effective cooperation between the two countries’ enforcement authorities has therefore become increasingly important. To strengthen cooperation in this area, Thailand and China signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on IP enforcement in Beijing on July 20, 2026, during the Thai prime minister’s official visit to China. Officially titled “Memorandum of Understanding Between the State Administration for Market Regulation of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Commerce of the Kingdom of Thailand on Cooperation in the Field of Intellectual Property Enforcement,” the MOU forms part of a broader bilateral agenda covering industrial and supply chains, participation by micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), cooperation associated with the ASEAN–China Free Trade Area 3.0, and progress on the registration of Thai geographical indications in China. The MOU establishes a bilateral framework for cooperation and coordination in five broad areas: Strengthening dialogue in IP enforcement; Enhancing information sharing; Facilitating the enforcement of IP rights in cases arising in the parties’ domestic markets and on online platforms, in accordance with their respective domestic laws; Promoting cooperation in IP enforcement training and human resource development; and Undertaking other cooperation activities agreed upon by both sides. The Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) will serve as the principal coordinating agency for Thailand, while the Bureau of Law Enforcement and Inspection in China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) will serve in that role for China. The framework is particularly relevant to the growth of e-commerce, as it covers infringement in the domestic markets and on
Read More
August 28, 2026
When considering a franchise, many people first think of a restaurant, retail chain, or service outlet. From a legal perspective, however, the foundation of every franchise lies in the right to use a brand, which is typically granted through a trademark license. Trademarks are often the most valuable assets in a franchise system. Through a trademark license, a franchisor authorizes a franchisee to use its trademarks, logos, and branding while maintaining control over how the brand is presented to customers. The Role of Trademarks in Franchise Businesses Under the Trademark Law 2019, a mark is defined as a sign that is capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of others in the course of trade. This distinguishing function is particularly important in a franchise arrangement, where the franchisee’s use of the franchisor’s trademark allows consumers to recognize the source, quality, and reputation of the business. In this way, trademarks help preserve brand identity, strengthen market recognition, and protect the commercial value of the franchise system. Legal Foundation for Franchise Brand Protection Myanmar presently does not have a specific statutory framework governing franchise arrangements. As a result, franchise agreements are generally regulated under the broader applicable legal framework, including the Contract Act 1872, the Trademark Law 2019, the Competition Law 2015, the Consumer Protection Law 2019, and the relevant implementing rules and regulations. The licensing of trademarks within a franchise arrangement is particularly governed by the Trademark Law 2019. Franchisors should ensure that the trademarks intended to be licensed to franchisees in Myanmar are registered under the Trademark Law 2019 and that the relevant trademark license is properly recorded with the Intellectual Property Department (IPD). Trademark License Recordal Under the Trademark Law 2019, the owner of a registered trademark may grant a license to another
Read More
August 27, 2026
It is generally understood that patents are granted for new designs that have not been widely known or used in Thailand and not been disclosed anywhere prior to the date of the patent application. It is trite law that design law protects the distinctive appearance or products. Under Section 3 of the Thai Patent Act B.E. 2522, as amended by the Patent Act (No. 2) B.E. 2535 and the Patent Act (No. 3) B.E. 2542, a design is defined as “any form or composition of lines or colors that gives a product a special appearance and can serve as a pattern for an industrial or handicraft product.” This raises an important question. Can a patent be issued for a product design that contains text, numerals, trademarks, or symbols that do not fall under the definition of a design? This issue commonly arises when attempting to register packaging, labels, and graphical user interfaces (GUIs). Until a few years ago, applicants could file design applications with the Thai Patent Office for designs that contained such elements, provided that an appropriate disclaimer was included. This practice was generally accepted by Thai design examiners at that time, but the Patent Office has since implemented a change in its practice that could have a significant impact on applicants for design patents. Where design representations are submitted as line drawings or computer-aided design (CAD) drawings, the examiner may now issue an office action requiring their removal. This practice, however, appears to be applied inconsistently, as some examiners still exercise their own discretion in determining whether drawings containing these elements are acceptable. Below are examples of a GUI design, a CAD drawing design, and a photographic design representation that illustrates issues relating to the presence of nonallowable elements. GUI design For this GUI design, the submitted
Read More