Deleted user
posted 2 years ago
Amendments in the Trademark Registration Regulations in Thailand
Thailand’s Department of Intellectual Property discloses the Trademark Examination Guideline (“TM Guideline”) on January 17, 2022. It is applicable to all current and future trademark applications. The revised TM Guideline clarifies numerous significant concerns, particularly those essential to registrability, which are like the following: New Regulations to judge "Distinctiveness" a. The revised TM Guideline includes five distinctness spectrums: (i) fanciful/inventive markings; (ii) arbitrary marks; (iii) suggestive marks; (iv) descriptive marks; and (v) generic marks. b. Now it is possible to classify combinations of three or more uncommon sequential alphabets and digits, such as TCL and HTC, in the first spectrum of fundamentally distinctive/inventive markings. c. As long as the mark lacks a definition, markings made out of a combination of the Japanese, Chinese, or Korean alphabets can now be considered fundamentally distinctive or inventive marks. d. The minimum amount of time to use evidence to establish acquired uniqueness in Thailand is now two years. According to the new TM Guideline, advertisements on television, social media sites, billboards, and other print media are sufficient as proof of use in Thailand. e. According to the revised TM Guideline, the “Disclaimer Instruction” for a non-distinctive component of the mark is only relevant to the non-dominant component of the mark. New Regulations to judge "Prohibitive Characteristics" a. Unless the application presents an authentic official consent letter issued by the embassy and/or ministry of trade (or their equivalent) to indicate that the applicant is permitted to use such names/abbreviations, country names and abbreviations cannot be registered. b. Country names and abbreviations may be used in the mark as long as the applicant is of that nation’s nationality. “Made in [country name/abbreviation],” for instance. Now, it is possible to evaluate the applicant's intent when determining whether the mark violates public order, morals, or policy. c. According to the revised TM Guideline, where a mark has been recognized as a “well-known” mark, trademark examiners should take those determinations into account. New Regulations for "Identicalness/Confusing Similarity" The new TM Guideline outlines the evaluation of confusing similarity in detail and instructs trademark examiners to take into account elements like consumer groups, whether the goods or services require expert advice or supervision, the purpose of use, trade or distribution channels, and the cost of the goods or services. If you are from Thailand or from outside Thailand, please take your time to check whether your mark is in compliance with the new clauses or not. If not, take your time and make it eligible according to the newly announced clauses.
  • Thailand
  • Commercial and Business Law
  • Intellectual Property

Answer this Post

Login into your account and answer this post

Contribute Now