Property rights protection in ASEAN 6, 2015

Case Study: Property Rights Protection in 6 ASEAN Countries – Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia and Vietnam By: Bienvenido “Nonoy” Oplas, Jr., Fellow, Southeast Asia Network for Development (SEANET) Summary : There is a vast difference in the scores for Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) between the best performing ASEAN country, Singapore (5th), and the worst performing ASEAN country, Vietnam (85th). Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) and EU FTAs, have exerted pressure on ASEAN to increase protection of IPR. However, there is worry that no

successive ASEAN documents on IPR are available beyond 2015. In order to ensure that ASEAN countries can benefit from a robust IP system, ASEAN member states should encourage competitive and deregulated economies and ensure that the rule of law is upheld. ------ The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is composed of 10 countries with diverse economic and social conditions. Nonetheless, these countries are welded together by a common and shared goal that faster growth is possible through accelerated liberalization in trade and investments. The protection of physical and intellectual property rights (IPR) will help achieve this goal.

The Property Rights Alliance (PRA) in Washington DC, USA, produces the annual International Property Rights Index (IPRI) report. This paper covers six out of the 10 member-countries of the ASEAN. IPRI scores are composite for a country’s performance in three areas: (a) legal and political environment, (b) physical property rights, and (c) intellectual property rights. There is a mixture of results over the past eight reports. The bad news is that (a) the gap in overall score between high-ranked Singapore and low-ranked Vietnam was very wide, with the average score of the former almost twice that of the latter; (b) Thailand and Vietnam suffered significant declines in score and global rank, both falling by at least 19 notches in

ranking from 2014 to 2015; and (c) Indonesia’s global rank also fell significantly from 59th in 2014 to 70th in 2015. The good news is that Singapore and Malaysia have managed to retain their high scores and global ranking. The scores and global rankings for the past 11 years are given below.

Table 1. Overall IPRI Scores of Five ASEAN Countries, 2008-2015.

Year Singapore Malaysia Thailand Philippines Indonesia Vietnam

Ave. score, 2008-15 8.1 6.4 5.2 4.8 4.7 4.6

2015 (out of 129) 8.1 (5th) 6.6 (28th) 4.9 (69th) 5.1 (65th) 4.9 (70th) 4.5 (85th)

2014 (out of 97) 8.2 (5th) 6.5 (27th) 5.3 (50th) n.a. 5.0 (59th) 4.8 (66th)

2013 (out of 177) 8.1 (7th) 6.5 (33rd) 5.2 (71st) 5.0 (77th) 4.9 (81st) 4.7 (91st)

2012 (out of 130) 8.1 (4th) 6.5 (36th) 5.0 (69th) 4.7 (87th) 4.8 (86th) 4.7 (87th)

2011 (out of 129) 8.3 (3rd) 6.1 (44th) 5.3 (64th) 4.7 (87th) 5.0 (77th) 4.9 (81st)

2010 (out of 125) 8.2 (8th) 6.1 (41st) 5.2 (59th) 4.5 (80th) 4.1 (97th) 4.5 (80th)

2009 (out of 115) 8.1 (10th) 6.2 (36th) 5.4 (51st) 4.5 (74th) 4.1 (87th) 4.4 (77th)

2008 (out of 115) 7.9 (13th) 6.4 (31st) 5.6 (49th) 5.0 (62nd) 4.9 (70th) 4.7 (76th)

Source: IPRI annual reports, 2008 to 2015. On area 3, IPR in particular, there are three notable facts: (a) the IPR scores for the 6 ASEAN countries except the Philippines were all lower than their overall IPRI scores, especially for Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia; (b) the gap in scores between Singapore and Indonesia-Vietnam was even wider; and (c) somehow there were significant increases in scores for Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia from 2008 to 2015. Table 2. IPR Scores of Selected ASEAN Countries, 2008-2015.

Year Singapore Malaysia Philippines Thailand Indonesia Vietnam

Ave. score, 2010-15 7.9 6.1 5.0 4.4 3.8 3.8

2015 (out of 129) 7.9 6.3 5.1 4.3 4.1 4.1

2014 (out of 97) 7.9 (16th) 6.3 (32nd) n.a. 4.6 (70th) 4.2 (83rd) 4.3 (78th)

2013 (out of 177) 7.9 6.1 5.3 4.2 4.1 3.9

2012 (out of 130) 7.9 6.2 4.9 4.1 4.0 3.8

2011 (out of 129) 8.3 5.9 4.9 4.5 3.2 3.8

2010 (out of 125) 7.9 5.8 4.8 4.3 3.2 3.5

2009 (out of 115) 7.8 5.9 4.8 4.6 3.4 3.4

2008 (out of 115) 7.5 5.8 5.0 4.6 4.2 3.2

There are several implications for the above numbers. First, IPR protection is still a relatively new concept in public policy for many ASEAN countries. Notice that Singapore, always scoring and placing high in (a) legal and political environment, ranked 8th (9) and (b) physical property protection, ranked 1st (2) has dropped out of the top 10 and ranked only 16th (?) in IPR component.

Secondly, a number of ASEAN countries were not strict on IPR protection. Thailand and

Indonesia for instance issued a number of patent-busting compulsory licensing (CL) of several innovator and patented medicines over the last decade. Thirdly, Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with more developed countries outside of ASEAN have exerted pressure for ASEAN to ensure intellectual property rights protection. The proposed Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) involving the US, as well as the proposed FTAs with EU, play a role in ensuring better protection of IP in the region. This can be observed in the significant rise in scores of Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam in 2014 compared to 2013 in intellectual property rights protection. The Fraser Institute in Canada produces the Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) annual reports. The freedom index is composed of five areas, one of which, Area 2, is a country’s legal system and property rights. Sections (a) and (b) of Area 2 are about a country’s legal and justice system, and Section (c) is about Protection of property rights. Area 2-c component is lifted from the Global Competitiveness Report (GCR) question: “Property rights, including over financial assets, are poorly defined and not protected by law (= 1) or are clearly defined and well protected by law (= 7) otherwise.” This replaces previous GCR question on protection of intellectual property. Here are the scores in the EFW 2015 Report. Other ASEAN countries are covered in the EFW, so they are

included in this table for comparison purposes. Table 3. Scores in Area 2-c, legal system and property rights – protection of property rights, EFW

Economy 2000 2005 2010 2013

Singapore 7.62 8.90 8.97 8.73 Malaysia 4.23 7.93 7.19 7.00 Indonesia 3.13 4.59 4.94 5.48 Philippines 3.22 5.69 4.35 5.47 Thailand 4.42 7.11 4.29 5.15 Vietnam -- 5.72 4.52 4.34

Brunei -- -- 6.06 5.97 Cambodia -- -- 4.63 3.91 Myanmar -- -- -- 2.82

Hong Kong 6.30 8.73 8.54 8.44 Japan 7.55 8.73 7.81 8.24 S. Korea 5.00 7.40 5.92 5.91

Source: Fraser Institute, Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) 2015 Report,

Area 2-c lifted from World Economic Forum (WEF), Global Competitiveness Report. The above numbers show the following: * Singapore has been scoring high in this area since 2000; * Malaysia has been scoring high since 2005, a significant improvement from 2000; * Singapore and Malaysia’s high scores in 2013 are consistent with their high scores in IPRI 2015 report; * Indonesia showed significant improvement in 2013 compared to previous years; * Philippines and Indonesia have similar scores; * Thailand’s score was comparable with Malaysia’s in 2005 then significantly declined in

2010; this could be a reflection of the series of political instabilities and threats to private property since the late 2000s; * Vietnam also showed a similar decline in its score in this area in 2010; * Indonesia scored higher than Thailand and Vietnam in this area, not consistent with its score in IPRI reports. * Brunei is not covered in the IPRI 2015 report but their scores above could be a proxy for their possible ranking if they were included in the said IPRI 2015 report; * Hong Kong and Japan have comparable high scores as Singapore, but S. Korea has a surprisingly lower score than Malaysia. There should be deeper explanations why this happened. There are documents in the region like the ASEAN Intellectual Property Rights Action Plan

2004-2010, and later the Intellectual Property Rights Action Plan 2011-2015, outlining several activities on the subject. But there seems to be no successor document, like Intellectual Property Rights Action Plan 2016 and beyond. In the ASEAN IPR 2011-2015, it mentioned the ASEAN Working Group on Intellectual Property Cooperation (AWGIPC) that was established in 1996. Its mandate was to “develop, coordinate, and implement all IP-related regional programs and activities in ASEAN.” (p.1) Some sentences in the document can signal contradictory meanings though. For instance, one section says, “The grant of IP involves a balancing of rights—the exclusive right of the creator to reap benefits from the IP and the public right of access to information associated

with the right. (p.4) The phrase “public right of access to information associated with the right” can be a source of future problems. IP-protected information like a drug molecule or a production process that are patented or copyrighted are private, not public. The phrase connotes possible issuance of compulsory licensing (CL) or mandatory public appropriation of IPR-protected commodities. The public has access to the use of products and services that are patented or copyrighted by buying them.

In other sections though, the wordings are explicitly pro-IPR protection. Like these, on patents and trademarks: “ASEAN needs to continuously attract the inflow of cutting-edge technology through patent filings by assuring inventors and innovators that patents granted in any of the AMSs have a high presumption of validity and enforceability. With more patent filings in the region, there will be better opportunity for technological information to eventually be diffused to local businesses, which, in turn, will spur the growth of the technological and innovative capacity of the region. As local businesses continue to grow, the need for them to use trademarks to distinguish their

products and services becomes even more important. With strong trademark systems in the region, ASEAN businesses will be encouraged to file in the AMSs where their business is located and foreign entities that bring their businesses into the region will be assured of protection for their marks.” Some reports show that ASEAN countries are moving towards stronger IPR protection, but there are lingering problems: (1) Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS), ASEAN continues stride towards vibrant and interoperable intellectual property system, April 10, 2015. Assessing its progress as outlined in the ASEAN Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Action Plan

2011-2015, the ASEAN Working Group on Intellectual Property Cooperation (AWGIPC) noted that more than 80% of the 108 initiatives under its 2011-2015 action plan are expected to be completed by 2015. Over the past five years, ASEAN has also acceded to a slew of international treaties. Eight of 10 ASEAN countries have acceded to the Patent Cooperation Treaty, which allows applicants to seek patent protection internationally by filing a single application. Most ASEAN member states are also committed to acceding to the Madrid Protocol, which allows applicants to seek trade mark protection in several countries simultaneously, by 2015. In the spirit of interoperability amongst member states, the ASEAN Patent Examination Co-operation (ASPEC) work-sharing program was established to reduce the cost and waiting

time to obtain a patent in ASEAN. ASPEC has gained good traction since its inception, with 80% of applicants receiving a first office action (i.e. a document from the patent examiner after he/she has examined the application) within nine months. This has allowed stakeholders to enjoy expedited patent filing in ASEAN, from two to three years previously for the first office action. (2) SciDevNet, Red tape blamed for hindering Asian innovation, March 15, 2015.

Countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines are on the cusp of becoming global

innovation centers, but their small businesses need a better entrepreneurial environment, speakers said…. at the second ASEAN-EU Science, Technology and Innovation Days event, which took place in Paris, France, last week (17-19 March). The conference explored collaboration opportunities between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the European Union (EU), but flagged up several obstacles preventing small, innovative companies from reaching their potential. “Across the region we see that small and medium-sized enterprises have not contributed to patenting,” said Fortunato de la Peña, a former undersecretary in the Philippines’s Department of Science and Technology.

The conference heard how South-East Asia’s economic strength is shifting from producing consumer goods such as shoes, sports goods and perfume to more innovative areas such as hi-tech and pharmaceuticals. In addition, Asia’s growing middle class, now equal in number to that of the United States, is opening up new markets for more expensive goods produced by European companies, said Anu Sahai, the founding director of the ASEAN Private Equity & Venture Capital Association, which supports businesses in the region. More news reports on the subject are listed in Annex 1, below. On compulsory licensing (CL) and TRIPS flexibilities in the WTO, Malaysia’s Patent law provides the following:

In accordance with TRIPS, under the scope of compulsory license, the Act allows for importation of patented products that are already in the other countries’ market (parallel import).The Government can prohibit commercial exploitation of patents for reasons of public order or morality. The Act was amended to include provision for Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and to allow importation under the scope of compulsory license. Similar to the Philippines’ Cheaper Medicines Act of 2008 (RA 9502), Malaysia allows CL, Special CL, and “international exhaustion” of patent via parallel importation, even though patent application and granting is specific to each country where a patented drug molecule or product has been applied for.

A list of IP laws of the 5 ASEAN countries is found in Annex II below. It is notable that all of them except Vietnam have a law for each type of IP. For example, a law on patent, a law on copyright and so on. In Vietnam, there is only one law that covers all, Law No. 50/2005/QH11 as amended in 2009. In the Philippines, there is also one big and long law that covers all types of IP, the IP Code of the Philippines (RA 8293) enacted in 1997.

One advantage of one law for each type of IP is that if a country wants to revise or amend in

the future one aspect, say only the patent system or copyright system, it will not affect the whole big law -- and cause some confusion. The world is moving towards high value products and services production and trade. New mobile phones, flat or curved TV, other appliances, furnitures with sleek, modern or exotic designs, etc. are all guided by new ideas that were non-existent and unimaginable just a few decades ago. And these ideas are protected by various forms of IP — patent, copyright, trademark, service mark, industrial designs, circuit designs — to protect the innovators and inventive people and enterprises from copycat ones. Concluding notes

1. As confirmed in the three tables above, of the 10 ASEAN countries, Singapore is the most dynamic and most attractive in terms of trade, investments, finance, and property rights protection, including intellectual property (IP). This shows that many investors and professionals believe that the main purpose of having government is to help the people expand, not limit, individual freedom especially the freedom to own and control private property, physical or non-physical/intellectual. 2. It is not government populism and welfarism that gives attractive and stable socio-economic environment; rather, it is the observance and enforcement of the rule of law, including the protection of IPR.

3. It will take time for many ASEAN countries and governments to fully recognize the value of clear IPR protection and its impact towards competitive and innovative economies, leading to a more prosperous and wealthier ASEAN. They need to sustain a competitive, liberalized and deregulated economy so that more players, both domestic and foreign will keep coming and emerging in each sector and sub-sectors. 4. From the example of Singapore, other ASEAN states should ponder again and again, that when private property is secured and protected, more trade, investments, finance and tourism will come from many countries abroad.

Annex I. Some news reports about IPR protection in some ASEAN countries. A. Singapore (1) IPOS, New Programme to Boost Skilled Manpower for Intellectual Property Sector, April 07, 2015. Singapore will soon witness a larger pool of qualified patent agents, with the launch of a new Professional Conversion Program for trainee patent agents by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) and the Singapore Workforce Development Agency (WDA) today.

The program aims to convert up to 70 professionals in the next two years to meet the growing manpower needs of the intellectual property sector. These professionals will join the ranks of more than 100,000 workforce involved in high value-added jobs in the vibrant IP sector, as revealed in a recent manpower survey. This larger core of qualified patent agents will help Singapore effectively serve the increasing demand for patent procurement services in the region, both from local enterprises and international companies. Over the past decade, Singapore has seen a healthy increase in overall patent filings by more than 30%, from 7,908 in 2003 to 10,312 in 2014. (2) Channel News Asia, Singapore begins operations as ASEAN's first international patent search, examination authority, August 31, 2015.

Local and global businesses and inventors will from Sep 1 be able to fast track their applications for patent protection in multiple markets via Singapore. This comes as the Republic kicks off operations as ASEAN’s first International Patent Search and Examination Authority under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) said that Singapore is the fifth in Asia - after China, India, Japan and Korea - to join a group of 19 IP offices worldwide that have been appointed as International Authorities for the PCT. IPOS also said that patent applicants from Brunei, Japan, Mexico, Laos and Vietnam will be the first to gain access to Singapore’s new service offerings as an International Searching Authority and International Preliminary Examining Authority in the coming months. These arrangements were set out under bilateral

agreements signed recently at IP Week @SG 2015, said IPOS.

(3) Channel News Asia, Singapore and UK boost intellectual property cooperation, September 21, 2015. A new intellectual property (IP) agreement is set to benefit the Republic and the UK, with closer IP cooperation and enhanced UK-ASEAN trade relations, said the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) and the UK Intellectual Property Office in a joint media release on September 21.

"Singapore is an influential voice on issues of intellectual property in the ASEAN region," said UK Minister for Intellectual Property, Baroness Neville Rolfe, adding that the MOU will allow the UK and Singapore to share best practices in areas such as IP rights protection, IP-related research and the streamlining of IP court processes. Mr Tan Yih San, chief executive of IPOS, said: "This MOU reaffirms our mutual commitment to increase cross-border IP cooperation and provide a robust IP system for businesses and creators looking to expand into the UK, and those seeking to venture into the ASEAN region.”

(4) IPOS, Innovators could access patent system in U.S. and Indonesia markets with lower cost, October 09, 2015. At the sidelines of the 55th World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) General

Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) of Indonesia appointed the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) as a competent International Searching Authority (ISA) and International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA), for patent applications entering their respective markets under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). Under the PCT, innovators in Singapore and Singapore-based technology companies would have cost-efficient access to a growing list of markets, such as Vietnam, Mexico, Brunei, Japan, Laos, and the two new additions i.e. U.S. and Indonesia, when they utilise the Patent Search and Examination services provided by IPOS-International. This is in addition to the Patent Prosecution Highways offered by Singapore that expedite patent applications to over 30 countries, including key economies such as Europe, China, Japan, Korea and ASEAN.

B. Malaysia (1) Borneo Post, Asean’s fight for intellectual property rights, August 8, 2015.

“A lot of companies misunderstood that IP only serves as a defensive move. Actually IP could do more than that. Companies may licence or franchise their IP in order to earn passive income, for example, by collecting royalty fees and franchise fees from licensees and franchisees.” In other countries, IP ecosystems are very well-developed and matured, as examplified by the

establishments of IP bodies. Take Singapore, for example, who plans to develop itself as a global IP hub in Asia. “Notably, Asia is emerging as a new hot bet for IP activities,” said its IP Steering Committee in its Master Plan Report 2013. “Since 2010, East Asia has overtaken North America and Western Europe in the number of applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, which is used for the filing of patents in multiple jurisdictions.

Statistic of new IP filing in Malaysia in 2013

(2) The Malaysian Insider, Intellectual property a new source of wealth, says PM September 10, 2015. “We need to be competitive in our bid to become a high-income nation that is not dependent on traditional and physical resources but is based on new sources of wealth such as intellectual property. “To ensure the country’s continued momentum in making intellectual property a new source

of wealth, we have a responsibility to be more innovative and creative as well as to constantly create value added in order to come up with high-impact products and technologies for the local and global markets,” he said at the National Intellectual Property Awards 2015 today. Najib, who is also finance minister, said the effectiveness of initiatives to strengthen the national intellectual property ecosystem was shown by the 6% average annual rise in applications…. Some 42% of intellectual property rights applications are from within the country. C. Thailand Toughens Copyright Law To Deal With Internet Providers, Unlawful Movie Recording In Theaters, April 01, 2015,

IP Department hopes to see GI certification for every province in three years, March 3, 2015 D. Rules on Refusal of Trademark Application in Indonesia, April 02, 2015, Indonesia could lose the 2018 Asian Games because of Olympic logo copyright violation, February 12, 2015 E. Vietnam – Tradeark Squatting: a Growing Problem, April 15, 2015

Vietnam – Patent Infringement Judgment Sets Precedent, March 16, 2015.

Annex I: IP Laws of Selected Countries Source: World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) IP laws of Malaysia:

Main IP Laws

* Industrial Designs Act 1996 (Act 552) (1996)

* Layout-Designs of Integrated Circuits Act

2000 (Act 601)

* Geographical Indications Act 2000 (Act 602)

* Trademark Act (Act 175 of 1976, as last

amended by Act A1138 of 2002)

* Protection of New Plant Varieties Act 2004

(Act 634) (2004)

* Patents Act 1983 (Act 291 of 1983, as

amended up to Act No. A1264 of 2006)

* Copyright Act 1987 (Act 332, as of 1 Jan.

2006)

Trade Descriptions Act 2011 (Act 730) (2011)

IP-related Laws

* Telemedecine Act 1997

* Digital Signature Regulations 1998

* Sabah Biodiversity Enactment 2000

* Digital Signature Act 1997 (Act 562) (2006)

* Malaysian Communications and Multimedia

Commission Act 1998 (Act 589) (2006)

* Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (Act

558) (2006)

* Optical Discs Act 2000 (Act 606) (2006)

* Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia Act

2002 (as at 1 January 2006)

* Electronic Commerce Act 2006

57 Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of

those laws

IP Laws of Thailand

Main IP Laws: enacted by the Legislature Trade Secrets Act (No. 2) B.E. 2558 (2015) Copyright Act (No. 2) B.E. 2558 (2015) Copyright Act (No. 3) B.E. 2558 (2015) Optical Disc Production Act B.E. 2548 (2005) Protection of Geographical Indications Act B.E. 2546 (2003) Trade Secrets Act B.E. 2545 (2002) Protection of Layout-Designs of Integrated Circuits Act B.E. 2543 (2000) Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) (consolidated as of 2000) Protection and Promotion of Traditional Thai Medecinal Intelligence Act, B.E. 2542 (1999) Plant Varieties Protection Act B.E. 2542 (1999)

IP-related Laws: enacted by the Legislature Customs Act B.E. 2469 (1926)(consolidated as of 2005) Competition Act, B.E. 2542 (1999) Consumer Protection Act, B.E. 2522 (1979) Export and Import of Goods Act, B.E. 2522 (1979) Industrial Products Standards Act, B.E. 2511 (1968) Law on Ancient Monuments, Antiques, Objects of Art and National Museums B.E. 2504 (1961) 11 Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of those laws IP Legal Literature: Intellectual Property and International Trade Court: A New Dimension for IP Rights Enforcement in Thailand (2010)

Patent Act B.E. 2522 (1979) (1999) Copyright Act B.E. 2537 (1994) (1995)

IP Laws of Singapore

Main IP Laws: enacted by the Legislature * Geographical Indications Act (Chapter 117B) Patents (Amendment) Act 2012 (Commencement) Notification 2014 * Plant Varieties Protection Act (Chapter 232A) (2014) Registered Designs Act (Chapter 266) (Revised Edition 2005, as amended up to Intellectual Property (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2012) (2014) * Patents Act (Revised Edition 2005, as amended up to the Statutes (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2014) Patents (Amendment) Act 2012 * Intellectual Property (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2012 (Act No. 16 of 2012) * Copyright Act (Chapter 63) (2006) * Trade Marks Act (Chapter 332, 2005 Revised Edition) * Intellectual Property Office of Singapore Act (Chapter 140) (Revised Edition 2002) * Layout-Design of Integrated Circuits Act (Chapter 159A) (1999)

IP-related Laws: enacted by the Legislature * Statutes (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2014 * Control of Plant Act (Chapter 57A) (1999) * Medicines Act (Chapter 176) (1998) 30 Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of those laws

IP Laws of Indonesia

Main IP Laws enacted by the Legislature

Law No. 28, September 2014 on Copyright

Law No. 14, August 2001 re. Patents

Law No. 15, August 2001 re. Marks

Law No. 30, December 2000 re. Trade Secret

Law No. 31, Dec. 2000 re. Industrial Designs

Law No. 32, December 2000 re. Layout Designs of

Integrated Circuits

Laws No. 29 of 2000 on Plant Variety Protection

Patent Law No. 13, May 1997 amending Patent

Law No. 6 of November 1989

IP-related Laws enacted by the Legislature

Law No. 5 of 1999 Concerning Ban on Monopolistic

IP Laws: issued by the Executive

* Decree of President of Rep. of Indonesia No.

4 of 2006, re. establishment of National team

on the tackling of Infringements of IPR

* Decision of the Minister of Justice No. M.07-

HC.02.10, October 1991, Concerning Request

for Substantive Examination

* Decision of the Minister of Justice No. M.08-

HC.02.10, October 1991, on recording and

request for copies of patent documents

* Decision of the Minister of Justice No. M.06-

HC.02.10, October 1991, on the procedure

for patent application

* Decision of the Minister of Justice No. M.04-

HC.02.10, September 1991, concerning the

Practices and Unfair Business Competition

Penal Code (Undang-undang R.I. No. 27 Tahun

1999, tanggal 19 Mei 1999)

14 Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of

those laws

Requirements, Time Frame and Procedure to

Pay Patent Fees

* Decision of the Minister of Justice No. M-

01.HC.02.10, July 1991, on Simple Patents

* Decision of the Minister of Justice No. M-

02.HC.02.10, July 1991, on Patent Publication

IP Laws of Vietnam

Main IP Laws enacted by Legislature:

* Law No. 36/2009/QH12, June 2009,

amending and supplementing a Number of

Articles of the Law on Intellectual

Property (promulgated by the Order No.

12/2009/L-CTN of June 29, 2009 of the

President of the Socialist Republic of

Vietnam)

* Law No. 50/2005/QH11, November

2005, on Intellectual Property

(promulgated by the Order No.

28/2005/L-CTN of December 12, 2005, of

the President of the Socialist Republic of

Vietnam)

* Civil Code (2005)

IP Law issued by the Executive

* Order No. 03/2008/L-CTN, April 2008,

on the Promulgation of the Ordinance on

Handling of Administrative Violations

IP-related Laws enacted by the Legislature

* Law No. 37/2009/QH12 Amending and

Supplementing a Number of Articles of the Penal Code

* Ordinance No. 04/2008/PL-UBTVQH12 on Handling

of Administrative Violations

* Law No. 80/2006/QH11 on Technology Transfer

(2007)

* Ordinance No. 29/2006/PL-UBTVQH11 Amending

and Supplementing a Number of Articles of the

Ordinance on Procedures for the Settlement of

Administrative Cases

* Law No. 42-2005-QH11, June 2005, Amendment of

and Addition to a Number of Articles of the Law on

Customs

* Competition Law No. 27/2004/QH11

* Civil Procedures Code (2004)

* Seed Ordinance No. 15/2004/PL-UBTVQH11

* Criminal Procedures Code (2003)

Ordinance No. 44/2002/PL-UBTVQH10, July 2002 on

Handling of Administrative Violations

* Decree No. 39-2001-PL-UBTVQH10 on

Advertisement passed by the National Assembly

Standing Committee, November 2001

* Law on Customs No. 29/2001/QH10, June 2001

* Law No. 21/2000/QH 10 on Science and Technology

* Criminal Code (1999)

* Ordinance on the Procedures for the Settlement Of

Administrative Cases (1996)

IP Laws of the Philippines

Main IP Laws: enacted by the

Legislature

* Republic Act (RA) No. 10372, 'An

Act Amending Certain Provisions of

Republic Act No. 8293’, otherwise

known as the ‘Intellectual Property

Code of the Philippines', and for other

purposes' (2013)

* Philippine Technology Transfer Act

of 2009 (RA 10055) (2010)

* Philippine Plant Variety Protection

Act of 2002 (RA 9168)

* RA 9150 'An Act for the Protection

of Layout-Designs (Topographies) of

Integrated Circuits, Amending for the

Purpose Certain Sections of Republic

Act No. 8293, otherwise known as the

Intellectual Property Code of the

Philippines and for other purposes'

(2001)

* Intellectual Property Code of the

Philippines (RA 8293) (1997)

IP-related Laws: enacted by the Legislature

* The Graphic Health Warnings Law (RA 10643 of July 15,

2014).

* Toy and Game Safety Labeling Act of 2013 (RA No.

10620) (2013)

* Food Safety Act of 2013 (RA 10611) (2013)

* An Act Amending Certain Provisions of Republic Act No.

7581, Entitled “an Act Providing Protection to Consumers

by Stabilizing the Prices of Basic Necessities and Prime

Commodities and by Prescribing Measures Against undue

Price Increases During Emergency Situations and Like

Occasions” and For Other Purposes (Republic Act No.

10623) (2013)

* An Act Amending Republic Act No. 9296, otherwise

Known as “the Meat Inspection Code of the Philippines”

(Republic Act No. 10536) (2013)

* Republic Act No. 10530 of May 7, 2013, An Act Defining

the Use and Protection of the Red Cross, Red Crescent, and

Red Crystal Emblems, Providing Penalties for Violations

Thereof and for Other Purposes (2013)

* RA 10515 of April 17, 2013, An Act Prohibiting and

Penalizing Unauthorized Interception, Reception or Use of

Any Signal or Service Over a Cable Television System or

Cable Internet System and/or Network, and for Other

Purposes (2013)

* National Cultural Heritage Act of 2009 (Republic Act No.

10066) (2010)

* Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009 (Republic

Act No. 9995) (2010)

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Act of 2009 (RA

9711)

* Universally Accessible Cheaper and Quality Medicines Act

of 2008 (RA 9502) (2008)

* An Act Amending Section 27, 28, 34, 106, 107, 108, 109,

110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 116, 117, 119, 121, 148, 151, 236,

237, and 288 of the National Internal Revenue Code of

1997, as Amended, and For other Purpose ( Republic Act

No. 9337) (2005)

* An Act Amending Certain Sections of the National

Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as Amended, by Excluding

Several Services from the Coverage of the Value-Added Tax

and Re-imposing the Gross Receipts Tax on Banks and

Non-Bank Financial Intermediaries Performing Quasi-

Banking Functions and Other Non-Bank Financial

Intermediaries Beginning January 01, 2004 (RA 9238)

* The Meat Inspection Code of the Philippines (RA 9296)

(2004)

Optical Media Act of 2003 (Republic Act No. 9239) (2004)

Tobacco Regulation Act of 2003 (Republic Act No. 9211)

(2003)

* Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (Republic

Act No. 9165)

* Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act (RA

9417) (2001)

* An Act Amending certain Provisions of Presidential

Decree No. 1464, otherwise known as the Tariff and

Customs Code of The Philippines, as Amended, and for

other Purposes (Republic Act No. 9135) (2001)

* Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines (RA 1937)

(2001)

* Electronic Commerce Act (RA 8792) (2000)

* Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines (RA 8491)

(1998)

* Traditional and Alternative Medicine Act (TAMA) of 1997

(RA 8423) (1997)

* The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 (RA 8371)

(1997)

* An Act Regulating the Practice of Pharmacy and Settings

Standards of Pharmaceutical Education in the Philippines

and of Other Purposes (Republic Act No. 5921) (1997)

Expanded Value-Added Tax Law and Other Pertinent

Provisions of the National Internal Revenue Code, as

Amended (RA 8241) (1996)

* Special Law on Counterfeit Drugs (RA No. 8203) (1996)

** An Act for Salt Iodization Nationwide (ASIN)(Republic

Act No. 8172) (1995)

* Book Publishing Industry Development Act (RA 8047 of

June 7, 1995) (1995)

* An Act Restructuring The Value Added Tax (Vat) System,

Widening Its Tax Base and Enhancing Its Administration,

and for these Purposes Amending and Repealing the

Relevant Provisions of the National Internal Revenue Code,

as Amended, and for other Purposes (RA 1994)

* Inventors and Invention Incentives Act of the Philippines

(RA) (1992)

Consumer Act of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 7394)

(1992)

Manlilikha ng Bayan Act (Republic Act No. 7355) (1992)

The Price Act (Republic Act No. 7581) (1992)

Foreign Investments Act of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7042)

(1991)

Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes

Control Act of 1990 (Republic Act No. 6969) (1990)

Generics Act of 1988 (Republic Act No. 6675) (1988)

The Corporation Code of the Philippines (Batas Pambansa

Blg. 68) (1980)

Civil Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 386) (1980)

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ( Republic Act No. 3720)

(1963)

Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices (Republic Act No. 3019)

(1960)

An Act to Regulate and Control the Manufacture,

Importation, Labeling, Advertising, and Sale of Livestock

and Poultry Feeds and Providing Funds Therefore,

(Republic Act. No. 1556 (As Amended by S.B. No. 627)

(1956)

The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815 of December 8,

1930) (1930)

Treaty membership

Singapore Malaysia Thailand Philippines Indonesia Vietnam

WIPO-Administered

treaties

13 7 4 10 10 10

IP-related multilateral

treaties

22 23 26 29 25 25

IP regional treaty 1 1 1 1 1 1

Regional econ. Integration

treaties

6 5 6 6 4 4

IP-related bilateral treaties 10 5 6 6 4 4