Insights

Thailand’s Department of Intellectual Property has signalled this week, in its response to the 2026 U.S. Special 301 Report, that the draft amendment to the Patent Act has moved into the final accelerated stage of legislation. Thailand remains on the U.S. intellectual property Watch List, but the reform message is now more practical than political: companies filing patents, designs or technology-related matters in Thailand should revisit authorisation records, filing calendars and likely prosecution costs before the law changes rather than after.

In Malaysia, MyIPO’s revised Guidelines of Trademark 2019 (VA1-2026) are now becoming a live item in corporate compliance reviews. The sharper points are the formal review of powers of attorney and the examination of marks containing foreign words or scripts. If a compliant POA is not filed within the required period, the agent’s authority may not be recognised; if a mark includes non-Roman or foreign-language elements, translation and transliteration materials should be prepared early. For brand owners, the lesson is plain: in key Southeast Asian markets, formalities are no longer a harmless clean-up exercise.

With Indonesia’s Ministerial Regulation No. 6 of 2026 now fully in force, DJKI has used its online filing system this week to issue a practical warning: any excess claims fees for new patent applications must be paid in full at the time of filing. The message is procedural, but its effect is immediate. Claim counting, specification drafting and payment checks now need to be handled as one filing task, not as separate follow-up items.

For applicants, the main risk is not simply a higher official fee. It is the loss of room to correct a fee gap after the application has entered the system. Before filing in Indonesia, applicants should review the claim set, trim dependent claims where commercially sensible, and make sure the local filing budget matches the claim structure. DJKI’s approach also points to a more front-loaded patent filing environment, where online validation may become as important as the legal drafting itself.

In early May, the Vietnamese government stepped up its explanation and implementation messaging around Decree No. 134/2026/ND-CP, which took effect on 9 April 2026. The decree amends Decree No. 17/2023/ND-CP and gives more detailed treatment to AI-assisted creation, the use of protected text and data for AI training, rights-reservation mechanisms, and the responsibilities of intermediary services and digital content platforms. For generative AI providers, content platforms and businesses using AI-generated material, the compliance question is moving beyond a simple AI label.

The practical point is sharper: companies will need cleaner records of training-data sources, human creative contribution, takedown handling and downstream licensing. Vietnam is not closing the door on AI-driven content businesses, but it is making clear that copyright compliance has to be built into product design and platform operations. Waiting until a dispute arises may leave platforms with weak evidence, unclear allocation of liability and limited room to explain how a piece of AI-assisted content was actually produced.

Israel has recently updated the application of its Extension of Periods and Postponement of Deadlines Law in response to the regional situation, giving temporary breathing room for selected regulatory approvals and certain administrative time limits. For IP owners and representatives, the relief may help where filings, responses or supporting documents are affected by disrupted operations. It should not be treated as a blanket extension, however. The competent authority, including the Israel Patent Office in relevant matters, may still shorten or remove the relief depending on the facts of the case.

A second issue is developing in parallel: the National Cyber Security Law bill, still under discussion in May, may add new compliance expectations for cloud storage, SaaS and other digital service providers serving the Israeli market. IP-heavy businesses should review where prosecution records, licensing files, user data and confidential technical materials are stored, who can access them, and how incidents are escalated. The immediate deadline relief helps with timing; the cybersecurity bill points to a more durable compliance question that rights holders should not leave to the last stage of an Israeli matter.

Bahrain’s Intellectual Property Office has reported that its IP portal, previously disrupted by a technical failure, is now fully restored. The authority has also clarified that late filings caused by the service interruption will not attract late fees and should not prejudice core deadlines such as priority claims; affected users should now complete any pending steps through the online system as soon as possible.

The practical message is reassuring but not a reason to slow down. The temporary allowance to submit certified legal documents, including powers of attorney, within three months helps applicants dealing with overseas execution and legalisation formalities. Still, case owners should promptly review filing receipts, payment records and missing documents, treating the grace period as a recovery measure rather than a new operating timetable.

Jordan’s Cabinet has advanced amendments to the Investment Environment Regulation, with a clear focus on reducing procedural friction for foreign investors entering the market. The changes are expected to simplify business registration and improve the way related checks, including trade names and trademarks, are handled before or during registration. For companies planning a Jordanian entity or brand launch, the practical point is straightforward: name clearance and trademark registrability may need to be assessed earlier in the investment process.

A separate but connected filing update is also relevant. The Jordanian Trademark Office has moved to the 13th edition of the Nice Classification for new trademark applications and no longer accepts filings based on the 11th edition. The 13th edition does not add new classes, but it updates certain goods and services terms, class headings and explanatory notes. Applicants should review Jordan specifications before filing, rather than reusing older lists that may create office actions, delay or a narrower-than-intended scope of protection.