With INTA’S 146th Annual Meeting just around the corner, Asia Business Law Journal’s Brian Yap spoke to Walter Chia, the association’s chief representative officer for Asia-Pacific, about the big issues and notable developments in our region
The International Trademark Association (INTA) is set to congregate in New York from 18 to 22 May this year for its 146th Annual Meeting, having drawn 6,500 government officials, business leaders and academics from 120 countries as of early March, with more signing up every day.
Walter Chia, the chief representative officer (CRO) for Asia-Pacific based in INTA’s Singapore office, spoke to us about the most pressing intellectual property-related issues and challenges facing Asian countries, as well as regulatory and market-driven developments shaping the IP landscape in the region.
Chia is well aware of the nuances of his region with diverse economies at very different stages of development, and economic and regulatory practices that are similarly diverse.
But, as he points out, many of these Asian markets have, despite their distinct regulatory and economic approaches, continued to grapple with shared challenges arising from issues such as brand protection, particularly in e-commerce. A perception within some areas that counterfeits help lower the cost of living, coupled with uneven data privacy practices, continue to be trans-border issues affecting many in Asia.
What are some of the biggest IP-related issues and regulatory/legislative developments impacting Asia at the moment?
The Asia-Pacific consists of a very diverse range of economies at different stages of development. The economic policies, regulatory practices and legislation pursued by all countries throughout the region is understandably quite diverse.
Brand protection, especially in e-commerce, continues to be a major challenge for Asian markets. And this challenge alone has many layers. With the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) currently negotiating a Digital Economy Framework Agreement (DEFA) that seeks to bolster trade and increase market access, the prospects for e-commerce have never looked better. A DEFA will not just affect businesses that provide digital goods and services, but all industries, as the nature of commerce continues to evolve. To me, this is the biggest development to watch in Asean for the next few years.
E-commerce poses peculiar challenges for authorities. Let me name a few. Uneven data privacy practices mean that brand owners and even authorities have few leads to pursue online counterfeiters. Small parcel shipments are challenging for customs authorities. And we are not even talking about the sheer volume of shipments yet, which do pose understandable practical difficulties on the ground.
Counterfeiting is not just a commercial problem that results in economic losses for businesses and a reduction in gross tax revenue for authorities. One challenge we face is the apparent notion held by some that counterfeits arguably help lower the cost of living. This is not only short-sighted, but there are clear health and safety issue risks. And if you think about it, buying a counterfeit product is akin to getting scammed and should be taken just as seriously as cheating/breach of trust.
How do you seek to address these problems or to help bring awareness to them?
At the regulatory level, I hope that Asean’s DEFA will not only lower barriers for digital goods and services, but also boost regional co-operation to tackle counterfeiting. Internally at INTA, the board of directors passed a resolution last November on “Establishing a Framework for Protecting Consumers from Third-Party Sales of Counterfeit Goods via Online Marketplaces”.
It spells out our expectations for platforms and brand owners alike in addressing the problem. In this vein, our Asia-Pacific Representative Office is working closely with various IP offices to lobby for a region-wide set of guidelines for e-commerce platforms. On the ground, we continue to conduct ‒ in collaboration from members and other associations and organisations ‒ various workshops and training for enforcement officers.
We also focus on consumer education through our Unreal Campaign, which aims to educate young consumers (14 to 23 years) about the dangers of counterfeiting and the importance of trademarks. This campaign serves to address the demand for counterfeits. On the demand side, we are advocating for effective legal and enforcement regimes to protect brands.
Our Anti-counterfeiting Workshop, which takes place every year during the Annual Meeting, continues to grow in size. This year, some regional IP offices and other enforcement authorities are hosting tables so that brands can not only get the latest developments from them, but also provide feedback on existing systems. This is in addition to the IP offices of Australia, China, India, Indonesia and Japan, and others in the region, which are providing updates at various panels in the IP and Innovation Track throughout the Annual Meeting.
Another issue that has occupied our attention of late is a trend towards the adoption of brand restrictions in the name of public health. Such regulations and legislation intentionally restrict brand use, including plain and standardised packaging, which reduces the use of trademarks on the packaging, or even bans their use altogether.
While the intentions are noble and should indeed be pursued, studies have shown that moves to restrict brands in this way are less effective than other measures. Regulators must also make a clear distinction between advertising guidelines and trademarks.
Can you elaborate on the main highlights of the 2024 INTA Annual Meeting and the rationale behind this year’s educational programme having the theme of the ‘Business of Innovation’?
The theme “Business of Innovation” underscores the pivotal role innovation plays in driving businesses forward and how intellectual property (IP) is central to protecting and fostering this creativity. But there is another angle: we all know that businesses all need to continually innovate and stay ahead of the competition. This does not only apply to coming up with new products and services, but also about how we reach out and market ourselves, how we manage people and even the way we work.
As far as INTA is concerned, which Asian markets or jurisdictions have made notable improvements in IP-related legislation in the past year, or have such improvements in the pipeline?
It is not all gloom for IP in the region. Many jurisdictions are constantly monitoring trends and updating their legislation. The recent allowance of Letters of Consents in Japan and South Korea will help streamline registrations there.
In India, the Jan Vishwas and Personal Data Protection Acts were passed in 2023, and brought about welcome changes. The Philippines is currently looking at legislation governing blockchain technologies and cryptocurrency, while Singapore launched its Intangibles Disclosure Framework, which provides guidelines on how companies can identify and disclose various non-physical assets such as brand value, patents and other forms of IP.
What were your goals and priorities when you became CRO last year, and which objectives and plans have been achieved, and which have changed or developed, after more than a year in office?
My plans for the Asia-Pacific Representative Office remain unchanged for 2024, and it will continue to be guided by INTA’s 2022-2025 Strategic Plan and three strategic directions. They are promoting and reinforcing the value of brands, building a better society through brands, and supporting the development of IP professionals.
In the near term, we want to increase the cadence of activities in the region. And, to maximise resource efficiency, we will step up discussion and collaboration with various partners, including other IP offices, IP-related organisations and associations and, more importantly, our members.
Promoting greater harmonisation, combatting counterfeiting, resisting brand restrictions and keeping the internet secure, stable and resilient will continue to be priority areas for the foreseeable future.
In the longer term, I would personally like to see more activities on educating small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and startups on the value of IP and building up brands. There are already many rising brands from Asia, but I would naturally like to see more.
INTA is making inroads in this area. We started the inaugural Open Innovation Challenge in Singapore last year, and this year’s iteration in Atlanta is already bigger and more exciting. We have resources and even special membership and event rates for SMEs.
But in some parts of Asia, we still need to go down to the grassroots to raise awareness of the linkage between IP and business, especially in how businesses grow internationally.
