MALAYSIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Tai Foong Lam and Amy Lim Yun Jin, Gan Partnership
Conversely, applicants should consider direct national filing in Malaysia where exceptional circumstances require: • urgent issuance of a Malaysian registration certifi- cate; • immediate regulatory compliance; • licensing or advertising approvals; • enforcement readiness against infringers; • investor or distributor due diligence requirements; • customs enforcement recordals; or • operational deployment in Malaysia within a short timeline. This is due to the fact that in direct national filings, local examiners and trade mark agents typically have greater procedural flexibility to interact directly with MyIPO, proactively handle objections, request expe- dited examination when appropriate and strategically modify specifications to comply with local examina- tion procedures. Further, from a litigation and enforcement perspective, locally registered trade marks are often operationally easier to rely upon when dealing with: • enforcement authorities; • customs seizures; • online platform takedowns; In contrast, reliance solely on pending Madrid des- ignations may delay the operational enforcement of rights, notwithstanding the applicant’s eventual enti- tlement to protection. Accordingly, from a Malaysian intellectual property practitioner’s perspective, the most commercially effective strategy is often not an “either-or” approach but rather a hybrid filing strategy. It prioritises direct national filings in commercially critical jurisdictions such as Malaysia while simultaneously leveraging the Madrid System for broader international expansion. Such an approach balances: • legal certainty; • local distributors; and • regulatory agencies.
• regulatory compliance; • commercial agility; • enforcement readiness; and • long-term portfolio management efficiency, while mitigating the procedural limitations and regu- latory uncertainties increasingly emerging within the Malaysian legal landscape. Conclusion The modernisation and internationalisation of Malay- sia’s trade mark system have reached a major turning point with its ratification of the Madrid Protocol. By enabling streamlined cross-border trade mark protec- tion and enhancing administrative efficiency for brand owners worldwide, the implementation and integra- tion of the Trademarks Act 2019 into the Madrid Sys- tem have unquestionably increased Malaysia’s appeal as a commercial and investment destination. Nevertheless, despite the Madrid System’s efficien- cies, real-world issues in Malaysia’s legal and regula- tory system persist. The limitations of relying solely on international registrations or pending Madrid des- ignations have been brought to light by local regula- tory authorities’ increasingly strict approach, which requires proof of Malaysian trade mark registration certificates for licensing, operational, advertising and commercial compliance purposes. In actuality, the dif- ference between local authorities’ operational accept- ance of trade mark rights and their legal recognition has grown in importance. Therefore, rather than viewing international registra- tion as a one-size-fits-all solution, companies and for- eign investors must adopt a commercially informed and jurisdiction-specific trade mark strategy. Direct national filings in Malaysia may still be required in situ- ations involving urgency, regulatory certainty, enforce- ment readiness or immediate commercial deployment, even though the Madrid System is still very effective for large international portfolio expansion and cost- effective global brand management. Trade mark registration is increasingly shifting from a defensive intellectual property tool to a more compre- hensive commercial compliance and market access mechanism as Malaysia’s regulatory and commercial
200 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook