• Our People
  • Global Presence
  • Regions
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Americas
  • Offices
    • Canada
      • Ottawa
      • Toronto
    • China
      • Beijing
      • Hong Kong
    • Luxembourg
    • Malaysia
    • Singapore
    • UK
      • Aberdeen
      • Birmingham
      • Cambridge
      • Edinburgh
      • Glasgow
      • London
      • Manchester
      • Oxford
  • Client liaison
    • Japan
    • Korea
  • Expertise
  • Services
    • Patents
    • Brands & Trade Marks
    • Designs
    • Litigation & Dispute Resolution
    • Commercial IP & Contracts
    • Due Diligence
    • Freedom to Operate
    • EPO Patent Oppositions
    • European Patent Validations
    • Anti-counterfeiting
    • Open Source & Third Party Code
  • Sectors
    • Digital Transformation
      • 3D Printing
      • Artificial Intelligence
      • Blockchain
      • Data & Connectivity
      • Extended Reality
      • Industry 4.0
    • Energy & Environment
    • Life Sciences
    • Agritech
    • Medical Technologies
    • Chemistry
    • Transport
    • Entertainment & Creative Industries
    • Food & Drink
    • Fashion & Retail
    • Universities & Research Bodies
    • Start-ups & Spin-outs
      • Creating value for start-ups
      • The IP driven start-up
    • Financial Services
  • About Us
    • Working with us
    • Awards
    • Corporate & Social Responsibility
    • Diversity & Inclusion
    • Careers
  • Insights
    • Articles
    • News
    • Events
    • Resources
    • Unified Patent Court hub
    • Beyond Brexit: European trade mark hub
    • M&C Reacts
  • Contact Us
Marks & Clerk logo
Marks & Clerk logo
Contact Us
Language
English
Our People
Global Presence
Regions
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Americas
Offices
  • Canada
    • Ottawa
    • Toronto
  • China
    • Beijing
    • Hong Kong
  • Luxembourg
  • Malaysia
  • Singapore
  • UK
    • Aberdeen
    • Birmingham
    • Cambridge
    • Edinburgh
    • Glasgow
    • London
    • Manchester
    • Oxford
Client liaison
  • Japan
  • Korea
Expertise
Services
  • Patents
  • Brands & Trade Marks
  • Designs
  • Litigation & Dispute Resolution
  • Commercial IP & Contracts
  • Due Diligence
  • Freedom to Operate
  • EPO Patent Oppositions
  • European Patent Validations
  • Anti-counterfeiting
  • Open Source & Third Party Code
Sectors
  • Digital Transformation
    • 3D Printing
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Blockchain
    • Data & Connectivity
    • Extended Reality
    • Industry 4.0
  • Energy & Environment
  • Life Sciences
  • Agritech
  • Medical Technologies
  • Chemistry
  • Transport
  • Entertainment & Creative Industries
  • Food & Drink
  • Fashion & Retail
  • Universities & Research Bodies
  • Start-ups & Spin-outs
    • Creating value for start-ups
    • The IP driven start-up
  • Financial Services
About Us
  • Working with us
  • Awards
  • Corporate & Social Responsibility
  • Diversity & Inclusion
  • Careers
Insights
  • Articles
  • News
  • Events
  • Resources
  • Unified Patent Court hub
  • Beyond Brexit: European trade mark hub
  • M&C Reacts

Malaysia joins the Madrid Protocol and has a new Trademarks Act

18 August 2020
Gerald Samuel Veronica Guuk
Print
Share
As we wrote about about last year, Malaysia recently deposited its instrument of accession to the Madrid Protocol with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to become the 106th contracting member to the Protocol, paving the way for the long-awaited implementation of the Madrid Protocol in the Malaysian trademark system.

The Protocol has entered into force for Malaysia and the new Trademark Act 2019 has also come into force, which ensures it’s compliance with the Protocol.

The Trademarks Act 2019 has also changes the scope of infringement, invalidation and revocation by the Registrar and provided for new criminal offences.

Trademark owners in Malaysia can now use the Madrid System, which means they can protect their trademarks in over 120 territories of the system by filing a single international application in one language and paying one set of fees in a single currency. On the other hand, trademark owners applying for international trademark from other countries are now able to designate Malaysia, which helps to reduces bureaucracy and costs. Trademark owners of active/existing international trademarks are also able to apply for a subsequent designation and extend protection to Malaysia.

Take Away Points

  1. The accession to the Madrid Protocol brings about a fundamental change to Malaysia’s trademark law in that previously trademark applications in Malaysia could only be made directly with the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO).
  2. The amendment to the Trademarks Act 2019 has changed the current single-class filing system to the multi-class system, allowing trademark owners to file for registration of their trademarks in multiple classes of goods and services in a single application.
  3. The amendment to the Trademarks Act 2019 provides for an expanded scope of trademark protection, whereby protection is now accorded to 3D marks, shape of goods/packaging, sound, scent, colour, holograms, positioning and sequence of motion.
  4. In line with the amendments recently made to the Madrid Protocol for international registration, a trademark application or registration in Malaysia can be divided into two or more separate applications or registrations, and conversely, multiple applications or registrations can be merged.
  5. Malaysia has chosen to make five declarations as part of its accession to the Madrid Protocol, as follows:
    1. Article 5(2)(b) of the Madrid Protocol which extends the provisional refusal period to eighteen (18) months. This means that the provisional refusal (what is generally/domestically/nationally referred to as the examiner's report, must be sent before the end of the eighteen (18) months after MyIPO is notified of the designation.
    2. Article 5(2)(c) of the Madrid Protocol which allows MyIPO to send a notification to the International Bureau informing them that a provisional refusal based on an opposition may be issued on a Protocol application after the eighteen (18) month time limit. This means that there is a possibility that if the opposition period has not yet occurred and more than eighteen (18) months have passed since the date of notification of designation, MyIPO will be able to send a notification of provisional refusal based on an opposition if a statement of opposition is filed on that Protocol application.
    3. Article 8(7)(a) of the Madrid Protocol which provides for the ability to charge individual fees. These fees will be the equivalent of the national fees, only in Swiss Francs (CHF).
    4. Rule 7(2) of the Common Regulations which requires international trade mark applications or subsequent designations of Malaysia to include a Declaration of Intention to Use the mark in Malaysia.
    5. Rule 20bis(6)(b) of the Common Regulations which mandates that the recording of licenses is provided for by domestic law but the recording of these licenses in the International Register alone has no effect.

Changes in trademark prosecution and rights by the Trademarks Act 2019

  1. With respect to the grounds of refusal are now categorized into “absolute grounds” and “relative grounds”.
  2. “Absolute grounds” are similar to the grounds for prohibition on registration that under the previous Trade Marks Act 1976 as “likely to deceive or cause confusion, commonly used word(s), offensive matter etc. For “absolute grounds” an additional ground for refusal is where a mark consists of a sign or indication which is customary in the country or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade.
  3. “Relative grounds” are similar to the grounds for prohibition on registration that under the previous Trade Marks Act 1976 as objections in respect of citations of prior similar or identical trademarks and well known trademarks. Here express provision has been made for the recognition of common law rights under the law of passing off for both unregistered marks and trademarks that infringe copyright and/or industrial design laws. The Registrar will also recognise consent given by the owner of an earlier conflicting mark after taking into account public interest and the likelihood of confusion.

Regulatory Changes

  1. The responses to office actions are now limited to written submissions, with the right to ex parte hearings that was available previously being removed.
  2. The filing date is now upon the formality requirements being completed.
  3. Physical certificates of registration will no longer be issued except upon request. A notification will be issued electronically bearing the seal of the Registrar.
  4. The period of establishing conclusive ness has been reduced to 5 years.

Transactional Matters

  1. Licenses would only be effective if they are in writing and signed by /or on behalf of the Licensor.
  2. There is no mandatory requirement to record the assignment, however recordal will mean notice to the public is deemed to have been given.
  3. An exclusive licensee will have rights and remedies that are concurrent with an assignee in respect of infringement proceedings.

Security Interest

  1. Trademark is recognised as a form of security and can be assigned and charged.
  2. Registration of the interest allows protection against a third party acquiring a conflicting right .
  3. The transactions that can be registered are assignments, licenses, charges (security interest and assents by personal representatives.
  4. Trust are recognised where express trusts are registrable and implied and constructive trust recognized.

We at Marks & Clerk (Malaysia) would be happy to assist in any way we can for trademark matters in Malaysia.

Next Story
  • IP protection in collaborations: "Just Do It"
  • Peppa Pig v Wolfoo: clash of the cartoons
  • China: draft amendments to trade mark law
  • From Beijing to Barrow - via Mayfair
  • Change to UKIPO practice where no UK representative has been appointed
More insights

Latest Insights

Chemistry
Article
- 24 March 2023

Preliminary position on priority published

As we reported in early 2022, the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the EPO are considering two pending referrals (G1/22 and G2/22) regarding the question of entitlement to priority. A hearing has now been set for 26 May 2023, and the Enlarged Board have now issued a preliminary opinion setting out the points to be discussed.
Read more
Quantum computing
Article
- 22 March 2023

International patent insights on quantum computing

The latest patent insight report from the European Patent Office (EPO) looks at the trends in patent filings for quantum computing, and has uncovered some interesting findings.
Read more
Article
- 22 March 2023

InterDigital v Lenovo: The latest FRAND judgment

On 16 March 2023, Mr Justice Mellor handed down the latest FRAND judgment: InterDigital v Lenovo. The case concerned a dispute between InterDigital and Lenovo as to the terms on which Lenovo should take a licence to InterDigital’s portfolio of patents which had been declared essential to the European Telecommunications Standard Institute (ETSI) Standards.
Read more
Marks & Clerk logo (white)
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Notice
  • Cookies
  • Legal Notices
  • Press Enquiries
  • Lexology
  • Mondaq