（1） The revised version of Vietnam's Intellectual Property Law has come into effect

On December 10, 2025, the Vietnamese National Assembly passed the "Law on Amending and Supplementing Several Provisions of the Intellectual Property Law", which will officially come into effect on April 1, 2026. The revision focuses on two major areas: patents and industrial design, and makes significant adjustments in examination cycles, rights protection, application mechanisms, and other aspects to align with international intellectual property protection standards. The main content is as follows:

Realize full process time limit compression and mechanism improvement in the field of patents

The publication deadline for patent applications requesting early publication has been reduced from 2 months to 1 month, starting from the date of submission of the publication request or the date of application qualification (whichever is later);

The opposition period for ordinary patent applications has been reduced from 9 months to 6 months, and the opposition period for patents requesting accelerated substantive examination is only 3 months;

The substantive examination request node has been shortened from 42 months from the application date/earliest priority date to 36 months, and this provision also applies to patent applications submitted before April 1, 2026 and published on or after that date; The completion period of substantive examination has been reduced from 18 months to 12 months, starting from the date of publication of the application or the date of acceptance of the examination request (whichever is later).

The bill also establishes a framework for accelerating patent examination, and subsequent supporting regulations will clarify procedural requirements and fee standards.

Expansion of Protection Scope and Optimization of Rules in the Field of Appearance Design

The deadline for application for publication has been reduced from 2 months to 1 month, the substantive examination period has been reduced from 7 months to 5 months, and the objection period has been reduced from 4 months to 3 months. Applicants may apply for an extension of publication for a maximum of 7 months;

Add protection for non physical form products such as partial appearance design, graphical user interface (GUI), icons, and digital visual elements, and include digital replication behavior in the industrial practicality category in cyberspace;

Relaxing the exception conditions for novelty, any disclosure made within 6 months prior to the application date due to the right holder's self disclosure, third-party unauthorized disclosure, or illegal publication of application documents shall not lose novelty and break through the original restrictions of only exhibition and academic disclosure;

If the author of the design is not the actual creator, the certificate may be declared invalid as a whole to strengthen the legal status of the actual creator; At the same time, the formal acceptance decision shall be cancelled, and the formal examination shall be deemed qualified if there is no reason for rejection. The date of application transfer announcement shall be regarded as the formal qualification date, simplifying the examination process.

Supporting rules and transitional clauses

An authorization letter without a specified validity period shall be valid for one year from the date of issuance or until the completion of the entrusted matter, in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code, and shall no longer be indefinitely valid;

Applications submitted before April 1, 2026 will, in principle, follow the old law. The formal examination that was not qualified before the effective date, as well as the objection period and substantive examination request period for applications published on or after the same day, will all be subject to the new law. Vietnam will subsequently issue supporting decrees and implementation rules to clarify the implementation standards.

（2） Tajikistan raises official fees related to trademarks

Tajikistan will adjust the official fee calculation benchmark for trademark related services from January 1, 2026, raising the billing base to 78 somoni, resulting in a uniform increase of 4% in all trademark related business fees.

After adjusting the specific fee standards, the submission and examination fee for a single category of black and white trademark application is 2708 somoni (approximately $295), and an additional fee of 967 somoni (approximately $105) is required for each additional category; The official registration fee for monochrome trademarks has been raised to 3026 Somoni (approximately $329).

（3） New Policies for the Implementation of Intellectual Property in Multiple Fields in India

Recently, India has introduced multiple policies for trademark, patent, and design protection, further improving the protection system.

A major breakthrough has been achieved in the field of trademarks. In November 2025, the Indian Trademark Office accepted and announced the first olfactory trademark application, which was submitted by Sumitomo Rubber Industries in Japan. The scope of protection is "rose fragrance odor applicable to tires". This application meets the graphic representation requirements by submitting a seven dimensional olfactory vector model that includes measurable parameters such as intensity, floral aroma, sweetness, etc., and proves that the odor has no technical function and is only used for brand recognition, marking the extension of India's trademark protection scope to sensory identification.

In the field of patents, the "2025 Patent (Revision) Rules" will officially come into effect on November 25, 2025. If the administrative counterpart is dissatisfied with the handling decision of false patent identification as stipulated in Article 120, non provision or false provision of information as stipulated in Article 122, and unqualified agency patent business as stipulated in Article 123 of the Patent Law, they need to submit a complaint electronically through Form 32. The adjudicator will complete the investigation within 3 months, and the parties can appeal within 60 days through Form 33. The appellate body will make a ruling within 6 months, and all documents will be electronically transmitted and made public to improve the transparency and efficiency of the process.

In terms of design protection, starting from December 26, 2025, the design announcement mechanism will be optimized, and all views of registered trademark designs will be published in the weekly official gazette, replacing the previous rule of only disclosing a single representative view, to help relevant parties fully understand the scope of protection and effectively avoid infringement risks.

（4） The Supreme Court of Japan clarifies the cross-border validity of patent rights

On March 3, 2025, the Supreme Court of Japan made a final ruling on two patent infringement cases between Dwango Corporation and FC2, breaking through the strict limitations of the traditional principle of patent territoriality and clarifying that the effectiveness of Japanese patent rights can be extended to specific cross-border network related invention use behaviors. Both cases revolve around the determination of infringement in cross-border technology use.

The focus of controversy in Case One is

Is the transmission of comment display control programs from US servers to Japanese users subject to Japanese patent rights.

The core dispute of Case 2 is

Does the act of transferring program files to Japanese users through US servers and building a system consisting of Japanese user terminals and US servers fall under the category of "manufacturing" under the Patent Law.

The first instance court rejected Dwango's claim on the grounds of territoriality, while the second instance intellectual property high court overturned the original judgment and determined infringement. After the defendant appealed, the Supreme Court upheld the second instance judgment.

The clear judgment standard of the Supreme Court is that although Japanese patent rights essentially follow the principle of territoriality, the cross-border dissemination of information in the digital age is convenient. If the validity of patent rights is denied solely due to server deployment and other actions overseas, it will violate the legislative purpose of protecting inventions and promoting industrial development under the Patent Law. The determination of whether cross-border behavior is subject to constraints needs to be judged from the overall essence, with a core consideration of whether the invention effect will inevitably be manifested at the terminal within Japan and whether it will have an impact on the economic interests of the patentee. In the two cases, the acts involved served Japanese users, the invention effects were realized in Japan, and the interests of Dwango were harmed, therefore it was determined that the "patent related acts were substantially implemented within Japan".

This judgment fills the loophole of overseas servers avoiding patent infringement. The Japan Patent Office is promoting the improvement of the system for cross-border effectiveness of patent rights based on this judgment, exploring issues such as the balance between protection adequacy and compliance burden, and the clarity of recognition standards, and plans to formulate written rules.

（5） Saudi Arabia issues new copyright law

On February 4, 2026, Saudi Arabia issued a new version of the Modern Copyright Law (Royal Decree No. M/169), replacing the old 2003 regulations, aimed at promoting the alignment of the country's intellectual property framework with international best practices and supporting the development of domestic creators, enterprises, and cultural industries. The new law will officially come into effect on August 1, 2026.

At the same time, it fills the loopholes in the old law of 2003, expands the scope of territorial application, clarifies the definition of protected objects, strengthens the spiritual and economic rights of creators, updates the exceptions and limitations of rights clauses, and balances public interests and creator rights. To ensure the implementation of the new law, supporting implementation regulations are expected to be promulgated before the effective date, reserving compliance preparation time for rights holders and relevant institutions to adjust internal policies and contract terms.

（6） Kazakhstan's first artificial intelligence law officially takes effect

The Artificial Intelligence Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan, passed on November 17, 2025, will officially come into effect on January 18, 2026. This law is the first comprehensive law in the field of artificial intelligence in the country, which establishes a complete legal framework for the legal positioning, application norms, and responsibility attribution of AI systems for the first time.

According to the definition of the bill, artificial intelligence is a functional ability that imitates human cognitive functions and produces results equivalent to or surpassing human intellectual achievements. AI synthesis results refer to images, videos, audio, text, and combined content created/modified by AI systems to simulate human appearance/sound/behavior or restore events that have not occurred. The bill establishes core principles for AI applications such as transparency, security, respect for third-party rights, and interpretability of decisions.

The bill regulates the copyright of AI generated content: copyright protection only applies to the results of human creative contributions; The text prompt words creatively conceived and drafted are recognized as works protected by copyright;

Using the work for artificial intelligence model training does not fall within the scope of reasonable use for educational or scientific purposes; Carrying out AI model training does not mean that the rights holder tacitly approves the relevant parties to copy, adapt, display, perform or distribute the work;

The work can only be used for artificial intelligence related activities if it has not made a usage prohibition statement in machine-readable form. At the same time, it is stipulated that the responsibility for the behavior and results of AI systems should be borne by developers, owners, or users, forcing enterprises to establish internal management systems and set up contract protection clauses.