Thailand’s evolving website blocking for IP protection

In Thailand, the rise in online intellectual property infringement has prompted authorities to strengthen enforcement efforts, including the use of website-blocking orders under Section 20(3) of the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2560 (2017) (CCA). This provision authorizes the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES), with court approval, to block or remove computer data that constitutes a criminal offence under IP law. Since its implementation, the procedure has undergone several developments, which is an encouraging sign of progress.

Website-blocking procedure

In practice, website-blocking orders under Section 20(3) of the CCA are primarily used for copyright and trademark infringement. While such orders are legally applicable to patent infringement, their use remains challenging due to the difficulty of proving infringement through administrative procedures.

The website-blocking procedure begins when an IP owner identifies online infringing content. For copyright infringement, which is considered a compoundable offence, the IP owner is required to first file a police report with the specialized police unit known as the Economic Crime Suppression Division (ECD) prior to filing the website-blocking application with the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP). For trademark infringement cases, the application can be filed directly with the DIP without a prior police report.

The DIP reviews the evidence and, if infringement is confirmed, forwards it to the MDES for further consideration. If the case is deemed valid, the MDES requests a court order to block the infringing website. Once granted, the MDES notifies the internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to the specified website.

Recent advancements in website-blocking actions

Seamless collaboration through digital integration. Thailand has made significant progress in digitizing its website-blocking procedures to improve efficiency and transparency. At present, all website-blocking applications and supporting evidence must be submitted in electronic format. These systems have significantly reduced processing times while enhancing transparency and traceability, resulting in more efficient and accountable website-blocking procedures.

For copyright infringement cases, the ECD accepts soft copies of evidence when filing a police report. Similarly, the DIP requires electronic submission of both the website-blocking application and supporting evidence. Once submitted, the DIP reviews the case and forwards it to the WebD platform, a shared digital system developed by the MDES. This platform enables faster processing, centralized tracking and improved coordination between the DIP and MDES.

To further streamline enforcement, Thailand’s Criminal Court has launched a specialized Technology Crime Division to handle online offences, including IP infringement. When requesting a court order to block infringing websites, the MDES files the complaint electronically with this division, significantly accelerating issuance. After the court grants the order, the MDES uses its SUSPEND system, a platform designed to dispatch and track notification letters and court orders, to notify ISPs.

With the adoption of electronic systems across all stages of the procedure mentioned earlier, processing time from the initial filing stage to receiving the court order has significantly improved.

Addressing redirection with dynamic website blocking. Dynamic blocking is a recent judicial development in Thailand, introduced to address the recurring issue of infringing content being quickly moved to new or redirected domains. This approach is particularly relevant given the widespread use of mirror and redirect sites, which have historically reduced the effectiveness of static-blocking orders.

In cases where infringing content is reintroduced through redirected domains, Thailand’s Criminal Court has thoughtfully included provisions for dynamic blocking in its orders. This means that if the same infringing computer data is disseminated again via a new or redirected domain, the original court order can be extended to cover them.

Thanks to this provision, enforcement agencies can rely on the original domain’s court order to request the blocking of redirected domains that host the same infringing content. The request for dynamic blocking can be submitted to the MDES permanent secretary for consideration. Upon approval, the MDES notifies the ISPs to comply with the court order to block access to the redirected domains.

Moving ahead: AI-powered enforcement

In its latest initiative, the MDES has introduced an AI-powered system to enhance the detection of infringing content online. The system automatically scans websites and compiles a report listing suspected infringing URLs, which is then sent to the DIP and IP owners for verification. Once the IP owners confirm the infringement, they can proceed with the website-blocking action.

While the AI-powered system promises to enhance detection, its effectiveness depends on the accuracy of the technology and the capacity of authorities and rights holders to verify and act on the reports. Ongoing monitoring and refinement will be essential to ensure the system’s reliability and to minimize the risks of incorrect detections or unintended blocking. This initiative has recently been implemented, and its effectiveness remains to be seen.

Thailand’s approach to website blocking for IP enforcement has evolved rapidly, with significant improvements in digital integration, judicial innovation and inter-agency collaboration. However, challenges remain, including persistent online infringement, the need for ongoing technological adaptation and the importance of balancing enforcement with due process and transparency.