Thailand Moves to Regulate Copyright and Performers’ Royalty Collection

1.    Introduction

Thailand’s creative industry has experienced significant growth, with copyrighted works being widely created and commercially exploited. However, the current copyright licensing and remuneration collection landscape faces significant challenges, particularly in the area of music copyright. 

Key problems include: 

     (a)    users not knowing whom to contact for licensing, at what price, and by what method; 

     (b)    unintentional copyright infringement due to fragmented permissions from multiple rights holders; 

     (c)    duplicative remuneration collection from users who have already paid;

     (d)    individuals fraudulently claiming to represent rights holders and using intimidation to collect settlements in exchange for not pursuing infringement lawsuits; and

     (e)    a lack of transparency and fairness in how collecting management organizations (“CMO”) set rates and distribute remuneration. 

Various measures have been implemented by the Ministry of Commerce (“MOC”) to address these problems, including requiring disclosure of remuneration rates and costs, establishing a voluntary code of conduct for collecting organizations, and creating a registration system for copyright litigation agents. However, they remain insufficient.

The latest development in this intellectual property saga sees the Department of Intellectual Property (“DIP”) preparing the Draft Act on the Collection of Remuneration for the Use of Works Subject to Copyright and Performers’ Rights, B.E. … (…) (“Draft Act”) to create a comprehensive regulatory framework for copyright remuneration collection. 

The Public Hearing on the draft was opened on 20 April 2026, with the deadline for comments set for 22 May 2026. The key provisions are summarized below.

2.    Key Provisions of the Draft Act

     1)    Scope and Types of Use

     The Draft Act empowers the MOC to designate, by ministerial regulation, specific types of copyrighted works and performers’ rights that will be subject to regulatory oversight. These are limited to types of use where there are multiple rights holders or a large number of users, making individual licensing impractical or inefficient (e.g. musical works). Once a type of use is designated, the collection of remuneration by copyright operators or the operation of a CMO in that category requires a license under the Draft Act.

     2)    Licensing of Copyright Operators and CMOs

     Copyright operators (i.e., rights holders or their assignees who collect remuneration from users without distributing to others) and CMOs (i.e., entities that manage rights on behalf of members, collect remuneration, and distribute it to the members) must obtain a license from the competent official.

     Applicants who are copyright operators must meet specified qualifications, including holding the relevant rights, not being an incompetent or quasi-incompetent person, and having served no sentence under a final judgment for coercion[CMH1.1], dishonest property offenses, extortion, or infringement of copyright or performers’ rights (unless three years have elapsed since having served [CMH2.1]the sentence).

      As for CMOs, they must [CMH3.1]be a juristic person with the objective of collecting and distributing remuneration, be entitled to manage the relevant rights, maintain standard licensing and membership agreements, as well as having bylaws compliant with the collection regime under the Draft Act and remuneration collection and distribution rules as prescribed by the Remuneration Collection Oversight Committee (“Oversight Committee”), also established under the Draft Act.

     Both copyright operators and CMOs must maintain a list of works as will be prescribed by the ministerial regulation.

     3)    Obligations of Licensees

     Licensed copyright operators and CMOs must set remuneration rates that are transparent, clearly justified, and non-discriminatory, taking into account the economic benefit derived by the user.

     They must also comply with the rules which will be prescribed by the Oversight Committee and will govern issues such as collection, collection reporting to the competent official, public disclosure, and public display of the rates. For CMOs, the rules will also govern distribution among members, distribution reporting, rules on membership, and matters requiring approval at general meetings.

     Notably, during the term of a licensing agreement, if a user’s right to use the licensed work is disputed, the relevant licensed copyright operator or CMO (as the case may be) will be the party responsible[CMH5.1] for resolving the dispute and compensating the user for any damages and expenses incurred. In addition, under the Draft Act, CMOs cannot refuse membership applications made by qualified rights holders and representatives.

     4)    Extended Collective Licensing (ECL)

     The Oversight Committee may authorize qualified CMOs to license works and collect remuneration on behalf of non-member rights holders who have not expressed a contrary intention to the competent official. The authorized CMOs must treat non-member rights holders no differently from their own members, take appropriate measures to notify the rights holders, and report the collection and distribution of remuneration to the Committee. To qualify for such authorization, a CMO must already be operating in the relevant category, have a substantial number of members and user agreements, possess the capability to contact non-member rights holders, maintain transparent data systems, have a system for managing undistributable remuneration, and be able to cooperate with foreign or international CMOs.

     5)    Sales Agents and Litigation Agents

     Sales agents (persons authorized by a copyright operator or CMO to solicit users to enter into licensing agreements) handling the regulated rights must present proof of authorization, a list works subject to copyright or performers’ rights under their care, and means for users to verify their status as sales agents. They may optionally register with the competent official.

     Litigation agents (persons authorized to file complaints or claim damages for copyright or performers’ rights infringement), on the other hand, must register with the competent official. They must meet specified qualifications (a minimum age of 20, minimum vocational diploma education, Thai domicile, no civil service status, having served no sentence for specified offenses, etc.), present registration proof and powers of attorney, refrain from acts constituting coercion, dishonest property offenses, or extortion, and report annual litigation data to the competent official.

      6)    Remuneration Collection Oversight Committee

     The Draft Act establishes the Oversight Committee chaired by the Director-General of the DIP, with ex officio members from the Office of the Consumer Protection Board, the Office of the Attorney General, the Ministry of Culture, and the Office of Trade Competition Commission, plus up to four expert members appointed by the Cabinet. The Oversight Committee has powers and duties including adjudicating appeals, prescribing rules and conditions for licensees, revoking licenses, authorizing ECL, and adjudicating disputes.

      7)    Dispute Resolution

     Where a dispute arises regarding unfair and discriminatory remuneration collection or distribution, failure to collect at stated rates or distribute according to stated rules, unjustified refusal to license, rates not in compliance with statutory requirements, or unreasonable conditions, either party may petition the Oversight Committee for adjudication.

     The Oversight Committee has the power to order the payment or acceptance of remuneration, as well as the power to determine rates and other conditions as it deems appropriate to ensure that collection is non-discriminatory and fair. In this regard, a petitioning party that has paid the remuneration as ordered by the Committee will be deemed to have obtained a valid license.

    The Committee must resolve disputes within 90 days. Parties may appeal to the court within 30 days; otherwise, the Committee’s decision is final.

      8)    Enforcement

     The Draft Act establishes a graduated enforcement framework. Competent officials may (i) issue a written warning to cease the violation, (ii) issue a prohibition order, publish the violation, and provide guidance for compliance, and (iii) impose administrative (Phinai) fines. At every step, the offending party must be given an opportunity to provide an explanation.

     9)    Penalties

     Administrative (Phinai) fines of up to THB 500,000 plus up to THB 10,000 per day of a continuing violation apply to non-compliance with various obligations under the Draft Act (e.g., failure to set rates transparently, failure to hold general meetings, failure to register as a litigation agent). The statute of limitations for administrative (Phinai) fine cases is three years. Criminal penalties of up to three years’ imprisonment or a fine of up to THB 1,000,000, or both, apply to copyright operators and CMOs that collect remuneration or operate in designated categories without a license. Corporate officers or directors may also be held personally liable for such violations.

     10)    Miscellaneous

     Organizers of public performances of musical works by performers or the playing of sound recordings are obligated to pay remuneration to the copyright operator or CMO, unless otherwise agreed. In a case of suspected infringement under ECL, copyright operators, CMOs, sales agents, or litigation agents must issue a pre-litigation notice requiring payment of remuneration before pursuing legal action against suspected infringers. Jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases under the Draft Act lies with the Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court.

     11)    Transitional Provisions

     Existing copyright operators, CMOs, and litigation agents operating before the effective date of the ministerial regulations imposing licensing or registration requirements must apply for a license or registration within 120 days of the relevant ministerial regulations becoming effective. They may continue operating until they are notified that their application has been refused.

3.    Conclusion

The Draft Act represents a significant step toward modernizing Thailand’s copyright remuneration system. By introducing a licensing framework for copyright operators and CMOs, implementing extended collective licensing, regulating litigation agents, and establishing graduated enforcement mechanisms, the Draft Act aims to bring transparency, fairness, and efficiency to the copyright remuneration landscape in Thailand. If enacted, the Draft Act will take effect 180 days after its publication in the Royal Gazette.