Research & Article

This research article aims to 1) examine the definition of rights holders of local wisdom; 2) study the rights of these holders in cases of infringement or distortion of their local wisdom; and 3) propose guidelines for protecting against such infringements or distortions. This study employs a documentary and comparative research methodology. The findings reveal that existing intellectual property laws are ineffective in protecting local wisdom, as the collective and continuously inherited nature of local wisdom conflicts with legal principles emphasizing individual ownership and novelty.

Although Thai law currently recognizes communities as primary rights holders under the Constitution and the Cultural Heritage Intellectual Property Act, such recognition remains limited to aspects of preservation and custodianship. Consequently, legal gaps persist in preventing and litigating commercial exploitation, such as biopiracy.

To address these challenges, the study proposes the establishment of a sui generis protection system tailored specifically for local wisdom. This framework should clearly define community co-right holders and introduce a standardized benefit-sharing mechanism, empowering communities with legal authority to regulate commercial use and to obtain a fair share of benefits derived from the sustainable utilization and development of their local wisdom.