Lebanon lacks a comprehensive framework in place that provides effective protection of trade secrets, but there are limited measures addressing some issues related to them.
Art. 47 of the Patent Law penalises anyone who, by virtue of their position or profession, unlawfully discloses or uses secret industrial or commercial information for personal or third-party benefit. The article applies when the information was lawfully acquired, derives its value from being secret, and the owner has taken measures to maintain its secrecy.
Moreover, Art. 579 of the Lebanon Penal Code penalises with up to one year's imprisonment and a fine of up to 400,000 liras anyone who, by virtue of their position or profession, discloses or misuses a commercial secret without legitimate reason, if the act may cause harm.

Pursuant to Art. 36.2 of the Telecommunication Law, service providers are required to make their infrastructure facilities available to other providers upon request, in accordance with written agreements duly notified to the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (TRA). Requests for shared use of infrastructure may not be refused except for valid and substantiated reasons, which must be provided in writing.

The Lebanese government retains several state-owned monopolies within the telecommunications sector. The state-owned enterprise Ogero owns and operates all fixed-line telecommunications services in Lebanon, while the two mobile and internet service providers, Touch and Alfa, are likewise under state ownership. In 2002, Lebanon enacted Law No. 431 to provide for the privatisation of the telecommunications sector; however, this legislation has yet to be implemented.

The telecom sector is fully owned by the Lebanese state, which holds full ownership of the fixed-line operator Ogero Telecom and the two mobile network operators, Alfa and Touch.

Lebanon does not mandate functional separation for operators with significant market power (SMP) in the telecom market. However, it is reported that an obligation of accounting separation can be found in the Significant Market Power Regulation (Decision No. 3/2009). Moreover, according to Art. 30 of the Telecommunications Law, the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (TRA) may require SMP operators to comply with accounting rules or take any other precautionary measures as deemed appropriate to ensure a competitive market.

Reports indicate that the licensing framework set out in the Telecommunications Law is not operational and independent. In fact, the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (TRA), which woud be in charge of issuing new licences, has operated without a functioning board for most of the past two decades. As such, the telecommunications sector remains entirely owned, managed, and regulated by the Ministry of Telecommunications.

Lebanon has not appended the World Trade Organization (WTO) Telecom Reference Paper to its schedule of commitments. In fact, the country is not a member of the WTO.

Lebanon maintains a telecommunications regulatory body known as the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (TRA). Nevertheless, evidence suggests that the decision-making processes within this entity are not entirely autonomous from governmental influence. While the Lebanese telecommunications legislation is formally overseen by the TRA, which functions as a semi-independent advisory body reporting directly to the Council of Ministers, in practice, the TRA possesses limited authority, thereby rendering the Ministry of Telecommunications the de facto regulatory authority. It is further reported that, although the TRA is nominally independent, its operations are frequently subject to the influence of dominant political factions, which significantly undermines its effectiveness. Former Ministers of Telecommunications have asserted that the TRA lacks substantive power, as the legislative provisions conferring its authority have yet to be fully implemented.

It is reported that the Central Bank of Lebanon (CBL) has mandated that digital service providers host their data within the country and refrain from utilising cloud-based solutions. In addition, CBL requires all banking institutions to maintain data backups domestically, with the same obligation extending to service providers.

Lebanon has not joined any agreement with binding commitments to open transfers of data across borders.

Art. 8.1.b of the Patent Law stipulates that, where the patent applicant is neither a Lebanese national nor a resident of Lebanon, such applicant must appoint an agent or proxy domiciled within Lebanese territory. In addition, Art. 8.2.b requires that the application include a stamped envelope containing two copies of the abstract of the invention in Arabic. It is also reported that, in order to secure the official filing date of a patent application in Lebanon, the application must include a power of attorney that has been legalised by the Lebanese Consulate abroad and, in addition, locally legalised by the Lebanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Art. 9.a of the Patent Law stipulates that the patent application must be submitted in the Arabic language.

Lebanon is not a party to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).

Lebanon maintains a copyright framework under the Law No. 75 of April 1999. The Act does not adopt an open-ended fair use or fair dealing model. Instead, it establishes a closed list of narrowly defined exceptions, which restricts lawful use to specific, enumerated purposes. Arts. 23-34 set out the complete list of exceptions, which include private reproduction for personal purposes; quotation; reproduction for teaching; reprographic reproduction by libraries and archives; among others.

Lebanon has not signed the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty.