Why Choose Unilaw as Your Copyright Protection Lawyer?

Intellectual property protection, especially copyrights, plays a critical role in today’s globalized economy. As a premier copyright defense attorney in Vietnam, Unilaw specializes in ensuring clients’ creations, including literary works, music, and software, are legally secured and protected against unauthorized usage.

At Unilaw, we understand the complexities of Vietnamese copyright laws, which are deeply rooted in both local and international legal frameworks. With offices strategically located in Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City, and Nha Trang, Unilaw ensures that businesses and individuals have access to top-tier legal services wherever they are. Our lawyers do not treat copyright as an isolated filing exercise; we view it as part of a broader intellectual property strategy that must be integrated with a client’s commercial contracts, licensing arrangements, and cross-border operations.

The Legal Basis of Copyright Protection Under Vietnamese Law

Vietnam’s intellectual property regime is codified in the Law on Intellectual Property (Luật Sở hữu trí tuệ), originally enacted as Law No. 50/2005/QH11 and subsequently amended by Law No. 36/2009/QH12, Law No. 42/2019/QH14, and, most significantly, Law No. 07/2022/QH15, which took effect on 1 January 2023. Article 1 of this Law confirms that it governs, among other rights, “copyright, rights related to copyright” – alongside industrial property rights and plant variety rights – together with the mechanisms for protecting those rights.

Article 2 extends the application of the Law to Vietnamese organizations and individuals, as well as to foreign organizations and individuals who satisfy the conditions set out in the Law itself or in the international treaties to which Vietnam is a party. This is a critical point for foreign authors, publishers, and technology companies: protection in Vietnam is not automatic simply because a work is protected abroad, but it is available once the statutory or treaty-based conditions are met – which is one of the first issues a copyright protection lawyer should assess for any foreign client.

Article 3.1 further defines the subject matter of copyright as “literary, artistic, and scientific works,” while rights related to copyright cover performances, sound and video recordings, broadcast programs, and encrypted program-carrying satellite signals. This distinction between “copyright” proper and “related rights” often confuses clients who assume a single registration covers every form of creative output, when in fact different categories of subject matter may require different analysis and, in some cases, different procedures.

How Vietnamese Law Defines a “Work” and “Copyright”

Precision in legal definitions matters enormously in copyright disputes, because the outcome of an infringement claim frequently turns on whether the disputed material qualifies as a “work” in the first place. Article 4.2 of the Law defines copyright (quyền tác giả) as “the right of an organization or individual over a work created or owned by that organization or individual.” Article 4.7 defines a “work” (tác phẩm) as “a creative product in the field of literature, art, and science expressed in any means or form whatsoever.” This broad, technology-neutral wording is deliberate: it allows the law to extend to new forms of expression, including digital and software-based works, without requiring constant legislative amendment.

The Law also recognizes derivative works. Article 4.8 defines a “derivative work” (tác phẩm phái sinh) as one “created on the basis of one or more existing works through translation from one language to another, adaptation, compilation, annotation, selection, modification, musical arrangement, or other forms of transformation.” This provision is particularly relevant for clients in publishing, film, and music, where translated, adapted, or remixed content routinely raises questions about whether consent from the original author is required – and it usually is.

Article 4.9 clarifies what it means for a work to be “published” (đã công bố): it is a work that “has been released with the consent of the copyright owner or related rights owner, for dissemination to the public in a reasonable quantity of copies in any form.” Meanwhile, Article 4.10 defines “reproduction” (sao chép) as “the making of a copy of the whole or part of a work, or of a sound or video recording, by any means or in any form.” Together, these definitions form the analytical backbone that a copyright protection lawyer relies on when advising whether a specific act – copying, adapting, distributing, or streaming – falls within the exclusive rights of a copyright owner or a related-rights holder.

For businesses handling contracts involving royalties, Article 4 (as amended) also introduces the concept of “tiền bản quyền” – royalty payments made for the creation or transfer of copyright or related rights, including remuneration and honoraria. Properly structuring these payment terms in licensing agreements is one of the more technical, yet commercially significant, tasks Unilaw regularly undertakes for clients across sectors ranging from publishing to software distribution.

Comprehensive Copyright Services

As a leading copyright protection lawyer, Unilaw provides a full spectrum of services grounded in this statutory framework:

• Advising on copyright registration and renewal processes, and clarifying which category of work or related right applies to a given creation.
• Representing clients in copyright disputes, including infringement cases involving reproduction, adaptation, or unauthorized distribution.
• Drafting and reviewing copyright licensing agreements, including royalty and remuneration structures.
• Ensuring compliance with Vietnamese copyright laws and the international treaties Vietnam has joined.

Our lawyers have a deep understanding of both statutory requirements and the practical application of copyright laws, making Unilaw a trusted name in intellectual property protection for domestic and foreign clients alike.

Administrative Enforcement Under Decree No. 131/2013/NĐ-CP

Civil litigation is not the only avenue available to a copyright protection lawyer in Vietnam. Decree No. 131/2013/NĐ-CP, which governs administrative sanctions for copyright and related-rights violations, gives rights holders a faster – and often more practical – enforcement track. Article 2 of the Decree sets the ceiling for administrative fines at VND 250,000,000 for individuals and VND 500,000,000 for organizations, with the fine for an organization committing the same violation set at double the fine applicable to an individual. This distinction matters in practice: when an infringer operates through a registered company rather than as a private individual, the exposure – and the corresponding leverage available to counsel – is significantly higher.

Beyond monetary penalties, Article 3 authorizes a set of remedial measures that go directly to the harm suffered by a rights holder, including an order to correct the true name of the author or work, revocation of a copyright or related-rights registration certificate obtained improperly, removal of infringing copies distributed in electronic form or over the Internet, and – critically for commercial disputes – an order compelling the infringer to return to the rights holder any royalties, remuneration, or material benefits obtained through the infringing act. Article 8 specifically targets the transport and storage of unauthorized copies, imposing fines of VND 3,000,000 to 5,000,000 for transporting goods produced without the rights holder’s permission and VND 5,000,000 to 10,000,000 for storing such goods, coupled with confiscation of the infringing goods themselves. For a copyright protection lawyer advising a client whose reproduced content or packaging materials are being distributed through unauthorized channels, these provisions offer a concrete administrative complaint pathway that can move faster than a court case, particularly when the infringing goods are still in transit or warehoused and can be physically seized.

Articles 9 and 10 of the Decree address a subtler but commercially important category of violation: distortion of authorship and integrity. Article 9 penalizes the use of a work without stating the true name or pseudonym of the author, or misstating the author’s name or the title of the work, with fines of VND 2,000,000 to 3,000,000, alongside a mandatory public correction. Article 10 goes further, penalizing unauthorized alteration or truncation of a work that damages the author’s honor and reputation (VND 3,000,000 to 5,000,000) and outright distortion of a work causing similar harm (VND 5,000,000 to 10,000,000). These provisions are frequently overlooked by businesses that assume copyright enforcement is only about unauthorized copying, when in fact misattribution and distortion carry their own distinct sanction regime.

Statutory Remedies vs. Practical Reality: A Client Case Study

The gap between what the law provides on paper and what a rights holder can actually achieve on the ground is one of the most important things a copyright protection lawyer must explain to clients from the outset. Decree 131/2013/NĐ-CP, read together with the Intellectual Property Law, appears to offer a relatively clean enforcement path: identify the infringing party, document the unauthorized use of protected content or marks, file an administrative complaint, and obtain fines, seizure of infringing goods, or a forced takedown order. In practice, enforcement against dispersed, low-visibility infringers – particularly small e-commerce operators – can be considerably harder to execute than the statute suggests.

Unilaw’s own experience advising a Vietnamese flooring distribution company illustrates this gap concretely. The client held the exclusive distribution rights in Vietnam for a Swiss flooring brand and operated its own official website to market the product. Beginning in 2017, the client identified a cluster of unauthorized websites – none of which were appointed dealers – that were advertising the same branded flooring, along with a separately branded Belgian flooring line, at prices below the authorized market rate. The infringing sites used the brand names and product specifications to draw in customers, then employed a pattern of bait-and-switch tactics: telling customers the advertised product was out of stock, disparaging the competing brand’s quality to redirect the sale, and in some instances delivering unrelated, lower-cost vinyl flooring imported from China while marketing it under the branded name.

On paper, this conduct implicates precisely the kind of unauthorized use of protected commercial content and misleading marketing practices that the administrative penalty framework is designed to address – unauthorized reproduction and use of the brand’s promotional materials and product descriptions, combined with unfair competition through false advertising and disparagement of a competitor’s product. The client’s representative sent a documented series of notifications to the manufacturer over several months – in July and August 2017 and again in January 2018 – describing the infringing websites in detail and requesting that the unauthorized sellers be compelled to stop. Yet as of the most recent correspondence in January 2018, the infringing listings remained active. No fine had been levied, no infringing content had been removed, and no seized goods had been reported.

This outcome underscores a point that a copyright protection lawyer must convey candidly to clients: the existence of a statutory remedy under Decree 131/2013/NĐ-CP does not, by itself, translate into swift relief when infringement is spread across multiple small, loosely connected websites operating under different names and contact addresses. Practical enforcement in such cases depends heavily on evidentiary groundwork – consistent documentation of each infringing website, dated records of communications, and screenshots of the unauthorized use – assembled in a form that an enforcement authority or court can act on quickly. It also depends on contractual leverage that often sits outside the copyright statute altogether. In this matter, Unilaw’s assessment was that the client’s ability to compel meaningful manufacturer support hinged on the precise terms of its underlying distribution agreement, which needed to be reviewed closely to determine the scope of the parties’ respective obligations regarding brand protection and legal support. Where such contractual provisions are silent or ambiguous, even a well-documented complaint under the administrative penalty regime may stall for lack of a coordinated enforcement partner.

For businesses facing comparable situations – whether the underlying right is a registered trademark, an original product description, or licensed promotional content – the lesson is the same: administrative remedies under Decree 131/2013/NĐ-CP are a genuine tool, but they work best when paired with disciplined evidence collection and a contractual framework that clearly allocates enforcement responsibility between the rights holder and any manufacturer, licensor, or brand owner standing behind the product.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does a copyright protection lawyer actually do in a case like this?

In practice, a copyright protection lawyer’s work is less about filing a single lawsuit and more about building a defensible evidentiary record and choosing the right enforcement channel. As the case above illustrates, that means documenting each infringing website, preserving dated correspondence with the responsible manufacturer or licensor, and assessing whether an administrative complaint under Decree 131/2013/NĐ-CP, a civil claim, or contractual enforcement against a business partner is the most realistic path to relief. The lawyer’s role is to align the client’s expectations with what the available remedy can actually deliver, rather than assume that a statutory penalty provision guarantees a fast outcome.

Is a copyright protection lawyer the same as an intellectual property attorney?

Not exactly, though the two roles overlap significantly in Vietnam. A copyright protection lawyer typically focuses on disputes involving original works, promotional materials, product descriptions, and similar copyrighted content, along with the administrative and civil remedies available under Vietnamese copyright law. An intellectual property attorney has a broader mandate that also covers trademarks, patents, and unfair competition claims – which is relevant because, as the case discussed above shows, copyright infringement is often bundled together with trademark misuse and false advertising in the same dispute. In most firms, including Unilaw, the same team handles both, since a single infringing website frequently raises copyright, trademark, and unfair competition issues at once.

When should a business contact a Vietnam intellectual property lawyer about online infringement?

The earlier, the better – ideally as soon as unauthorized use of promotional content or product descriptions is identified, rather than after months of informal back-and-forth with a manufacturer or supplier. In the matter described above, the client’s representative did send repeated notifications over several months, but the absence of coordinated legal documentation from the outset appears to have weakened the eventual enforcement effort. A Vietnam intellectual property lawyer engaged early can help structure the evidence collection process – screenshots, timestamps, communication logs – in a form that an enforcement authority or court is more likely to act on, and can review the underlying distribution or licensing agreement before disputes over enforcement responsibility become entrenched.

Can an administrative complaint under Decree 131/2013/NĐ-CP resolve infringement on its own?

Not reliably, at least not when infringement is dispersed across multiple websites with different names and contact details, as in the case discussed above. The decree provides a genuine statutory basis for penalties, but as that case showed, sending detailed notifications over several months did not, by itself, result in a fine being levied, infringing content being taken down, or goods being seized. A Vietnam IP lawyer generally advises treating the administrative route as one component of a broader strategy that also draws on contractual leverage against the manufacturer, licensor, or brand owner, and on disciplined, ongoing evidence collection rather than a one-time complaint.

What should a company have ready before consulting a Vietnam IP lawyer about a similar dispute?

Based on the pattern seen above, three things matter most: a dated record of every notification sent to the counterparty, screenshots or archived copies of the infringing content as it appeared at the time, and a copy of the underlying distribution, licensing, or supply agreement. That agreement is often decisive, since it determines whether the manufacturer or brand owner is contractually obligated to support enforcement action, or whether the rights holder is left to pursue administrative and civil remedies largely on its own. Bringing these materials to the first consultation allows a Vietnam intellectual property lawyer to assess realistic options quickly, rather than starting from scratch.

Working With Unilaw

Copyright and related IP disputes involving online infringement rarely resolve through a single letter or a single statutory provision. As the experience of one Unilaw client demonstrates, meaningful protection depends on combining the remedies available under Vietnamese law – including the administrative penalty regime set out in Decree 131/2013/NĐ-CP – with careful evidence documentation and a clear-eyed reading of the contracts that allocate enforcement responsibility among rights holders, manufacturers, and licensors.

If your business is facing unauthorized use of copyrighted content, promotional materials, or product descriptions in Vietnam, Unilaw’s team can review your documentation, assess the contractual framework governing your relationship with manufacturers or distribution partners, and help determine which enforcement path is realistically available to you. Contact Unilaw to discuss your situation with a copyright protection lawyer before infringement has a chance to spread further.