Q: In your view, what is the current state of intellectual property protection and enforcement in Viet Nam, particularly in the context of the rapid growth of the digital economy and innovation?

A: I view the current state of intellectual property protection and enforcement in Viet Nam from two perspectives: market demand is rising rapidly driven by the digital economy and innovation; meanwhile, enforcement in cyberspace remains an area requiring significant improvement.

On the positive side, e-commerce reached approximately 25 billion USD in 2024 (up 20%) and accounted for around 9% of total retail sales, boosting demand for the protection of trademarks, industrial designs, software and digital content. Viet Nam ranked 44th in the Global Innovation Index (GII) 2024 and retained the same position (44th out of 139) in 2025.

However, if procedures become faster while enforcement does not become stronger, innovation will still be eroded by infringements. In 2025, the market management force handled 23,402 cases involving counterfeit goods, goods of unknown origin, and violations in e-commerce. At the international level, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) continued to place Viet Nam on its Watch List and raised concerns over online copyright infringement, as well as counterfeit goods sold through platforms and livestreams.

Intellectual property must therefore become a form of soft infrastructure for the digital economy. To truly spur innovation, the approach must shift from handling individual cases to governing the ecosystem as a whole: digitising enforcement, imposing more meaningful sanctions, and requiring all stakeholders, including digital platforms, to bear responsibility.

Intellectual property must become a form of soft infrastructure for the digital economy. To truly spur innovation, the approach must shift from handling individual cases to governing the ecosystem as a whole.

Dr Tran Van Khai, Vice Chairman of the National Assembly’s Committee on Science, Technology and Environment

Q: The Law amending and supplementing a number of articles of the Law on Intellectual Property takes effect on April 1, 2026. In your view, how will the new provisions affect the registration, protection and commercialisation of intellectual assets in Viet Nam?

A: The law, which takes effect on April 1, 2026, will directly affect the chain of registration, exploitation and enforcement of intellectual assets in the direction of digitalisation.

At the protection stage, the law updates protected subject matter in line with the logic of digital products: industrial designs are recognised in both physical and non-physical forms; industrial application also covers the consistent reproduction of non-physical products in cyberspace. As a result, digital designs, interfaces and 3D models will have a clearer legal basis for protection.

With regard to new technologies, the law authorises the Government to issue regulations on the generation and establishment of rights where intellectual property subject matter involves the use of artificial intelligence systems. At the same time, it permits the use of lawfully published texts and data for research, testing and AI training, provided that this does not unreasonably affect the lawful rights and interests of right holders.

At the commercialisation stage, the Law supplements mechanisms for the management, exploitation and encouragement of capital contribution and collateralisation using intellectual property rights, while promoting the digital transformation of intellectual property activities, forming databases on protection and on transaction prices of intellectual property rights, creating leverage for valuation and transfer.

Finally, procedures and enforcement are strengthened: immediate publication of trademark applications; a fast-track substantive examination mechanism; the responsibilities of digital platform operators in protecting rights; and measures to remove/hide/disable access to infringing content, along with raising the ceiling for material compensation.

Overall, the Intellectual Property Law helps reduce transaction costs and enhance legal confidence for innovation.

Q: For the new provisions of the Law to soon prove effective in practice, what are the key solutions to ensure the Law is quickly put into life, thereby creating strong momentum for innovation?

A: For the new provisions to take effect soon, in my view, the Law must be implemented with an “action programme” mindset: with a clear timeline, measurable indicators, and individual accountability in line with the spirit of decisive implementation, avoiding formalism and ensuring measurable outcomes.

First is the completion of detailed regulations and guiding documents on schedule. The conclusion of the Central Steering Committee requires that in April 2026, 100% of documents implementing the laws and resolutions passed by the National Assembly in 2025 must be completed. The plan for implementing the Law (Decision No. 224/QD-TTg) also identifies key focuses: issuing guiding documents, communication and dissemination, training, reviewing the legal system, and strengthening inspection and supervision.

The law must be implemented with an “action programme” mindset: with a clear timeline, measurable indicators, and individual accountability.

Dr Tran Van Khai, Vice Chairman of the National Assembly’s Committee on Science, Technology and Environment

Next is “enforcement capacity” so that the Law creates real deterrence in the digital environment. Directive No. 02/CT-TTg sets out the principle of handling with “six clarities” and assigns the task of building a national database on the enforcement of intellectual property rights, while applying AI and blockchain to detect, trace origins and protect rights in the digital environment. On that basis, it is necessary to establish a standing inter-agency coordination mechanism and fast-track procedures to remove, block infringing content and collect digital evidence.

Finally, it is necessary to pave the way for commercialisation by standardising the valuation of intellectual property rights and developing accounting and credit mechanisms that allow enterprises to contribute capital or use such assets as collateral, developing intermediary organisations, and supporting small businesses and start-ups in aligning their intellectual property strategies with product strategies.

Q: In the context of the increasingly complex and rising infringements of intellectual property rights in the digital environment, in your opinion, how should the National Assembly strengthen its supervisory role to ensure effective law enforcement in practice?

A: In response to intellectual property right infringements in the digital environment, the National Assembly’s supervision must focus on the “enforcement structure”: timely guidance, inter-sectoral coordination, and the responsibility of digital platforms.

The National Assembly should supervise the progress of issuing sub-legal documents and organising implementation. The Central Steering Committee has required that by April 2026, 100% of documents guiding the implementation of laws and resolutions passed by the National Assembly in 2025 must be completed, this should be a mandatory supervisory milestone, linked to the responsibility of heads of agencies.

The National Assembly should also supervise the enforcement of legal tools for protecting rights in cyberspace as stipulated by the Law, including the legal responsibilities of businesses providing intermediary services and digital platform owners, and measures to compel the removal, hiding, or disabling of access to content, accounts, websites, applications, or internet identifiers related to infringing acts. Supervision must be based on indicators such as the time taken to process removal requests, the rate of re-infringement, and the number of prosecuted cases.

Finally, there must be supervision of resources and data. Directive No. 02/CT-TTg sets out the principle of “six clarities” and assigns the task of building a national database for enforcement, along with the application of AI and blockchain technologies to detect, trace, and protect rights in the digital environment. The National Assembly must ensure budget and effective supervision: whether data is inter-sectoral and whether it supports investigation and prosecution. 

Q: In the context of deep international integration and rapid digital technology development, what core issues, in your opinion, should be prioritised to perfect the intellectual property institutional framework?

A: In the context of deep integration and the rapid advancement of digital technology, a top priority in perfecting the intellectual property institutional framework is to remain faithful to the spirit of the Politburo’s Resolution 57: institutions are the prerequisite conditions, must take the lead, and must foster innovation and creativity.

The first priority is to ensure effective enforcement in cyberspace. The law already establishes the responsibility of intermediary service providers and digital platform operators, while also permitting measures such as removing, concealing, or disabling access to infringing content. Perfection of the institutional framework must therefore clarify fast-track procedures, standard requirements for digital evidence, and mechanisms to prevent abuse.

The second priority is a legal framework for data and artificial intelligence. The law assigns the Government the task of regulating the emergence and establishment of rights where the subject of intellectual property involves the use of AI systems; at the same time, it permits the use of published texts and data for research, testing, and AI training, provided that such use does not unreasonably affect the lawful rights and interests of rights holders. Clear criteria for what constitutes “unreasonable” impacts must be set out promptly in order to reduce compliance risks.

The third priority is the “marketisation” of intellectual property assets against the backdrop of increasingly high standards under the new generation of free trade agreements. The new law encourages the contribution of capital and the granting of mortgages using intellectual property rights, and it promotes transparency in transaction prices; it is therefore necessary to perfect mechanisms for valuation, accounting, taxation, credit, and to develop intermediary organisations.

Thus, the intellectual property institutional framework must both safeguard creativity and transform creativity into a source of sustainable development.

Thank you for your sharing!