You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

May 28, 2020

CPTPP Calling: Changes to Domain Name Dispute Resolution in Vietnam?

Subscribe to Updates

Vietnam’s Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC) is drafting a decree to amend Decree No. 72/2013/ND-CP on the management, provision, and use of internet services and online information (Decree 72), one of the key pieces of legislation affecting online business and activities in Vietnam. Among other things, the draft decree is expected to revise the current regime of domain name dispute resolution to bring it in conformity with Vietnam’s obligations under the CPTPP. However, it seems the lawmakers have not yet addressed all the pitfalls the current regime is posing to rights holders and enforcement bodies.

Changes

Under the CPTPP’s requirements, Vietnam must introduce a regime for domain name dispute resolution in line with the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) proceedings, particularly the principles established under this policy. Shortly after the effective date of the CPTPP in Vietnam (January 14, 2019), Vietnam passed an amendment to its IP Law, but left out the issue of domain name dispute resolution, deferring the change to the MIC’s revision of Decree 72.

In fact, in the draft decree, the MIC focused only on revising the elements of domain name disputes to model them after the UDRP elements. Specifically, in order for authorities to rule on a domain name dispute, the complainant must prove the following three elements:

  • the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark, trade name, geographical indication, or personal name of the complainant;
  • the registrant has no rights and interest in the domain name; and
  • the registrant is registering the domain name in bad faith.

The MIC goes noticeably further than UDRP when it affords the right to fight against cyber-squatting not only to trademark owners but also the owners of trade names and geographical indications.

The current Decree 72 (particularly, Article 16.2) lists six grounds on which the authorities can rely to rule on cyber-squatting. However, the provision is structured ambiguously as it is not clear whether all six grounds must be established or if just one of the grounds suffices to find cyber-squatting. The new change (mostly a change to the structure of the provision) sheds light on how to interpret the regulation. The complainant now must prove three elements, not six, and not one. However, without retroactive effect, things would change only when the draft decree takes force in the near future. Disputes arising during the purview of the prevailing Decree 72 still fall into the land of uncertainty.

No change

In fact, the revision of Article 16.2 falls short of IP rights holders’ expectations and still does not fully comply with the CPTPP requirements. Pursuant to the CPTPP (Article 18.28 of the IP Chapter), the new regime for settling domain name disputes must, among other things:

  • be designed to resolve disputes expeditiously and at low cost;
  • not be overly burdensome; and
  • not preclude resorting to judicial proceedings.

It is clear that apart from judicial proceedings (civil suits), the CPTPP requires Vietnam to introduce a time-effective, cost-efficient, and non-cumbersome mechanism of domain name dispute resolution. The draft decree fails to do so. The current mechanism as set out under Decree 72 remains unchanged, mentioning only civil suits, negotiation, and arbitration. Though arbitration seems to be the most relevant, it does completely satisfy the CPTPP requirement. In fact, it is quite infeasible as both the respondent and the complainant must agree to arbitration.

The MIC still dissents to the administrative procedures as set out under the IP Law, Decree 99/2013/ND-CP, and Joint Circular No. 14/2016/TTLT-BTTTT-BKHCN between the MIC and the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST)—laws mainly drafted by the MOST. Therefore, it appears the MIC intentionally left out administrative procedures as a mechanism of domain name dispute resolution from the draft decree. The current regime for administrative procedures, of course, does not fully tie in with the UDRP proceedings. However, it would be efficient to start off by including administrative procedures in the draft decree as the procedures, to some extent, meet the CPTPP requirement.

Recommendations

In addition to introducing a new forum for dispute resolution or simply modifying the current administrative procedures, the draft decree should also address other issues that are driving settlement of domain name disputes into stagnation. The draft decree should expressly provide for an automatic lock of domain names during enforcement actions. The draft should additionally allow for an immediate transfer of the domain names once the rulings/judgments take force. Currently, the Vietnam Internet Network Information Center (VNNIC), an agency administering country-code top‐level domains for Vietnam, still declines to transfer disputed domain names to plaintiffs even when the plaintiff has an enforcement judgment from a court.

In all, the current version of the draft decree does not yet effectively prevent the current pitfalls of settling domain name disputes. Given the incredible growth of integration of the internet into society, it is time the MIC and MOST set aside any differences, bridged the gaps between them, and introduced a truly effective tool to address cyber-squatting.

Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 8, 2024
The primary goal of business rehabilitation proceedings in Thailand is to provide debtors who are facing insolvency with various mechanisms to address their financial difficulties. This includes restructuring their liabilities and assets while also ensuring that creditors receive repayment equal to or greater than the amount they would have received if the debtor had been declared bankrupt by the court. Rehabilitation proceedings are governed by the Act on the Establishment of and Procedure for Bankruptcy Court B. E. 2542 and the Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483. The Civil Procedure Code regulates any matters not governed by these two laws. In the eyes of the Thai judiciary, rehabilitation proceedings are classified as a type of bankruptcy action—thus, the country’s bankruptcy courts have jurisdiction over rehabilitation matters. Business Rehabilitation Proceedings in Thailand is a detailed guide to the rehabilitation process for businesses in Thailand. It contains important information for entrepreneurs, creditors, and other stakeholders in businesses in Thailand that are facing challenges and that may be candidates for business rehabilitation. The full Business Rehabilitation Proceedings in Thailand guide can be downloaded through the button below.
Read More
February 2, 2024
The pervasive global issue of illicit personal data trading has extended its reach into Vietnam, where such sensitive information is being sold at minimal costs. A 2023 report from the Ministry of Public Security revealed that over two-thirds of the Vietnamese population has fallen victim to unlawful data collection and distribution. In the past two years, authorities have pressed charges on five criminal cases involving the buying and selling of billions of items of personal data, encompassing a wide range of sensitive information such as names, phone numbers, email addresses, and more. Notably, a person’s profile can be acquired for just USD 1, while profiles of millions of business customers can be obtained for a mere USD 100. Recognizing the severity of the problem, Vietnam has made serious efforts to combat illicit personal data trading by criminal means, encompassing both the legal framework and practical implementation.   Understanding the Criminal Legal Framework Vietnam’s 2015 Criminal Code, as amended in 2017, functions as a pivotal legal instrument delineating offenses and their corresponding punishments. Under Section 2 of Chapter XXI of the Criminal Code (“Offenses Against Regulations on Information Technology and Telecommunications Networks”), individuals engaging in the illicit trading of personal data, depending on the nature of the data (e.g., information about phone number, address, or—more dangerously—bank account) and the nature of the infringing acts, may be charged under different crimes. The sanctions can include monetary fines; non-custodial reform; imprisonment; and/or prohibition from holding certain positions, practicing certain professions, or doing certain jobs. For example, for the illicit trade of private information of an individual on a computer or telecommunications network, Article 288 of the Criminal Code specifies penalties including a monetary fine of up to VND 1 billion (equivalent to around USD 41,000); non-custodial reform of up to three years;
Read More
January 31, 2024
On January 31, 2024, Myanmar’s Intellectual Property Department (IPD) announced that it would officially start accepting industrial design applications under the Industrial Design Law on February 1, 2024. The IPD made this public in Announcement No. 1/2024, which comes three months after the Industrial Design Law entered into force on October 31, 2023. The Industrial Design Rules, issued by the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) on September 29, 2023, are another key instrument regulating the registration of industrial designs in Myanmar. In addition, the MOC’s Notification No. 71/2023 issued on October 27, 2023, specifies the forms required for industrial design registration and related actions, and the fees are specified by the IP Agency under Notification No. 2/2023, issued on December 29, 2023. Industrial design owners (individuals and legal entities) can file registration applications for new industrial designs with the IPD electronically, in person (directly or through a local representative), or by post. To be registered under the Industrial Design Law in Myanmar, industrial designs must be “new,” meaning that they must not have been disclosed to the public inside or outside Myanmar prior to the application date or the date of priority, if priority is claimed. Owners who wish to apply for and enjoy statutory protection of their industrial designs in Myanmar should start preparing all necessary documents and information for filing as soon as possible. For more information on industrial design registration in Myanmar or assistance in applying to register industrial designs, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins at [email protected].
Read More
January 24, 2024
Mickey Mouse (or, rather, a specific early version of the iconic Disney character) famously entered the public domain in the United States on January 1, 2024, almost 100 years after his 1928 debut in the short film Steamboat Willie. Mickey’s arrival highlighted the increasingly wide annual observance of “Public Domain Day”—the day when creative works enter the public domain for the first time, after the expiration of their copyright terms. This date, however, is not international, and depends on the copyright laws of each country. In Vietnam, Mickey Mouse had been in the public domain for years. Vietnam’s public domain regime Under Vietnam’s IP Law, the duration of copyright protection for moral rights is indefinite, except for rights to publish the works, which, together with economic rights, have a protection term of 75 years from first publication for cinematographic works, photography, applied art, and anonymous works. When these works are not published within 25 years from the date of their creation, the protection term is 100 years from the date of creation. For anonymous works, the protection term is determined when information about the author becomes available. For other types of copyrighted works (such as literary and musical works), following the Berne Convention, the protection term is for the life of the author and 50 years after the author’s death. Works for which the terms of protection have expired belong to the public. Everyone is entitled to use such works but must respect the moral rights of the authors. According to these regulations, Steamboat Willie and two other 1928 Mickey Mouse shorts, which are regarded as cinematographic works, have been in the public domain in Vietnam since 2003. This means that, for the past 21 years, anyone could legally copy, publish or distribute those shorts in Vietnam, and could
Read More