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

April 30, 2026

New Decree Strengthens Vietnam’s Copyright Framework in the AI Era

Subscribe to Updates
Managing Intellectual Property

Vietnam’s Decree No. 134/2026/ND‑CP, which took effect on 9 April 2026, plays an important role in detailing and implementing Vietnam’s Intellectual Property (IP) Law in the context of rapid digital transformation and the growing application of artificial intelligence (AI). The new decree provides comprehensive guidance on the application of copyright and related‑rights regulations, addressing key issues such as authorship, ownership, statutory exceptions and limitations, registration procedures, and enforcement mechanisms.

Through these measures, Decree 134 seeks to achieve an appropriate balance between safeguarding the legitimate interests of rightsholders and fostering innovation, research, and technological advancement, thereby strengthening the state’s framework for the effective management, protection, and exploitation of intellectual property in the digital and AI‑driven environment.

Some notable aspects of Decree 134 are discussed below.

Copyright for AI-Created Works

Decree 134 provides important guidance on the determination of copyright and related rights in works created with the assistance of AI. Article 5a reaffirms the principle that human creativity remains central to copyright protection, clarifying that copyright or related rights arise only where a human makes a substantial and decisive intellectual contribution, exercises effective control over the creative outcome, and assumes responsibility for the content and its legality.

At the same time, the provision confirms that AI is regarded solely as a technological tool rather than a rights‑holding subject, thus ensuring consistency with the fundamental concepts of authorship and ownership under the IP Law. By introducing requirements on transparency, proof of human contribution, and compliance with AI‑specific labelling and technical marking obligations, Decree 134 establishes a clear and enforceable legal framework for the responsible use of AI in creative activities.

Lawful Use of Copyrighted Texts and Data

Article 37a of Decree 134 sets out the specific conditions under which copyrighted texts and data may be lawfully used for scientific research, experimentation, and the training of AI systems, requiring that such use be based on lawfully published materials, accessed from legitimate sources, and conducted without circumventing or disabling technological protection measures implemented by rightsholders. It further establishes substantive limitations to ensure that such use does not conflict with the normal exploitation of protected works, does not cause unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of authors, performers, and rightsholders, and does not result in AI outputs that substitute the market or create unfair competition with protected subject matter.

The right of authors, performers, and rightsholders to reserve their copyright and related rights against this use of protected texts and data is also recognized under Article 37b. Such reservations must be exercised through clear and publicly accessible mechanisms, including machine‑readable rights‑management information, technological protection measures, or public declarations made via authorized collective management organizations. This reservation right specifically does not apply where the use of texts and data fully satisfies the strict conditions set out in Article 37a.

Users of copyrighted texts and data for research, experimentation, and AI training are required  to retain technical records, training data, and usage data in accordance with applicable AI‑related regulations, and to provide such information to competent authorities upon request for verification, dispute resolution, or enforcement purposes. In addition, Article 37c reinforces the obligation to respect the reservation of rights exercised by rightsholders, notably clarifying that where AI‑trained systems are commercially exploited, users must comply with the foregoing obligations and fulfill royalty‑payment duties in accordance with the law, ensuring that AI innovation is aligned with fair remuneration and effective rights protection.

Specialized Database on Copyright and Related Rights

To strengthen the institutional framework for copyright protection and enforcement in the digital environment, Decree 134 introduces a centralized, specialized database on copyright and related rights. This publicly accessible database will consolidate key data on registrations, collective management organizations, royalty tariffs, intermediary service providers, and other relevant matters to enhance information sharing, regulatory oversight, and lawful access, while ensuring compliance with data‑protection and confidentiality requirements.

Copyright Exclusions

Article 8.4 clarifies the scope of subject matter excluded from copyright protection by providing detailed interpretations of ideas, slogans, and the independent title of a work. The provision reaffirms that ideas or creative concepts not fixed in a material form, slogans lacking independent creativity beyond ordinary linguistic expression, and titles considered separately from the content of the work do not constitute protected works.

Legal Validity of Electronic Registration Certificates

Article 38.9 formally recognizes the legal validity of electronic copyright and related‑rights registration certificates, an important step toward modernizing copyright administration. The provision authorizes the competent authority to issue certificates in electronic form as the default, while allowing paper certificates to be issued upon request, and confirms that electronic certificates have the same legal value as paper documents.

Suspension of Examination During Disputes

Under Article 39.2a, the relevant authority must temporarily suspend the examination of registration applications where the subject matter is involved in an ongoing dispute, complaint, denunciation, or criminal investigation relating to IP infringement. By requiring formal notification to applicants and clearly defining the duration of such suspension, this important procedural safeguard helps prevent the issuance of registration certificates that could interfere with judicial, arbitral, or investigative proceedings, while ensuring procedural fairness through the resumption of processing or the return of applications once the suspension period ends.

A Promising Step Forward

In summary, Decree 134 represents a significant step forward in modernizing and strengthening Vietnam’s copyright and related‑rights framework in response to rapid digital transformation and the growing impact of AI. By providing detailed guidance on AI‑assisted creation, lawful data use for AI training, rightsholder reservations, user responsibilities, registration procedures, and digital administration, the decree enhances legal certainty and regulatory coherence while maintaining a human‑centric approach to copyright protection.

At the same time, it reinforces transparency, accountability, and fair remuneration, ensuring that technological innovation proceeds in harmony with the legitimate interests of authors, performers, and rightsholders. Taken together, these measures demonstrate the state’s commitment to effective IP management and to fostering a balanced, sustainable environment for creativity, innovation, and economic development in the digital and AI‑driven landscape.

This article first appeared in Managing Intellectual Property.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 5, 2026
Vietnam’s AI regulatory framework has reached an important milestone. While the Law on Artificial Intelligence No. 134/2025/QH15 (AI Law) established the foundation for AI governance, many practical compliance requirements were left to implementing regulations. On April 30, 2026, the government issued Decree No. 142/2026/ND-CP (Decree 142), which took effect on May 1, 2026, and provides the first detailed guidance on the implementation of the AI Law. Although an official list of high-risk AI systems is still pending from the prime minister, Decree 142 provides valuable insight into how Vietnam’s risk-based AI regulatory framework will operate in practice. Risk Classification Framework The AI Law adopts a risk-based approach under which AI systems are classified as high-risk, medium-risk, or low-risk. Decree 142 builds on this framework by providing detailed guidance on how these classifications are determined. High-risk AI systems are determined based on factors such as (i) their potential impact on life, health, property, human rights, public interests, or national security; (ii) the sector in which they are deployed; and (iii) the scale of affected users or integration with critical infrastructure. The latest draft list of high-risk AI systems appears to follow these same principles. Medium-risk AI systems generally include systems that may mislead, influence, or manipulate users, particularly where users may not realize they are interacting with AI or AI-generated content. The focus is therefore on transparency and authenticity risks rather than broader societal or safety concerns. Low-risk AI systems are those that do not meet the criteria for either high-risk or medium-risk classification. Importantly, Decree 142 seeks to avoid over-classification. Certain systems may fall outside the high-risk or medium-risk regimes, including internal-use systems, office-support tools, technical editing applications, certain back-end processing systems, and AI systems used in artistic, gaming, cinematic, or other creative contexts. Providers must also review and
Read More
June 5, 2026
On May 11, 2026, Thailand’s Ministry of Social Development and Human Security released a draft Child Protection Act (“CPA”) for public review. The draft CPA would completely repeal and replace the current Child Protection Act B.E. 2546 (2003). This represents the most comprehensive overhaul of Thailand’s child protection framework in over two decades, reflecting the government’s stated objective of modernizing the law to address evolving social challenges—including those arising from digital technology—and to promote greater coordination among government agencies, local authorities, and civil society. The public review period closes on June 9, 2026. Key changes introduced by the draft CPA that could have significant implications for businesses, particularly online platform providers, media companies, and entities operating child-related services in Thailand, are set out below. Expanded Definition of “Child” Under the current CPA, a “child” is defined as a person under the age of 18, excluding those who have attained legal majority through marriage. The draft CPA removes the marriage exception entirely, broadening the scope of the law’s protections to include all individuals under 18 without exception. Replacement of “Abuse” with Broader Concept of “Violence” The current CPA uses the term “abuse/cruelty,” which covers acts causing harm to a child’s liberty, body, or mind; sexual offenses against children; and using children in harmful or immoral activities. The draft CPA replaces this with the broader concept of “violence,” which encompasses any act or omission causing harm to a child’s body, mind, or development; abandonment or neglect; improper exploitation; and sexual abuse. Notably, the new definition adds developmental harm as a recognized category of injury and captures all forms of misconduct regardless of the child’s consent. New Standalone Definition of Sexual Abuse, Including Online Conduct One of the most significant additions in the draft CPA is the introduction of a standalone definition
Read More
May 25, 2026
After several years of policy discussion and continued efforts led by the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) to relax the list of reserved businesses under the Foreign Business Act B.E. 2542 (1999) (FBA), the reform process has now reached a significant milestone. On May 12, 2026, the Thai cabinet approved in principle two draft subordinate legislative instruments aimed at delisting certain reserved business activities under the FBA and reducing licensing requirements for foreign business operators. These developments signal a renewed and concrete effort by the government to modernize Thailand’s business regulatory framework in order to attract foreign investment and boost Thailand’s competitiveness in the global market. Nine Businesses Set for FBA Delisting Below is a list of the nine businesses that are being targeted for delisting from the FBA’s restrictions. A draft ministerial regulation would delist the first eight reserved businesses, while a royal decree has been drafted to delist the ninth business: Telecommunications services (Type 1 license only, covering operators without their own telecommunications infrastructure), under the supervision of the Office of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission. Treasury center services subject to the Foreign Exchange Control Act B.E. 2485 and under the supervision of the Bank of Thailand. Securities-collateralized lending, pursuant to the laws governing securities and exchange and derivatives regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Agency, dealer, advisory, or fund management services relating to derivatives where the underlying assets fall outside the scope of the Derivatives Act B.E. 2546 (2003) Intra-group shared services, including administrative, human resources, and IT functions Intra-group domestic debt guarantee services Leasing of partial space for installation of financial service machines and automatic vending machines for employee use Petroleum drilling services Trading of agricultural product derivatives through a futures exchange, with physical delivery or receipt of agricultural products at a futures exchange–designated
Read More
May 25, 2026
Thailand published new rules on May 1, 2026, establishing clear procedures for how the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) handles digital assets seized during criminal and money laundering investigations. Taking effect the following day, the Regulation of the Anti-Money Laundering Board on the Custody and Management of Seized or Frozen Assets (No. 3) B.E. 2569 applies to digital asset businesses, cryptocurrency holders, and anyone subject to asset seizure under Thailand’s anti-money laundering laws. For the first time, authorities now have a detailed roadmap for transferring seized digital property from private or foreign control into secure state custody. Digital asset businesses holding customer assets under investigation must be prepared to comply with these rules compelling repatriation of such assets in enforcement actions. Expanded Definition of Digital Assets The regulation defines digital assets to include not only those covered by Thailand’s existing digital asset business law but also any other property that can be stored using the same methods as digital assets. This broad formulation means the custody rules will apply to emerging blockchain-based assets and tokenized property that may not yet fall within the statutory definition of a digital asset business, giving authorities flexibility as the technology evolves. Mandatory Transfer to Domestic Custody When digital assets are held with service providers outside Thailand, AMLO will first attempt to transfer them to an account the office maintains with a licensed domestic digital asset business operator. If the domestic operator does not support that particular asset, the office will instead move the assets to its own cold wallet (offline, internet-isolated storage system). If neither option is feasible, the seizing official will report the situation to the Anti-Money Laundering Committee for alternative instructions. A similar hierarchy governs assets held in an accused party’s private wallet or by any third party that is not a
Read More