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

August 9, 2017

Patenting Business Methods in Vietnam

Subscribe to Updates

Background

Modern e-commerce and the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) have accelerated innovation while advancing collaboration. This new environment has revolutionized not only traditional business activities such as commerce, administration, and finance, but also fundamental interactions such as communications between employees, servers, and automated machinery, and between enterprises and their clients. Though intangible, the business methods used to navigate this new environment have become important proprietary assets for both large corporations and small businesses.

Traditionally, companies in Vietnam and around the world have protected their business methods as trade secrets through physical measures such as security clearances, and legal measures such as nondisclosure agreements. A classic example of traditional trade secret protections involves a highly publicized case from 2006. Two employees of a global beverage company with access to their company’s secret new formula contacted top-level executives at a rival company offering to exchange the recipe for millions of dollars. Fortunately, the executives at the rival company were responsible competitors, immediately reporting this offer to the FBI. The FBI investigated and the U.S. Department of Justice successfully convicted the perpetrators based in part on surveillance footage of the employees stuffing confidential files and samples of the new product into their bags as they left restricted areas.

As the business environment has evolved, and many trade secrets are now stored digitally on servers or cloud networks, security is no longer as easy as locking proprietary information in a vault. As such, traditional security measures may no longer be adequate to prevent theft. In practice, espionage techniques (e.g., hacking) and network attacks (e.g., viruses, spyware, and ransomware) are growing increasingly sophisticated, leaving trade secrets at risk. Despite this risk, businesses have no choice but to utilize digital data storage methods, as modern business models and tools include supply-chain algorithms, algorithms generating marketing analytics, and consumer data, which are either impractical or impossible to physically lock in a vault. Further, with the rise of the mobile employee, many companies’ trade secrets must be accessible to employees from anywhere in the world.

Protection in Vietnam

As Vietnam becomes more economically attractive through trade agreements, coalitions, and rapid economic growth, companies must seriously consider investing in Vietnam or being left behind their competitors. However, when companies calculate investment risk in emerging markets, they need reliable forms of intellectual property protection for their business methods. Patents can viably protect some trade secrets; however, Vietnam currently excludes business methods from the scope of patentable subject matter. Under Article 59.2 of the Law on Intellectual Property, business methods are listed as subject matter that is ineligible for patent protection. This means that while a traditional trade secret—such as the secret formula of a beverage—is likely patentable in Vietnam, a proprietary business method—such as a supply-chain algorithm that predicts the demand and costs of raw goods—is likely not. This is unusual, as many countries include business methods as patentable material. For Vietnam to continue experiencing financial prosperity and economic growth, the scope of patentable subject matter should include business models like most other patent offices in the world.

According to the Vietnamese Guidelines for patent examination, if claimed subject matter (a) is merely directed to a method of doing business, (b) does not use technical means, (c) does not solve any technical problems, and (d) does not create any technical effects, the subject matter will be excluded from patent protection. However, this means if the claimed subject matter involves methods of doing business and specifies an apparatus or a technical process for carrying out at least some part of these methods, the subject matter will not be excluded from patent protection.

In practice, when the Vietnam Patent Office examines business methods, much attention is paid to the designation of the claimed subject matter and the International Patent Classification (IPC) symbol used. To reduce the risk of an objection, technical features providing technical effects should be clearly recited in the claims instead of only being disclosed in the description. Applicants must always bear in mind that, in Vietnam, a patent application must demonstrate a technical feature before it is assessed on the requirements of patentability.

Outlook for the Future

In order to encourage companies to invest in Vietnam, the Vietnam Patent Office should move toward more liberal protection of business methods, following the model of the United States and many other patent offices. Meanwhile, companies should proactively identify and incorporate technical features providing unexpected technical effects into the steps of their business methods to be protected. By doing so, they may be able to protect the parts of their business methods that are difficult to secure as trade secrets through technical features that are protected by patents.

It is hoped that in the near future patent scope will more generously protect business methods in Vietnam with stipulations to be modified like the rest of the world and more transparent guidelines.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

December 17, 2025
Vietnam’s National Assembly approved wide-ranging amendments to the Intellectual Property (IP) Law on December 10, 2025, marking one of the most significant overhauls of the country’s IP regime in recent years. The changes, which supplement and refine existing provisions, are designed to align Vietnam’s framework more closely with international standards while addressing practical challenges faced by rights holders and practitioners. The amendments will come into force on April 1, 2026. The most notable changes are detailed below. Recognition of partial and nonphysical industrial designs: Industrial design protection has been broadened to cover partial designs and nonphysical forms (class 32), explicitly extending rights to parts of products that are not independently circulated as well as digital and intangible product appearances. The law clarifies that the external appearances of nonphysical products are protected industrial designs, and circulation of digital copies of any part of that appearance will be treated as an act of using the industrial design. The provision on the industrial applicability of industrial designs has also been amended accordingly to include the uniform reproduction of nonphysical products in cyberspace. Resolving conflicts between overlapping rights: The IP Law provides a safeguard against conflicts when a single subject matter is protected by multiple IP rights. Where overlapping rights exist, the later-arising right will be terminated if its exercise interferes with the normal exploitation of an earlier right. The decision to terminate such a later right rests with the court. Use of published data for AI training: Organizations and individuals may use lawfully published and publicly accessible documents and data for scientific research, testing, and AI system training. Such use must not unreasonably prejudice the rights or legitimate interests of authors or IP rights holders. Where the documents and data fall under copyright or related rights protection, their use must also comply
Read More
December 5, 2025
One morning, a California-based company mapping its Southeast Asia rollout opened an unexpected cease-and-desist letter from a Vietnamese IP firm. To the company’s surprise, the letter asserted that a local client already owned the company’s brand in Vietnam and threatened legal action. This is not an isolated incident. In another recent matter in the sports industry, a squatter demanded at least USD 48,000 from our client to “resolve” a similar conflict. For brands entering Vietnam or expanding distribution there, these tactics can create acute risk at precisely the point at which market momentum is building. Vietnam’s rapid economic growth and deepening integration into global trade have made it an increasingly attractive destination for multinational brands. Those same dynamics have intensified a longstanding issue: trademark squatting. Vietnam has modernized its IP framework over the past decade, but its strict first-to-file trademark system continues to incentivize opportunistic filings by parties with no legitimate interest in a mark. As more foreign brands build their reputation abroad before turning to Vietnam, squatters remain alert to timing gaps and enforcement frictions. The First-to-File System: Advantages and Vulnerabilities Vietnam adheres closely to the first-to-file principle under its Law on Intellectual Property. In practice, exclusive trademark rights belong to whoever submits the earliest valid application to the Vietnam Intellectual Property Office, regardless of prior use in Vietnam. This approach offers administrative clarity and reduces evidentiary burdens compared to use-based jurisdictions. Yet it also creates fertile conditions for squatting. Bad-faith actors regularly monitor foreign markets, identify brands gaining traction, and move quickly to register those marks domestically, often long before the genuine owner enters the market or prioritizes local filings. By the time the true brand seeks protection, the squatter’s application (or registration) stands as a legal obstacle, pushing businesses toward costly oppositions, cancellations, or uncomfortable negotiations
Read More
November 26, 2025
On November 21, 2025, Myanmar’s Ministry of Commerce (MOC) issued Notification No. 103/2025 promulgating the Geographical Indication Rules (GI Rules), establishing a comprehensive framework for the registration and administration of geographical indications (GI), which are primarily governed by the Trademark Law of 2019. On the same day, the MOC released Notification No. 104/2025 specifying the required forms for GI-related matters. The GI Rules establish a comprehensive set of procedures for the entire GI application process, including filing applications, oppositions, cancellations, and invalidations, and appointing a local representative for GI-related matters. Under the Trademark Law and the GI Rules, domestic and foreign legal entities (organizations) that formally represent a defined group of stakeholders (such as producers or manufacturers of natural products or resources, agricultural products, handicrafts, or industrial products) and other competent authorities from government departments are eligible to apply for GI registration with the Intellectual Property Department (IPD) in Myanmar. Application A GI application can be submitted in either English or Myanmar language electronically, in person, or via post. Foreign applicants seeking to register a GI in Myanmar are required to submit a copy of the registration certificate from their country of origin with the GI application. This certificate must explicitly state the GI name of the protected product. Notably, foreign applicants are mandated to appoint a local representative in Myanmar to act on their behalf for GI-related matters with the IPD and appeal-related matters with the IP Agency. The form for appointing the local representative must be duly notarized in the applicant’s home country to ensure its legal validity and acceptance in accordance with the GI Rules. Application for Use of GI Logo Pursuant to the GI Rules, any interested individual, local or foreign, may submit an application to the IPD for authorization to use the GI logo,
Read More
November 21, 2025
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed the Thailand chapter to Asia IP’s ASEAN Guide to IP Protection 2025, an annual reference covering key developments and practical considerations for intellectual property systems across Southeast Asia. The chapter offers an overview of Thailand’s current legal framework for the protection of trademarks, patents, industrial designs, and copyrights. It summarizes registration requirements, recent regulatory updates, and procedural considerations relevant to rights holders and practitioners. The chapter offers actionable insights for rights holders at every stage of the IP lifecycle and addresses practical strategies for managing portfolios, anticipating enforcement challenges, and maximizing the value of IP assets. The authors also highlight recent trends and developments in Thai IP law, ensuring that readers are equipped with the latest knowledge to inform their decisions. The complete Thailand chapter can be downloaded through the button below, and the chapter is also available on the Asia IP website.
Read More