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

January 23, 2019

Vietnam to Amend Decree on Broadcasting and TV Services to Regulate On-Demand Content

Content on demand and video on demand, also known as OTT (over-the-top) TV services, quickly generated interest and support from local users after entering Vietnam. In response to pressing complaints from some local service providers that there is unequal treatment between foreign service providers and domestic service providers (domestic providers have many obligations related to content, taxes, and charges that are not imposed on cross-border providers), the Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC) has plans to amend the current Decree 6 on the management, provision, and utilization of broadcasting and TV services. In this regard, the MIC released a draft decree for public consultation from July 23 to September 23, 2018.

After the release of the draft decree, which aims to improve the regulation of OTT TV services and cross-border provision of such services, there were many concerns regarding the potential burdens and unattractive environment the draft could create for businesses and investment. On December 12, 2018, local and foreign chambers of commerce coordinated to organize a workshop to collect comments on the draft decree from stakeholders in the TV industry and relevant state agencies. The draft decree used for this workshop was marked as “Draft 4,” which is the most current available draft to date.

Below is a summary of some of the key contents of Draft 4, and related concerns for stakeholders:

1. Definition of Terms

The definition of radio and TV services has been expanded to include the provision of on-demand content over broadcasting infrastructure to service users. The definition of internet TV services has also been expanded to include services provided via Vietnam-managed websites and internet apps (meaning OTT TV services are covered), and a new definition of on-demand internet content services has been introduced that also includes OTT TV services. On-demand content is defined broadly as “domestic and foreign radio/TV programs including live shows at the time of an event; film and content containing domestic or international audio or visual which meet requirements of relevant laws and regulations of Vietnam and are provided to subscribers on demand.”

Concerns: The very broad definition of terms would lead to a broad and vague scope of application. For example, it is unclear whether audio and visual content created and uploaded by users of social networks, at the demand of others, would be considered as falling into the definition of on-demand content. In addition, it is unclear whether classifying the provision of on-demand internet content under radio and TV services is appropriate and in line with relevant law (i.e., Appendix 4 of the Investment Law, which lists conditional businesses) and international CPC classifications.

2. Licensing of Paid OTT TV Services

Draft 4 sets out new licensing requirements with regard to paid OTT TV services and requires that enterprises wanting to provide paid OTT TV services must be Vietnamese enterprises, and approval in principle must be obtained from the prime minister in respect of foreign investments to establish a company in Vietnam in this field. This may mean that foreign companies cannot provide cross-border OTT TV services to users in Vietnam as they are currently doing, but may have to establish a company in Vietnam. However, the draft does not prescribe any limits or ceilings on the ratio of foreign ownership, which are also not mentioned in Vietnam’s WTO commitments.

One of the conditions for licensing under the draft is that the company must submit the content group category of on-demand content of their services along with relevant copyright agreements for on-demand content.

Concerns: The licensing requirement could be considered a barrier to market entry, and would not be promoting foreign investment and the overall business environment. Instead of following the traditional approach of licensing whenever there is a new type of service provided in the market, the MIC needs to manage based on risk and the mechanism of post-checks. The MIC may also consider an alternative management measure, for example, taxing the cross-border provision of OTT services.

The MIC should consider revising the draft so that instead of submitting the copyright agreement in advance for licensing, service providers can update the list of copyright agreements whenever content is updated.

3. Translation and Editing Requirements for Foreign Content

The duration of a license to edit foreign channels on pay TV services is proposed to be reduced from 10 years to 5 years in Draft 4.

The draft also expands the list of foreign content which must be translated to include TV shows (reality TV, game shows), and the translation and editing must be done by a licensed press agency.

Concerns: Because of the huge amount of constantly updated on-demand content, this requirement will create unnecessary burdens in terms of time and expense, while the quality of the translation and editing is not guaranteed. It may be more efficient and appropriate to consider letting OTT service providers conduct their own translation and editing, instead of using licensed press agencies, provided they bear responsibility for the translated and edited content.

4. Pre-installed Advertisements

Draft 4 does not allow pre-installed advertisement from overseas and requires licensed press agencies to be responsible for the installation of any advertisement in Vietnam.

Concerns: This requirement could be considered a restriction of advertisement from overseas and may violate Vietnam’s WTO commitments, because the WTO commitments do not restrict advertisement from overseas to Vietnam. In addition, with regard to services such as social networks which allow users to broadcast content on demand, it is unclear which entity should be responsible for installation of advertisements.

5. Proportion of Domestic Programs

The draft requires the proportion of domestic programs with regard to on-demand internet TV services to be not less than 30% of the total programs.

Concerns: In order to meet this requirement, either the domestic program production capacity must significantly increase or the content catalogue must be reduced significantly, thus, restricting users’ market access and creating difficulties for enterprises. This proportion should be left for the market to decide.

6. Other Changes

The draft requires certain sports programs having social impact to be rebroadcast over free broadcasting services for certain periods.

Concerns: Enterprises may spend huge amounts of money on the broadcast rights to certain sporting events, and need to recover the costs by re-selling the programs to other companies to rebroadcast.

The draft regulates that the MIC, based on development targets for the broadcasting sector stipulated in the broadcasting development plan, will decide on the number of domestic and foreign program channels.

Concerns: This matter should be left for the market to decide, instead of the MIC.

Outlook

After the workshop, in early January 2019, local chambers of commerce submitted comments to the MIC and the MIC is now revising the draft decree, but no new draft is yet available.

It is worth noting that on the first day of 2019, the government issued Resolution 02/NQ-CP on duties and measures to improve the business environment and enhance national competitiveness. With the government’s strong inclination toward creating a better and healthier business environment, it is expected that many business conditions and licensing requirements will be eliminated or reduced significantly. Therefore, it is expected that the MIC will reconsider the draft very carefully to be in line with government policy to create a more attractive investment and business environment in the broadcasting and TV field.

Because the nature of OTT TV services is different from the nature of traditional broadcasting and TV services, there are also recommendations that the government should consider developing a separate decree on the management, provision and utilization of OTT TV services and online content instead of regulating these services under Decree 6.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 27, 2026
Vietnam’s new E-Commerce Law, which took effect on 1 July 2026 along with its implementing Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP (Decree 248), marks a significant development in the country’s approach to online intellectual property (IP) enforcement, reflecting a clear shift from a reactive model of intermediary liability to one that expects platforms to play a more active role in preventing infringement. From notice-and-takedown to platform responsibility The most significant change introduced by the E-Commerce Law is the transformation of the legal role of e-commerce platforms. The existing safe harbor provisions under the IP Law and the copyright notice-and-takedown regime established by Decree 17/2023/ND-CP (Decree 17) largely required intermediaries to act only after receiving notice of infringement. Once infringing content had been removed, the platform’s legal obligation was generally considered fulfilled. The new legislation adopts a fundamentally different approach. Article 17 of the E-Commerce Law requires intermediary platforms to screen information relating to goods and services before publication in order to prevent listings involving counterfeit or IP-infringing goods, and goods of unknown origin. Rather than relying exclusively on complaints from rights holders, platforms are now expected to implement preventive measures before infringing listings become publicly available. Decree 248 further requires platforms to update keyword filters based on recommendations issued by competent authorities. These filtering mechanisms are intended to prevent prohibited listings from appearing on the platform and represent a further move away from a purely complaint-driven enforcement model. The legislation also introduces Vietnam’s first statutory stay-down obligation. Under the E-Commerce Law and Decree 248, major digital platforms must maintain automated systems capable of reviewing, warning against, and removing unlawful listings while also implementing measures to prevent repeat violations, defined under Decree 248 as conduct that has previously been identified and handled by the platform, but continues to recur. This obligation addresses one
July 27, 2026
A new decree on penalties for violations related to the crypto asset market creates compliance risks for offshore crypto asset exchanges in Vietnam that do not hold, and practically cannot obtain, a Vietnamese license, and for Vietnamese users who continue to transact on those platforms. Decree No. 284/2026/ND-CP (Decree 284), issued by the government of Vietnam on July 16, 2026, formally establishes an administrative penalty framework for violations related to crypto assets and the crypto asset market. The decree takes effect on September 1, 2026, and will remain in force for the duration of the five-year pilot program under Resolution No. 05/2025/NQ-CP, which is scheduled to end in September 2030. Direct Penalties on Vietnamese Users The most immediate commercial risk to offshore platforms is that their Vietnamese users now face direct personal liability for using their exchanges. Vietnamese users who trade crypto assets outside of a Ministry of Finance-licensed service provider face fines of up to VND 50 million (approximately USD 1,900). Vietnamese users trading in crypto assets that are offered or issued to foreign users face higher penalties of up to VND 100 million (approximately USD 3,800). It is expected that Vietnamese users will be more willing to migrate away from offshore platforms now that there is a risk of real enforcement against them. Penalties on Unlicensed Service Providers Violations of providing crypto asset services or advertising crypto-related services without a license face fines of up to VND 200 million (approximately USD 7,700). Operating a crypto asset trading market without proper authorization falls within the same highest penalty bands. Organizations that violate issuance, provision, or disclosure rules may face fines of up to VND 200 million. Although the maximum administrative fine per violation is capped at VND 200 million for organizations and VND 100 million for individuals, these
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
July 20, 2026
On July 16, 2026, Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) published a notification in the Government Gazette establishing detailed rules governing data subjects’ right of access under section 30 of the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The notification will take effect 60 days after publication—mid-September 2026—giving data controllers a limited window to bring their processes into compliance. Scope The notification covers requests to access or obtain copies of personal data and requests for disclosure of the source of data collected without consent. Data subjects may exercise their rights directly or through authorized representatives. Key Requirements Important requirements set by the notification include the following: Required request channels. Controllers must provide at least two request channels: direct submission at the business location and registered mail. Electronic channels are optional but, if offered, may also be used for fulfilling requests. Request contents. Requests must be in writing or in electronic form and include the data subject’s name, the preferred access method, details of the data requested, and the requester’s signature. Controllers may request additional identifying information as needed. Identity and authority verification. Controllers may require official identity documents for verification. Authorized representatives must provide authorization documents and identity documents for both the data subject and the representative. Alternative verification methods (e.g., digital authentication) are permitted if they do not unreasonably obstruct data subjects’ rights. Review and response timelines. Controllers must review requests within 15 days. If the request is incomplete, the controller must notify the requester and allow at least 15 days to correct deficiencies. If not corrected, the request may be treated as abandoned. Once verified, controllers must fulfill requests within 30 days, extendable by another 30 days for large-volume or complex requests with notice to the requester. Methods for providing access or copies. Controllers may fulfill