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 10, 2023

Vietnam Issues Guidance on Law on Cinema

Subscribe to Updates

The National Assembly of Vietnam promulgated a new Law on Cinema in June 2022 with an effective date of January 1, 2023. To guide the implementation of the new law and the sanctioning of administrative violations thereof, the government of Vietnam issued two related decrees in the final days of 2022.

Cinema Decree

On December 31, 2022, the government issued Decree No. 131/2022/ND-CP elaborating a number of articles of the Cinema Law (“Cinema Decree”), which took effect with the new law on January 1, 2023.

Among the many issues under the Cinema Law guided by the Cinema Decree, one that is critical to over-the-top (OTT) media service providers is the set of conditions for performing the mandatory self-rating of films to be disseminated in cyberspace. According to the Cinema Law, meeting the film self-rating conditions is one of the prerequisites for online dissemination of films. If a film disseminator does not meet these conditions, it would be required to request the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism (MOCST) to perform the rating.

The conditions for online disseminators to self-rate their films have now been set out under Article 12 of the Cinema Decree. Accordingly, these conditions include:

  • Having a film rating council or technical software or a mechanism to rate the films according to Vietnamese regulations on film rating and taking responsibility for the results of film rating.
  • Having a plan to amend and update film rating results at the request of the cinematography authority (for most providers, this is the Cinematography Department under the MOCST).
  • Having an administrative tool to support the rating of films according to each of the rating criteria and to flexibly display the updated rating immediately after the rating is changed.
  • Having a technical plan and process for suspending and removing films at the request of the cinematography authority. Upon a request for removal of the film, the disseminator must proceed to implement the removal functionality available on the administrative tool.

These officially enacted conditions are much more relaxed compared to those proposed in the first draft of the Cinema Decree (released for public consultation in October 2022), which required that a foreign film disseminator (e.g., an OTT service provider), among other conditions, must establish a local enterprise in Vietnam or enter into a business cooperation agreement with a local company to be eligible to perform the self-rating of films. This proposed requirement under the draft Cinema Decree was subject to heated discussions among relevant stakeholders at the time. The government seems to have taken industry opinions into consideration and decided to change the burdensome conditions.

The Cinema Decree also provides the formality requirements for an online film disseminator to request recognition from the MOCST that they meet the self-rating conditions, as well as the procedures for the MOCST to receive and handle the dossier (in Article 12.2 and 12.3).

In addition, the Cinema Decree gives details on the following critical obligations of online film disseminators:

  • To notify the MOCST of the list of films to be disseminated and the self-rating results of the films before disseminating films in cyberspace (Article 13).
  • To implement necessary technical measures for parental control, for display of warnings on inappropriate and age-restricted content, and for receiving and handling platform users’ complaints and reports on violations in relation to content, technical measures, or other violations of law (Article 14).
  • To provide contact points and contact information for receiving and handling requests from the cinematography authority (Article 15.1).
  • To stop disseminating and to remove violating films within 24 hours and other illegal content within 3 to 5 days upon the cinematography authority’s request (Article 15.2).

Cinema Sanction Decree

On December 30, 2022, the government issued Decree No. 128/2022/ND-CP amending Decree 38/2021/ND-CP on penalties for administrative violations in the field of culture and advertising (as previously amended by Decree 129/2021/ND-CP), focusing on the addition of sanctions for new violations in the field of cinematography (“Cinema Sanction Decree”). The Cinema Sanction Decree takes effect on February 15, 2023.

Some of the notable sanctions stipulated by the Cinema Sanction Decree include:

  • A monetary fine of VND 40–60 million (approx. USD 1,700–2,555) and forcible removal of the disseminated film for the act of online film dissemination without rating the film and displaying the rating results (Article 7.2b).
  • A monetary fine of VND 20–40 million (approx. USD 850–1,700) and forcible removal of disseminated films for the failure to notify the MOCST of the list of films to be disseminated and the results of film rating (Article 10.7a).
  • A monetary fine of VND 40–60 million (approx. USD 1,700–2,555) and forcible removal of disseminated films for the failure to provide contact points and contact information for receiving and handling requests from state authorities and feedback, complaints, and denunciations from service users according to the law (Article 10.7b).
  • A monetary fine of VND 60–80 million (approx. USD 2,555–3,400) and forcible removal of disseminated films for the failure to implement technical solutions and coordinate with competent state authorities in removing and preventing infringing films as prescribed by law (Article 10.7c).
  • A monetary fine of VND 80–100 million (approx. USD 3,400–4,260) and forcible removal of disseminated films for the failure to ensure the conditions for self-rating of films (Article 10.7d).
  • A monetary fine of VND 80–100 million (approx. USD 3,400–4,260) and forcible removal of disseminated films for the failure to implement necessary technical measures for parental control and for receiving and handling platform users’ complaints and reports (Article 10.7dd).
Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 10, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Finance and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have issued regulations broadening the criteria for determining who qualifies as a “major shareholder” of licensed securities and digital asset business operators. Under relevant SEC regulations, major shareholders of a regulated entity must obtain regulatory approval and undergo screening by the SEC. The revised framework introduces both shareholding-based and control-based tests to determine which shareholders require regulatory approval for a wider range of indirect ownership structures and de facto control. The Ministry of Finance notification took effect on February 21, 2026, while the SEC’s clarifying rules took effect on March 4, 2026. These changes aim to enhance transparency around beneficial ownership and strengthen regulatory oversight of entities operating in Thailand’s capital markets. Expanded Definition Under the revised framework, a “major shareholder” now includes persons who directly or indirectly hold more than 10% of the voting rights in a regulated company, as well as persons who exercise control over the regulated company or its shares. This system of two separate tests, based on both shareholding and control, differs from the prior regime, which focused primarily on shareholding thresholds and applied a more limited method for determining indirect shareholdings. The two tests (detailed below) operate independently of each other, and any person identified by either of the tests will be deemed a major shareholder. Shareholding-Based Test Broadens Indirect Ownership Attribution For the shareholding-based test, the SEC recognizes two existing methods for identifying indirect ownership, together with a new proportional attribution method. Any person captured under these methods, which are described below, will be regarded as a major shareholder of the regulated company and must obtain SEC approval as a major shareholder. First, the existing framework continues to apply to both first-tier and chain ownership structures. Approval is required for (1) first-tier
Read More
March 6, 2026
Thailand’s Legislation Consideration Committee of the Ministry of Interior has ruled that in-game loot boxes in online games do not constitute gambling under the Gambling Act B.E. 2478 (1935). This first-of-its-kind ruling provides useful guidance for online game operators and digital entertainment companies operating in Thailand. Background The ruling came in response to an inquiry concerning an online role-playing game operator that launched a campaign featuring a loot box mechanism. The mechanism allowed players to purchase a token in exchange for the opportunity to receive a virtual loot box containing randomized in-game items. The key features of this were as follows: The items received were digital, noncash items usable only within the game. The items could not be exchanged, redeemed, or converted into cash with the game operator. Items may differ in rarity but remain purely virtual. The central question was whether paying money to obtain randomized in-game items constituted a risk-based activity involving the chance to receive money or property of monetary value, which would constitute gambling under the Gambling Act. Committee Ruling The committee reached the following conclusions regarding the characteristics of the game’s loot-box mechanism: No cash or monetary equivalent: Players did not receive cash or property that could be exchanged for cash. The in-game items were merely usage rights within the online game ecosystem. No real-world monetary valuation: There was no determination of item value in real currency, and no mechanism for redeeming or converting items into money with the game operator. Any off-platform trading of in-game items between players is irrelevant to online game operators, as any value arising from such transactions is determined by the market rather than by the operators themselves. Service fee characterization: Payments made by players purchasing in-game loot boxes constituted fees for online game services. Accordingly, the committee concluded
Read More
March 5, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a criminal complaint against a licensed digital asset broker, its overseas trading platform, and its executives for allegedly operating an unlicensed digital asset exchange targeting Thai customers. The case marks an escalation in the SEC’s enforcement efforts against unlicensed offshore platforms that attempt to serve Thai users through local licensed entities. Criminal Complaint On February 20, 2026, the SEC filed a criminal complaint with the Economic Crime Suppression Division against a local licensed digital asset broker, its overseas global trading platform, and its executives. The SEC alleges that the parties violated the Digital Asset Business Emergency Decree B.E. 2561 (2018) by cooperatively operating a digital asset exchange business on a cross-border basis since 2023 without the required SEC license. According to the SEC, the local broker promoted the overseas platform’s services to the public through Thai-language posts on social media channels, with services available exclusively to customers residing in Thailand. Access to the global platform was provided through the local broker’s website and mobile application. Customers who registered for the local broker’s services were automatically granted access to the global platform without having to undergo a separate identity verification process. The SEC also found that the local broker provided back-office system support services to the global platform. The SEC considers these activities to constitute joint operation of an unlicensed digital asset exchange. The former executives of the local broker are being held liable as the responsible persons during the relevant period. The SEC emphasized that the complaint initiates the criminal process, and the decision to prosecute or convict the accused parties will ultimately be made by law enforcement authorities and the criminal courts. Platform Blocking The SEC has also coordinated with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society to block public
Read More
February 27, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has officially implemented a new regulatory framework supervising systemically important retail payment systems (SIRPS), effective February 21, 2026, with PromptPay being the first payment system designated as a SIRPS. Under this new set of regulations, the BOT may designate payment systems under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017) as SIRPSs based on quantitative and qualitative assessments. Once a system is designated as a SIRPS, the operator becomes subject to expanded supervisory obligations beyond the general requirements of the Payment Systems Act. Enhanced Supervisory Requirements SIRPS operators must comply with a heightened supervisory regime across three key areas, outlined below. 1. Governance SIRPS operators must maintain robust and transparent governance structures, including: Balanced board composition, with at least one-third of the board comprising independent directors who represent stakeholders in the system (such as payment service providers, consumers, and experts). Independent directors may serve for no more than two consecutive terms. Subcommittees to assist the board in overseeing compliance, policy implementation, and operational strategy. Clear separation between executives responsible for risk and information security and those overseeing day-to-day business operations. Risk Management and System SecuritySIRPS operators must implement comprehensive risk management frameworks, including: Clear service agreements between the SIRPS operator and its direct participants (payment service providers who connect directly to the SIRPS), defining roles and responsibilities among stakeholders. These agreements must include obligations for direct SIRPS participants to supervise any indirect participants they onboard to ensure compliance with service agreements and business rules. A business continuity plan covering both IT and non-IT aspects, with annual review. The SIRPS must target service availability comparable to international payment infrastructures, including the ability to recover operations within two hours of a disruption and to maintain scalable operational capacity. Tools and controls to monitor and manage material or
Read More