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 24, 2024

Vietnam’s Public Domain – Digging the Gold Mine with Care

Managing Intellectual Property

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 also make derivative works from them — including prequels, sequels, spinoffs, and remakes using this particular version of the Mickey Mouse character.

The public domain privilege also largely benefits other type of works in Vietnam. Vietnamese publisher Dong A, for example, has introduced the Classic Literature bookshelf (Dong A Classics) with the release of 26 famous world-classic books that have come into the public domain, such as Tom Sawyer and Treasure Island. Other publishing houses and websites releasing e-books have taken advantage of the public domain to reissue works with expired copyrights, which can be gold mines for publishers. However, these gold miners should be careful when digging such precious ore, or they could face challenges to their claim.

Risk of infringing author’s moral rights

Article 19 of the IP Law lists the moral rights of authors, in which one controversial regulation is the right to “Protect the integrity of their works, and prevent others from modifying, mutilating or distorting their works in any form prejudicial to their honor and reputation.” As this moral right is protected perpetually and is non-transferable, the action of modifying a work, even after the protection term has expired, may still constitute infringement.

However, in practice, it is often difficult to determine whether a modification is “mutilating or distorting their works in any form prejudicial to their honor and reputation.” Proving the value of the works themselves is burdensome because there are no common criteria for evaluation. The evaluation of literary and artistic works is mainly based on each person’s subjective perspective.

Complications of derivative works

In addition to the copyright owned by the author, there are also rights to derivative works, which may still be valid. Therefore, even if an original work falls into the public domain, use of its derivative works may still constitute infringement.

Confusion can be caused when the copyright to a song (i.e., sheet music) has come into the public domain, but the related rights of a recording of such song are still in force. In 2021, before an AFF Cup soccer match between Vietnam and Laos, the viewing audience was surprised (and angry) when the Vietnamese national anthem “Tien Quan Ca” was muted on a streaming channel “due to copyright reasons.” It is commonly known that the song (including both music and lyrics) was donated by the family of the late musician Van Cao to the people of Vietnam. The song is in the public domain and anyone can record it or make derivative works from it. However, the reason behind this incident laid in the fact that the recording of “Tien Quan Ca” used in the match was produced and owned by foreign record label Marco Polo, and was still protected under copyright laws.

In contrast, when derivative works are made from works that have already entered the public domain, such as folk-art paintings, their creators can face an uphill climb defending their creations from copycat infringers, as anyone is free to derive works from the same source material and the creativity of the works will be difficult to assess.

Different protection terms in different countries

Because the copyright protection term of works can be different from country to country, use of works from foreign authors/right owners must be handled with extra caution.

For example, the American writer and presenter Dale Carnegie, author of the famous self-help book How to Win Friends and Influence People (Vietnamese title Dac Nhan Tam) died in 1955. Per the Berne Convention, the copyright of the work expired in Vietnam in 2005. However, in the U.S., the provisions of the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act extend the term of copyright protection to 70 years after the author’s death. Thus, the copyright protection period for How to Win Friends and Influence People in the U.S. has not yet expired.

In 2014, there was a dispute between Dale Carnegie Vietnam (the local franchise of U.S.-based training company Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc.) against a former employee using a similar training course for his own business. As some copyrighted works of Dale Carnegie had fallen into the public domain in Vietnam, the company intended to bring the suit to a U.S. court where the copyright term was still valid.

To sum up, although public domain regulations in Vietnam and other countries can be beneficial for society as the free use may stimulate creation of other works, there are some more complex peripheral legal issues that should be well considered.

This article first appeared in Managing Intellectual Property.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 27, 2026
In March 2025, Thailand’s Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court (IP&IT Court) issued a landmark judgment in favor of Luckin Coffee, China’s leading retail coffee chain. The judgment marked a significant turnaround following earlier trademark litigation involving Luckin Coffee from 2021 to 2023 that had generated widespread public attention and raised questions about the protection available to legitimate foreign brand owners in Thailand. In a significant subsequent development, Thailand’s Court of Appeal for Specialized Cases has now affirmed the IP&IT Court’s judgment in its entirety. The appellate decision brings clarity to one of Thailand’s most closely watched trademark disputes. Significantly, this is the first case in Thailand to formally recognize the trademark squatting principle. The Court of Appeal confirmed that Luckin Coffee has a better right to the disputed mark and ordered cancellation of the defendants’ trademark registration—a key application of the “better right” doctrine. The court also upheld the substantial damages awarded at first instance, providing important guidance on assessing harm from systematic trademark squatting. Award-Winning Judgment Affirmed in Its Entirety The significance of the first-instance judgment extended beyond the outcome for Luckin Coffee. The IP&IT Court judgment was subsequently recognized in the IP&IT Court’s Distinguished Judgment Awards in 2025, reflecting the complexity, novelty, and legal significance of the issues considered in the case. The defendants nevertheless appealed the judgment, challenging several key aspects of the IP&IT Court’s decision. Luckin Coffee continued to entrust Tilleke & Gibbins as their sole attorney to pursue the case at the appellate level. After considering the defendants’ appeal and Luckin Coffee’s submissions in response, the Court of Appeal affirmed the first-instance judgment in its entirety. The judgment was announced on July 8, 2026. Better Right to the Marks The Court of Appeal confirmed Luckin Coffee’s superior rights. The orders include cancellation
July 24, 2026
As food innovation continues to accelerate, manufacturers are increasingly introducing ingredients derived from new sources, produced using novel technologies, or lacking a significant history of human consumption. While these innovations create new opportunities for the food industry, they also raise important questions regarding consumer safety. For this reason, many jurisdictions, including Thailand, the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, Canada, and Singapore, require a premarket safety assessment for novel food ingredients before they can be placed on the market. The objective of this assessment is to ensure that each ingredient is safe for its intended use and level of consumption, does not present toxicological, allergenic, microbiological, or nutritional concerns, and will not mislead consumers. Scientific authorities typically evaluate the ingredient’s identity, manufacturing process, composition, specifications, anticipated dietary exposure, toxicological information, nutritional impact, and history of use before determining whether it can be marketed. Against this background, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently took an important step toward improving regulatory transparency by publishing, for the first time, a consolidated public list of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process, including substances determined to be novel foods and those determined not to fall within the novel food category. The list identifies the approved substances, the corresponding manufacturers or importers, approval dates, and the approved conditions of use. Although the publication does not change the existing legal framework governing novel food approvals, it provides businesses with greater visibility into the Thai FDA’s regulatory precedents and the types of substances that have previously been accepted through the safety assessment process. The full announcement is available on the Thai FDA’s website. As the list is now publicly available, it also provides useful insight into the types of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process.
July 24, 2026
Indonesia has updated its fee framework for intellectual property (IP)-related government services, with implications for IP owners, licensees, lenders, digital platforms, and businesses operating in the country. Government Regulation No. 30 of 2026 on Types and Tariffs of Non-Tax State Revenue Applicable to the Ministry of Law (GR 30/2026) was promulgated on July 2, 2026, and will take effect on August 1, 2026. Key Takeaways GR 30/2026, which replaces the relevant IP service fees under Government Regulation No. 45 of 2024, reorganizes the fee schedule into separate categories for copyright, industrial designs, patents, layout designs of integrated circuits, trade secrets, trademarks, geographical indications, IP enforcement, and other categories. The most commercially relevant changes include a new copyright recordation tariff exemption for songs and music, higher fees for several trademark and geographical indication services, new IP enforcement service fees, and a new fee type for registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects. In addition, this is the first major update for trademark fees in approximately 10 years. GR 30/2026 is significant not only as a fee update but also as a further indication of Indonesia’s increasing recognition of IP as a financeable commercial asset. By expressly assigning fees to the registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects, the regulation places IP-backed collateral filings within the Ministry of Law’s administrative service framework. While GR 30/2026 does not create a new secured-transactions regime, this development is relevant for lenders, borrowers, and IP owners structuring financing arrangements secured by trademarks, patents, copyrights, industrial designs, or other registrable IP rights in Indonesia. Copyright: New Fee Exemption for Songs and Music Recordation For copyright, GR 30/2026 creates a fee-exempt category for recordation of works or related-rights products for songs or music, while maintaining a separate category for other works and related-rights products. It
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