VCI Legal – 29th September, 2026

On 24 September 2026, at its plenary session, the Judicial Council of the Supreme People’s Court approved three new intellectual property (IP) precedents together1. The precedents deal with questions that frequently decide the outcome of an IP case: how damages for software copyright infringement may be calculated, when attorneys’ fees can be recovered; how can one prove authorship in a case where there is evidence to the contrary in the intellectual property dispute case; and when trademark-infringing conduct may amount to a criminal offence.

Once the precedents are officially published, courts will have a reference point when handling cases with similar facts and legal issues. The Judicial Council also reviewed additional draft resolutions and precedents for possible adoption, which suggests that Vietnam’s body of precedents will keep growing and increasingly shape how courts interpret the law in IP disputes. For brand owners and rights holders, the facts and reasoning of each precedent will matter most when deciding whether it supports an enforcement action, a defense, or a claim for damages or costs. The three precedents can be summarized as follows:

Software copyright damages:

As computer software and digital products increasingly become major corporate assets, it is imperative to establish regulations protecting these forms of intellectual property. When copyright infringement occurs, proving damages and determining the appropriate level of compensation often prove complex. This case precedent serves as a reference not only for judges handling similar legal disputes but also for rights holders seeking redress for damages.

According to Draft Case Precedent No. 16/2026 regarding the “basis for determining compensation for damages caused by copyright infringement of computer software,” Company N (the defendant) was administratively sanctioned by competent authorities for copying and using “Pro/Engineer Wildfire 5.0” software—a program protected by copyright in the United States since September 10, 2009. Company P (the plaintiff) subsequently sought compensation for damages. By relying on the price for the transfer of the right to use the copyright in the computer software, specifically the actual price realized in Vietnam shortly before the infringement, as provided by the Plaintiff—the Court established a basis for determining the compensation amount in accordance with Article 204 and Article 205 (Clause 1, Point b) of the Law on Intellectual Property, as well as Section B, Part I, Item 1, Point 1.3 of Joint Circular No. 02/2008/TTLT-TANDTC-VKSNDTC-BVHTT&DL-BKH&CN-BTP dated April 3, 2008.

This provides the court and the disputing parties with a clearer, evidence-based method for valuing claims regarding software copyright infringement, an area that often presents practical challenges.

Oligation of proving copyright:

This case precedent focuses on how the Court evaluates evidence regarding a work created and published by a party prior to the formal registration of copyright by the rights holder. It aims to ensure absolute protection of copyright against attempts to exploit legal regulations for unfair advantage.

This pertains to Draft Case Precedent No. 24/2026 regarding “Compensation for legal fees and the burden of proving copyright in the presence of contradictory evidence in intellectual property disputes.” Specifically, the Plaintiff (Truong Minh N) authored the poem “Gánh mẹ” and posted it on Facebook on June 14, 2014. Subsequently, the Plaintiff discovered that the Defendant (Doan Dong D) had used the poem’s lyrics for the song “Gánh mẹ”, which had been granted Copyright Registration Certificate No. 2358/2019/QTG on April 24, 2019; without obtaining permission or paying royalties or remuneration. Regarding legal fees, the Plaintiff submitted a paid legal services contract; having established the Defendant’s infringement, the Court ordered the Defendant to compensate the Plaintiff for these legal costs. Regarding the proof of copyright, the Plaintiff provided evidence to the contrary, demonstrating that they were the author of the poem containing content identical to the lyrics of the musical work in question. Therefore, even though the defendant has been granted a copyright registration certificate, the defendant is obliged to prove their copyright ownership regarding this portion of the lyrics, in accordance with the provisions of Article 6, Clause 1; Article 14, Clause 3; Article 49, Clause 3; Article 204; and Article 205, Clause 3 of the Law on Intellectual Property.

Criminal industrial property infringement:

According to Judgment No. 187/2025/HS-ST dated December 3, 2025, regarding the business activities of Hoang Van Q, an investigation revealed the presence of goods bearing marks identical or confusingly similar to trademarks registered in Vietnam by renowned brands such as Christian Dior and Dolce & Gabbana, without the trademark owners’ consent. The precedent establishes that, provided all legal elements are met, such conduct must be classified as the crime of infringing upon industrial property rights, pursuant to Article 226 of the Penal Code. This provides a clearer basis for distinguishing this offense from other potentially applicable charges, such as the production or trading of counterfeit goods.

Consequently, the development of case law regarding legal classification is significant for standardizing the identification of the legal nature of such conduct, particularly as industrial property rights become increasingly integral to production, distribution, and brand development activities.

The resolution on the adjudication of IP disputes

Alongside the precedents, the resolution on the adjudication of IP disputes may have a broader procedural impact. The June 2026 consultation draft covered standing, evidence, expert opinions, damages, attorneys’ fees, remedies, international treaties, and administrative litigation.

Strategic recommendations for businesses

For IP owners (copyright and trademark holders)

• Keep license agreements and records of comparable transactions that can help establish the value of a damages claim, especially for software;
• Keep dated records showing when protected works were created and published, and who authored and owns them;
• Set up clear processes to create, store and retrieve records before a dispute arises, since contemporaneous records are generally more reliable than evidence reconstructed after litigation begins.

For businesses dealing in branded goods or facing IP claims

• Review sourcing and supply chains, as trading in goods bearing identical or confusingly similar signs without the owner’s consent may attract criminal liability;
• Reassess exposure in software use and licensing, given that damages may be benchmarked against earlier license fees;
• Monitor the official publication of the three precedents and the resolution and promptly assess their effect on current or future disputes and on the wider IP strategy.

About VCI Legal:

VCI Legal is an award-winning business law firm in Vietnam with a wide range of legal and corporate services, among other things, corporate, banking & finance, tax, labor & HR, real estate and dispute resolution with special focus on international investment disputes, We also offer our specialized type of service called “In-House Counsel Service” with the aim of assisting our clients in dealing with all types of internal and external issues arising from their day-to-day operations and business activities. With our offices in both Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City, we have a tremendous depth of experience in providing well-reasoned and comprehensive legal advice to not only multinationals and Fortune 500 companies, but also small and medium enterprises.

Our professional team comprises one of the leading law firms in Vietnam with service quality highly recommended and acknowledged by international legal service reviewers such as: The Legal 500, AsiaLaw Profiles, IFLR, KPMG’s Tax Directors’ Handbook, Acquisition International, ACQ Global, Global Law Experts, Finance Monthly, and Chambers & Partners.

For many years, VCI Legal has been ranked among the top law firms in Vietnam for corporate, finance, insurance, taxation, employment, intellectual property and investment. With a “Can Do Attitude” combined with a “Know How” capacity, our firm is big enough to provide comprehensive legal support for any in-house legal matters, yet small enough to care about each of our clients. We undertake each engagement with the mindset of a long-term relationship, with the will to give whatever it takes to understand and fulfill your needs.

Ho Chi Minh City

Suite P7-42.18, Vinhomes Central Park, 720A Dien Bien Phu, Thanh My Tay Ward, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Tel.: (+84) 028 3827 2029 Fax: (+84) 028 3823 4436

Hanoi

Suite 1903, Floor 19, W1 Tower, Vinhomes Westpoint, Pham Hung, Tu Liem Ward, Hanoi City, Vietnam

Tel.: (+84) 024 3936 4985 – (+84) 024 3936 4987

Affiliated Offices: Beijing – Shanghai – Hanoi – Ho Chi Minh City – Singapore – New Delhi – Dubai – Doha – Zurich – Paris – Rome – Brescia – Washington D.C. – Los Angeles