All material subject to strictly enforced copyright laws. © 2022 Managing IP is part of the Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC group.

Vietnam: Is site blocking the solution to online piracy?

Websites offering pirated content can inflict tremendous damage on copyright holders, but due to the simplicity of sharing digital content in today's high-speed, always-connected online environment, copyright protection is a serious challenge for both rights holders and government authorities.

Copyright owners such as professional sports leagues, movie studios, and legitimate streaming sites are increasingly turning to site blocking, which targets internet service providers (ISPs) to prevent users accessing websites hosting pirated content. In many countries around the world, this has become a common approach to protecting the legitimate rights of copyright holders.

In Vietnam, although paid streaming services are gaining a foothold, online copyright infringement and pirated content are still widespread. Site blocking may offer a possible alternative for rights holders in the fight against online piracy.

Obligations of ISPs under the law

While not explicitly stated in Vietnamese law, the obligations of ISPs to block access to pirated content are implied or suggested in various legal documents:

Information Technology Law 2006: Under Article 16.3, at the request of competent authorities, transmitters of digital information must promptly implement necessary measures to stop illegal access to information or deletion of information. As ISPs transmit digital information, they are therefore obliged to stop illegal access to information, through methods which could include site blocking, upon a request from the authorities.

Joint Circular No. 07/2012/TTLT-BTTTT-BVHTTDL on obligations of intermediary service providers in protection of copyright and related rights on the internet and telecom network environments: Under Article 5.3, ISPs have the obligation to remove and delete digital content which violates copyright and related rights, and to cut, stop or suspend internet or telecom connections (of their customers/users), upon the receipt of a written request from the authorities. Although preventing or blocking access to sites not hosted/operated by the ISP itself is not mentioned, there is an implication that ISPs could be required to do so, if there is a request from the authorities.

Cybersecurity Law 2018: Under Article 21, ISPs have the responsibility to cooperate with professional cybersecurity forces of the Ministry of Public Security to prevent, detect and respond to cybersecurity emergencies. Cybersecurity emergencies are events in cyberspace that seriously violate national security, public order, or the lawful rights and interests of an organisation or individual, and are further defined to include IP and copyright infringement. ISPs that detect a cybersecurity emergency must promptly inform a professional cybersecurity force and implement response measures which include preventing or minimising the damage caused by the emergency. In the case of copyright infringement, this could be done by initiating a site-blocking action. The law, however, does not specifically provide guidance on how to determine the seriousness of a violation.

Circular 38/2016/TT-BTTTT on cross-border provision of public information: Article 5.1 provides a mechanism for blocking Vietnamese users' access to "illegal online information." However, this only covers anti-state propaganda, pornography, defamation etc. and does not explicitly include IP or copyright infringement.

Based on the above analysis, ISPs under Vietnamese law would seem to have an obligation to block their users from accessing infringing websites, but only upon an order from the competent authorities. Without such orders, there is no requirement to block users' access to pirated content.

Route to obtaining site blocking order

In theory, rights holders may rely on the court (via preliminary injunction or final judgment) or other competent authorities, such as the Authority of Broadcasting and Electronic Information (ABEI), to seek a site-blocking order.

In practice, no court orders on site blocking have yet been recorded. This may be the result of not having any rights holders requesting such actions before the court yet, due to obstacles in achieving preliminary injunctions (only a few have been granted in IP disputes in Vietnam) and the length of time required for obtaining final court judgments (normally 10-14 months).

As a result, so far, the ABEI has been the most active authority in administering site blocking. Last year, one of the very first site-blocking actions on the basis of copyright and related rights infringement was granted by the ABEI, in which it ordered multiple ISPs to block users' access to 18 infringing websites which were illegally broadcasting events from the Asian Games.


Site blocking is not a perfect or final solution, and in some cases can feel like chasing a moving target, as infringing websites can change their online locations easily and at a relatively low cost (e.g. from .vn to .org). However, it is still a worthwhile tactic for owners of valuable copyrights, as it can be an effective deterrent to would-be infringers with limited resources or determination, and can reduce large-scale piracy by decentralising the pirated content and making it harder to find. Frustrated users forced to spend countless hours tracking down the football matches or movies they want to watch are likely more willing to pay for legal access.

In the long run, in addition to seeking site-blocking orders, rights holders should coordinate with other authorities like the police to handle infringement at the root through more serious actions like initiating criminal lawsuits.


Loc Xuan Le

Duc Anh Tran

Tilleke & Gibbins

HAREC Building, 4th Floor

4A Lang Ha Street, Ba Dinh District, Hanoi, Vietnam 

Tel: +84 4 3772 6688

Fax: +84 4 3772 5568

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

ITC counsel explain why companies will continue to bring trade secret complaints to the venue and talk about how to tackle challenges
Google and Sonos patent war continues; CNIPA finishes first administrative patent trials; Oppo halts German sales after Nokia wins; Chugai settles Fresenius suit; Taylor Swift claims she never heard Playas Gon’ Play; AI can’t be inventor, says Federal Circuit
Brands and retailers should educate their marketing departments and get help from their sales teams so private label products don’t become a major problem
The UK government wants to stop local tech going to China, but tech transfer offices often have few options
Hubertus Schacht of the Munich Regional Court shares his thoughts on German SEP trends and their influence on the UPC
Trademark counsel applaud the EUIPO’s new filing system but reveal it has come with teething issues
The executive vice president of partnerships and acquisitions at the NPE explains how his company’s deal with Intel came to be
South Korean lawyers welcome the trademark guidelines but say the appellate board, courts, and other IP offices may not necessarily agree with the KIPO
Lawyers for Craig Wright will seek approval for expert evidence to help the England and Wales High Court understand how autism affects his character
IP counsel say rude judges can dent their confidence but that the effect on clients should not be underestimated
We use cookies to provide a personalized site experience.
By continuing to use & browse the site you agree to our Privacy Policy.
I agree