New decree strengthens Vietnam’s copyright framework in the AI era

Vietnam’s Decree No. 134/2026/ND‑CP, which took effect on April 9 2026, plays an important role in detailing and implementing Vietnam’s Intellectual Property Law (the IP Law) in the context of rapid digital transformation and the growing application of AI. The new decree provides comprehensive guidance on the application of copyright and related‑rights regulations, addressing key issues such as:

• Authorship;

• Ownership;

• Statutory exceptions and limitations;

• Registration procedures; and

• Enforcement mechanisms.

Through these measures, Decree 134 seeks to achieve an appropriate balance between safeguarding the legitimate interests of rights holders and fostering innovation, research, and technological advancement, thereby strengthening the state’s framework for the effective management, protection, and exploitation of IP in the digital and AI‑driven environment.

Some notable aspects of Decree 134 are discussed below.

Decree 134 provides important guidance on the determination of copyright and related rights in works created with the assistance of AI. Article 5a reaffirms the principle that human creativity remains central to copyright protection, clarifying that copyright or related rights arise only where a human:

• Makes a substantial and decisive intellectual contribution;

• Exercises effective control over the creative outcome; and

• Assumes responsibility for the content and its legality.

At the same time, the provision confirms that AI is regarded solely as a technological tool rather than a rights‑holding subject, thus ensuring consistency with the fundamental concepts of authorship and ownership under the IP Law. By introducing requirements on transparency, proof of human contribution, and compliance with AI‑specific labelling and technical marking obligations, Decree 134 establishes a clear and enforceable legal framework for the responsible use of AI in creative activities.

Article 37a of Decree 134 sets out the specific conditions under which copyrighted texts and data may be lawfully used for scientific research, experimentation, and the training of AI systems, requiring that such use be based on lawfully published materials, accessed from legitimate sources, and conducted without circumventing or disabling technological protection measures implemented by rights holders. It further establishes substantive limitations to ensure that such use:

• Does not conflict with the normal exploitation of protected works;

• Does not cause unreasonable prejudice to the legitimate interests of authors, performers, and rights holders; and

• Does not result in AI outputs that substitute the market or create unfair competition with protected subject matter.

The right of authors, performers, and rights holders to reserve their copyright and related rights against this use of protected texts and data is also recognised under Article 37b. Such reservations must be exercised through clear and publicly accessible mechanisms, including machine‑readable rights‑management information, technological protection measures, or public declarations made via authorised collective management organisations. This reservation right specifically does not apply where the use of texts and data fully satisfies the strict conditions set out in Article 37a.

Users of copyrighted texts and data for research, experimentation, and AI training are required to retain technical records, training data, and usage data in accordance with applicable AI‑related regulations, and to provide such information to competent authorities upon request for verification, dispute resolution, or enforcement purposes. In addition, Article 37c reinforces the obligation to respect the reservation of rights exercised by rights holders, notably clarifying that where AI‑trained systems are commercially exploited, users must comply with the foregoing obligations and fulfil royalty‑payment duties in accordance with the law. This ensures that AI innovation is aligned with fair remuneration and effective rights protection.

To strengthen the institutional framework for copyright protection and enforcement in the digital environment, Decree 134 introduces a centralised, specialised database on copyright and related rights. This publicly accessible database will consolidate key data on registrations, collective management organisations, royalty tariffs, intermediary service providers, and other relevant matters to enhance information sharing, regulatory oversight, and lawful access, while ensuring compliance with data protection and confidentiality requirements.

Article 8.4 clarifies the scope of subject matter excluded from copyright protection by providing detailed interpretations of ideas, slogans, and the independent title of a work. The provision reaffirms that ideas or creative concepts not fixed in a material form, slogans lacking independent creativity beyond ordinary linguistic expression, and titles considered separately from the content of the work do not constitute protected works.

Article 38.9 formally recognises the legal validity of electronic copyright and related‑rights registration certificates, an important step towards modernising copyright administration. The provision authorises the competent authority to issue certificates in electronic form as the default, while allowing paper certificates to be issued upon request, and confirms that electronic certificates have the same legal value as paper documents.

Under Article 39.2a, the relevant authority must temporarily suspend the examination of registration applications where the subject matter is involved in an ongoing dispute, complaint, denunciation, or criminal investigation relating to IP infringement.

By requiring formal notification to applicants and clearly defining the duration of such suspension, this important procedural safeguard helps prevent the issuance of registration certificates that could interfere with judicial, arbitral, or investigative proceedings, while ensuring procedural fairness through the resumption of processing or the return of applications once the suspension period ends.

In summary, Decree 134 represents a significant step forward in modernising and strengthening Vietnam’s copyright and related‑rights framework in response to rapid digital transformation and the growing impact of AI. By providing detailed guidance on AI‑assisted creation, lawful data use for AI training, rights holder reservations, user responsibilities, registration procedures, and digital administration, the decree enhances legal certainty and regulatory coherence while maintaining a human‑centric approach to copyright protection.

At the same time, it reinforces transparency, accountability, and fair remuneration, ensuring that technological innovation proceeds in harmony with the legitimate interests of authors, performers, and rights holders.

Taken together, these measures demonstrate the state’s commitment to effective IP management and to fostering a balanced, sustainable environment for creativity, innovation, and economic development in the digital and AI‑driven landscape.