Issue of April 2026 – Key Update of Law on Intellectual Property No. 131/2025/QH15 (“Law on Intellectual Property 2025”)

Dear Valued Client,

In the context of the rapidly growing digital economy and innovation-driven activities, intellectual property rights play a crucial role in protecting intangible assets and enhancing the competitiveness of businesses. To meet practical demands and align with international commitments, Vietnam’s legal framework on intellectual property has undergone significant updates in 2025, introducing various notable changes relating to the establishment, protection, exploitation, and enforcement of IP rights.

These changes not only directly impact the registration and protection of intellectual property rights but also influence business strategies, technology transfer, and legal risk management. Therefore, staying up to date with the latest regulations is essential to ensure compliance and optimize business interests. Our valued clients may refer to this legal update for further details.

Within the scope of this legal update, we will summarize and analyze several notable updates to current Law on Intellectual Property 2025 of Vietnam, including changes relating to the substantive examination mechanism for patent and trademark applications; regulations on the scope and duration of authorization in industrial property representation; as well as the initial recognition of artificial intelligence in this field. In addition, the article also clarifies regulations aimed at strengthening the enforcement of rights, including the introduction of preliminary injunctive measures and updates to the mechanism for determining damages caused by intellectual property infringement, thereby providing businesses with a more comprehensive view to proactively ensure compliance and manage legal risks.

1. Provision for Fast-Track Substantive Examination Mechanism for Patents and Trademarks

The Law on Intellectual Property 2025 has introduced an fast-track substantive examination mechanism for patents and trademarks. Specifically, “In cases prescribed by the Government, applicants may request fast-track substantive examination for patent and trademark applications. Such examination shall be completed within three months from the relevant time points specified in Clause 2 of this Article[1]”.

Accordingly, the Law on Intellectual Property 2025  introduces a “fast-track substantive examination” mechanism, significantly shortening the examination timeline to three months, compared to the previous timeframes of 12 months for patents and 5 months for trademarks.

However, this mechanism is not universally applicable but is limited to specific cases as determined by the Government. According to the draft decree currently under consultation, typical applicable cases may include:

Trademarks used for goods manufactured based on inventions listed in the Catalogue of strategic technologies and strategic technology products, or inventions developed for emergency situations relating to national security, defense, natural disasters, or epidemics;

Cases where a Trademark Registration Certificate is a mandatory document or condition for carrying out other legal procedures.

The introduction of this mechanism represents a significant step in administrative reform, helping to shorten the time for obtaining protection and better meet business needs. Nevertheless, its practical application will depend on detailed implementing regulations, requiring applicants to closely monitor forthcoming guidance.

2. Time Limit for Power of Attorney in Industrial Property Representation

The Law on Intellectual Property 2025 provides clearer rules on the validity period of powers of attorney for industrial property representation. Under Article 107 of the amended Law on Intellectual Property 2022, a power of attorney without a specified term was deemed valid indefinitely until terminated by the principal. However, under the new provisions of the 2025 Law on Intellectual Property, “the term of such authorization is now limited and shall be determined in accordance with the Civil Code.” Pursuant to Article 563 of the Civil Code 2015, “the term of authorization shall be agreed upon by the parties or prescribed by law; if neither applies, the power of attorney shall be valid for one year from the date of establishment.”

Accordingly, where no term is specified, the authorization will now default to one year instead of being considered indefinite.

3. Introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Intellectual Property

This marks the first time Law on intellectual property formally addresses artificial intelligence (AI). Under Article 96.1(d) of the amended Law on Intellectual Property 2025, the inventor or creator of a patent or industrial design must be a natural person. Therefore, AI cannot be recognized as an inventor or creator under current Vietnamese law.

In addition, Article 7.5 allows organizations and individuals to use legally published and publicly accessible intellectual property data for scientific research, experimentation, and AI training purposes, provided that such use does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate rights and interests of rights holders.

However, since AI training inherently involves copying, storing, and processing data, this provision may give rise to risks of infringement, particularly with respect to the right of reproduction, if conducted without consent or appropriate remuneration.

In practice, the condition of “not unreasonably prejudicing” rights holders remain broadly defined, lacks clear criteria, and is difficult to apply, especially where rights holders have limited ability to control data usage. This may result in risks such as AI-generated content competing with original works, reducing revenue streams, diluting creative identity, and causing consumer confusion.

4. Supplmenting provision for injunctive measures and compensation levels for damages arising from intellectual property rights infringements

Article 205 of the Law on Intellectual Property 2025, the legal framework for damages has been strengthened to better protect rights holders. In cases where material damages cannot be determined based on statutory grounds, the court-awarded damages cap has been increased from VND 500 million to VND 1 billion. This reflects a stricter enforcement approach and enhanced deterrence against infringement.

Furthermore, to address challenges in the digital environment, Article 202 Law on Intellectual Property 2025 introduces interim measures applicable to intellectual property infringement in cyberspace. Competent authorities may, among others, order the concealment or disabling of access to infringing content, accounts, websites, applications, or internet identifiers. These measures serve as an important legal tool to promptly and effectively prevent and address IP infringements in an increasingly digitalized landscape.

Overall, the Law on Intellectual Property 2025 introduces significant changes toward modernization and enhanced enforcement efficiency, as reflected in improvements to examination procedures, clarification of authorization mechanisms, initial approaches to issues related to artificial intelligence, and the strengthening of rights protection measures, particularly in the digital environment. These changes not only help shorten processing time and improve transparency, but also enhance the protection of rights holders; however, for effective implementation in practice, businesses should proactively monitor detailed implementing regulations and review and adjust their intellectual property strategies to align with the new legal landscape.

For trademarks, industrial designs, and geographical indications: The time limit is calculated from the publication date of the application.

As always, we hope you find this update useful and look forward to continuing to work with you in the near future.

Best regards,

ENT Law LLC

[1] For patents: The time limit is calculated from the publication date of the application if the request for substantive examination is filed before the publication date, or from the date of receipt of the request for substantive examination if such request is filed after the publication date.