On the afternoon of December 5, the Ho Chi Minh City Intellectual Property Association organized a discussion on “Copyright exceptions for AI and their impact on Vietnam’s creative industry”, attracting more than 120 speakers and experts to attend.

According to experts, the Draft Law amending and supplementing a number of articles of the Law on Intellectual Property, which is being discussed at the 10th Session of the 15th National Assembly, is built on the spirit of being a framework law to ensure full institutionalization of the Party and State’s major policies and orientations on science and technology (S&T), innovation (I&T) and digital transformation (DCT), especially the spirit of Resolution No. 57-NQ/TW dated December 22, 2024 of the Politburo on breakthroughs in the development of S&T, I&T and national DCT.

The draft puts humans at the center, requiring AI to serve with human supervision in important decisions; promotes transparency, responsibility, and safety; clearly defines legal responsibilities; focuses on developing infrastructure, Vietnamese models, using AI for domestic public services, promoting green AI, startup sandboxes, tax incentives, investment funds, and AI commercialization, demonstrating a comprehensive vision of AI.

Delegates attending the discussion. Photo: QUANG HUY

Ms. Nguyen Minh Huong, Permanent Vice President of the Intellectual Property Association of Ho Chi Minh City, expressed concern when the draft considered including the “text and data mining exception” – commonly known as the “TDM exception” – in the law, allowing technology companies to use copyrighted objects to develop AI systems without having to ask for permission or pay the copyright owner. This is a problem that needs to be clarified.

Lawyer Phan Vũ Tuấn, Vice Chairman of the Ho Chi Minh City Intellectual Property Association, delivered his paper at the seminar. Photo: QUANG HUY

Similarly, Lawyer Phan Vũ Tuấn, Vice Chairman of the Ho Chi Minh City Intellectual Property Association, stated that considering the addition of exceptions for TDM into Vietnam’s Intellectual Property Law is a necessary requirement in the current context. However, such exceptions must be built on the principle of balancing interests – the core principle of the intellectual property protection system. Any exception mechanism must ensure harmony between the rights and legitimate interests of rights holders, the interests of the community in accessing knowledge, and the need to create a favorable legal environment for the development of new technologies.

Musician Tao Minh Hung shared at the seminar. Photo: QUANG HUY

Lawyer Pham Vu Khanh Toan, Head of Phạm & Associates Law Office, noted Article 7.5 of the Draft, which allows AI companies to use “published data sources” to train models without paying the owners. He emphasized that this provision needs to be carefully studied by the National Assembly before approval.

Agreeing with this view, musician Tao Minh Hùng, representative of IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry) in Vietnam, affirmed that while the music industry welcomes AI, it faces major copyright challenges when AI uses copyrighted data for training without permission, thereby competing with the original works. This poses a significant challenge for the Intellectual Property Law, especially regarding copyright protection for works created by AI and the use of data to train AI. It requires balancing the promotion of innovation with the protection of creators’ rights. Amending the Intellectual Property Law and considering copyright exceptions for AI is a global issue. Vietnam needs a cautious approach that harmonizes economic and cultural interests with legitimate rights, avoids weakening the motivation for traditional music creation, and ensures fairness and transparency.

Musician Tao Minh Hung shared at the seminar. Photo: QUANG HUY

From another perspective, Mr. Nguyen Trinh Hoan, Vice Chairman of the Vietnam Association for the Promotion and Development of Cinema, expressed concerns about balancing interests between AI development and copyright protection in the creative industries, particularly cinema. He suggested that authorities carefully consider TDM in the Intellectual Property Law when applying AI, requiring a comprehensive assessment of its impact on rights holders, and called for a transparent dialogue mechanism to build balanced policies that support both content and technology industries.