Author: Editor VCD

Does digitizing documents without permission violate copyright?

Written by Editor VCD on 11 March, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright Registration, Written works. No Comments on Does digitizing documents without permission violate copyright?

In today’s digital transformation, digitizing documents has become a common practice in academic and professional life. Many individuals, agencies, and organizations often scan, photograph, or convert paper books, textbooks, and documents into electronic files for easier storage, sharing, or use. So, does digitizing documents without permission violate copyright? This article from VCD will help you.

Is digitizing documents considered copying a work?

In reality, many people believe that digitization is simply a change in storage format, not “copying.” However, legally, when a document is scanned or photographed, a new version of that document is created in electronic data format. This electronic version can be stored, sent, or shared just like the paper version. This means that the content of the work has been duplicated.

According to the Intellectual Property Law, copying is understood as creating copies of a work by any means or form, including electronic copies. Furthermore, the right to copy is an exclusive property right of the copyright owner. Only the owner has the right to permit or prohibit others from performing this act.

Therefore, legally speaking, digitization is a form of copying a work, even if it does not alter the original content. Consequently, this activity falls within the scope of copyright law.

Cases where copying does not require permission from the author or copyright owner

Although the right to copy is an exclusive property right of the copyright owner, the law does not protect this right absolutely. The Intellectual Property Law stipulates several exceptions where organizations and individuals are allowed to copy a work without permission and without paying royalties.

Specifically, according to regulations on “copyright limitations,” individuals are allowed to copy parts of a work for their own scientific research or study purposes. This is a common need in practice, for example, photographing or scanning a few pages of reference materials for further reading. Because the use is personal, not for distribution, and does not replace the original on the market, it does not cause significant damage to the economic interests of the copyright holder.

In addition, libraries and archives are also allowed to copy works for preservation, storage, or to serve readers for research. Similarly, reasonable citation of works for teaching, illustration in education, or news reporting is also permitted by law without requiring permission, provided that the source and author’s name are clearly stated.

However, it should be noted that these exceptions only apply within reasonable limits and are not for commercial purposes. If the entire work is copied, reproduced in large quantities, shared publicly on the internet, or used for commercial purposes, then that act exceeds the limits permitted by law and may be considered copyright infringement.

Therefore, it can be understood that the law only permits copying in situations where it is truly necessary, serves the public interest, and does not affect the normal exploitation of the work. When copying reduces the owner’s control or revenue, the exception will no longer apply.

Does digitizing documents without permission violate copyright?

From the above analysis, it can be seen that since digitization is considered a copying act, in principle, digitizing documents without the consent of the copyright owner may be considered copyright infringement.

In practice, many digitization practices pose clear risks of infringement, such as scanning entire books to use instead of the original, storing digital documents for the entire organization to use, or uploading digitized documents to the internet for widespread sharing. These actions can reduce the demand for purchasing or legally using the work, thereby directly impacting the economic interests of the copyright holder. In such cases, the infringer may be required to remove the material, compensate for damages, or face administrative penalties.

However, not all digitization practices constitute infringement. If only a small portion is copied for personal study or research, without distribution or commercial purposes, it may fall under the category of fair use permitted by law. Therefore, determining whether an infringement has occurred depends on the specific circumstances, including the purpose of use, the scope of copying, and the extent to which it affects the copyright holder’s rights.

In other words, while the act of digitization is the same, the legal consequences can differ depending on the method and purpose of use.

The above is the article “Does digitizing documents without permission violate copyright?” that VCD has sent to you. We hope this article is helpful to you.

Sincerely,

FAQ

Question 1: Is it mandatory to obtain permission from the author or copyright owner for digitizing documents?

In principle, yes. Scanning, photographing, or converting paper documents to electronic files is considered copying a work – a property right belonging to the owner. According to the Intellectual Property Law, copying requires the owner’s permission, except in exceptional cases stipulated by law.

Question 2: In what cases is digitizing documents not considered a copyright infringement?

Digitization will not be considered an infringement if only a portion is copied for personal study, research, or for archiving, teaching, or library purposes within the limits permitted by law. Conversely, if the entire document is digitized, widely shared, or used for commercial purposes, it may be considered a copyright infringement.

Is the right to name a work protected indefinitely?

Written by Editor VCD on 11 March, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright Registration, Copyright-related rights. No Comments on Is the right to name a work protected indefinitely?

The title of a work is not only an identifying mark but also reflects the creative imprint, brand value, and reputation of the author or owner. However, many people wonder: Is the right to name a work protected permanently? How is the protection of a work’s title regulated by law? This article from VCD will help you answer that question.

What is the right to name a work?

The right to name a work is the author’s right to choose, decide, and use a suitable name for their created work. The title of a work is not simply a way of identification but also reflects the personal imprint, creative message, and spiritual value that the author wants to convey to the public. In many cases, the title of a work is also linked to the reputation, prestige, and commercial value of the author or owner.

According to Article 19 of the Intellectual Property Law, the author’s moral rights include:

The right to name the work;

The right to use their real name or pseudonym on the work;

The right to publish or allow others to publish the work;

The right to protect the integrity of the work, preventing others from modifying, abridging, or distorting it in a way that affects the author’s honor and reputation.

Thus, the right to name is a fundamental and particularly important moral right, as it is linked to the author’s identity and creative imprint. The law protects this right to ensure that the author has full control over how their work is recognized by the public, while also preventing unauthorized use or alteration of the work’s name that affects their legitimate rights and interests.

Is the right to name a work protected indefinitely?

According to Clause 1, Article 27 of the Intellectual Property Law, the following moral rights of the author are protected without time limit:

The right to name the work;

The right to use one’s real name or pseudonym on the work;

The right to protect the integrity of the work.

This provision clearly shows that moral rights are linked to the honor, reputation, and spiritual value of the author and therefore need to be protected long-term, regardless of the economic exploitation period of the work.

This means:

The right to name exists stably and for a long time, without time limit on protection;

Even after the author’s death, the name of the work must still be respected and cannot be changed arbitrarily;

Any organization or individual using the work must retain the original name or may only change it with the legal consent of the rights holder;

Using a work’s title in a way that misleads about its origin, author, or damages the author’s reputation may be considered a violation.

However, it is important to distinguish clearly: only certain moral rights, such as the right to name, the right to be credited, and the right to protect the integrity of the work, are protected indefinitely. Other rights, such as the right to publish or property rights (copying, distribution, commercial exploitation, etc.), are only protected for a specific period as stipulated by law.

What actions are considered infringements of copyright?

In practice, copyright infringement is quite common, especially in the publishing, media, and digital environments. Some typical actions that may be considered violations include:

Arbitrarily changing the title of a work when republishing, distributing, or reusing it without the author’s or copyright owner’s consent;

Using another person’s work title for one’s own products, content, or activities to create confusion about the origin or connection to the author;

Attaching a different name or modifying a name in a way that distorts its original meaning, affecting the author’s spiritual value or reputation;

Using a similar or nearly identical name to a famous work for commercial gain, to attract users, or to gain an unfair competitive advantage.

According to the Intellectual Property Law, when the right to name a work is infringed, the author or owner has the right to apply legal measures to protect their interests, including:

Requesting the infringing organization or individual to immediately cease the infringing act;

Requesting a public apology and correction to restore reputation and honor;

Requesting compensation for damages if the infringement causes material or moral loss.

The clear legal provisions on sanctions not only aim to protect the rights of authors but also contribute to raising awareness of respect for intellectual property rights in creative activities and the exploitation of works.

The above is an article titled “Is the right to name a work protected indefinitely?”. Hopefully, the information above has helped you understand the legal value of the right to name a work, as well as the scope and duration of protection as stipulated in the Intellectual Property Law.

Sincerely,

FAQ

1. After transferring the copyright, does the author still have the right to name the work?

Yes. The right to name is a personal right attached to the author and is protected indefinitely. The transfer of copyright does not negate the author’s right to name.

2. Can others arbitrarily change the title of the work when using it?

No. Changing the title of a work without the author’s or copyright holder’s consent may be considered an infringement of personal rights and may result in a request for termination or compensation as stipulated by law.

What should be done if a copyright registration application is rejected?

Written by Editor VCD on 11 March, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright Registration, Copyright-related rights. No Comments on What should be done if a copyright registration application is rejected?

Copyright registration is a crucial step for individuals and organizations to protect their works from unauthorized copying and use. However, many applications are rejected due to errors in content or procedure. So, what should you do when your copyright registration application is rejected to ensure your rights are protected? This article from VCD will provide detailed guidance.

When is a copyright registration application rejected?

According to Clause 2, Article 52 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law: “In case of refusal to grant a Certificate of Copyright or Related Rights Registration, the competent authority must notify the applicant in writing and clearly state the reasons.”

This regulation shows that the rejection of an application must be carried out transparently and with legal grounds, specifically:

The rejection decision must be in official written form.

Applicants have the right to know the reason for rejection.

This is an important basis for applicants to amend or supplement their application or file an appeal if they believe the rejection is inappropriate.

In practice, copyright registration applications are often rejected due to several common reasons:

Reason 1: Incomplete or Incorrect Information

This is the most frequent reason, especially for those who prepare their own applications but are not familiar with legal regulations. Applications may be rejected if:

The registration form is missing or incomplete, contains incorrect information about the author, owner, or type of work;

Copies of the work are not submitted in the correct number or format as required;

Documents proving ownership are missing, such as work contracts, rights transfer agreements, author’s commitment letters, or agreements between co-authors are missing.

Minor errors in personal information, creation dates, or inconsistencies between documents can also lead to rejection of the application.

Reason 2: The work is not eligible for protection

According to Article 14 of the Intellectual Property Law, only works that are creative and expressed in a certain physical form are protected by copyright. Therefore, the application will not be accepted if:

The registered content is only at the level of ideas, concepts, or orientations and has not been expressed as a concrete product;

The content is purely for factual informational purposes and lacks creative elements;

The work belongs to categories not eligible for protection, such as legal regulations, procedures, methods of operation, systems, principles, or purely data.

In these cases, even if the application is complete in form, it may still be rejected due to not meeting the conditions for protection of content.

Reason 3: Failure to prove the right to file the application

The competent authority may also reject the application if the applicant cannot prove their legal status regarding the work, such as:

The applicant is not the author or copyright owner;

The application is submitted through another organization or individual without a valid authorization;

Ownership of the work is subject to a dispute between parties.

In these cases, the receiving authority usually requests clarification or rejects the application if there is insufficient legal basis to prove the right to register.

Reason 4: The work shows signs of copying or infringing on the rights of others

If, during the assessment process, the competent authority finds that the work shows signs of copying from another source, lacks originality, or has complaints or disputes related to copyright, the registration application may be rejected to avoid legal risks. This is to ensure that the Certificate of Copyright Registration only applies to works that are genuinely created or legally owned by the applicant.

Therefore, copyright registration applications are often rejected due to procedural issues, protection conditions, or the legal basis of ownership. Understanding these reasons will help applicants proactively prepare complete and accurate applications and minimize risks during the registration process.

What should be done if a copyright registration application is rejected?

When you receive a rejection notice, you shouldn’t worry too much because most cases can be resolved. Here are some effective steps to take.

Step 1: Carefully review the reason for rejection

The copyright application rejection notice will clearly state:

What documents are missing?

What content is incorrect?

Does the work not meet the protection requirements?

Or is there a dispute?

Understanding the correct reason helps avoid resubmitting the copyright application multiple times, saving time.

Step 2: Amend and supplement the application

If the error lies in the copyright registration application procedure, you can handle it as follows:

Re-complete the application form

Add a copy of the work

Submit additional commitment letters and transfer agreements

Provide a valid power of attorney

After correcting and completing the necessary documents, you must resubmit the copyright registration application as required.

Note: Currently, the law does not limit the number of times a copyright registration application can be resubmitted, as long as the application is valid.

Step 3: Prepare evidence of ownership

In case of rejection due to doubt about ownership or originality, the following should be added:

Original manuscript, initial design file

Time of creation (email, work log, etc.)

Creative contract (if any)

Author’s commitment letter

Preparing sufficient evidence will help ensure the copyright registration application is accepted on the next submission.

Step 4: Appeal the rejection decision (if necessary)

If the applicant believes the rejection is unfounded, they have the right to appeal according to the provisions of the law on administrative appeals.

Basis:

Law on Complaints

Deadline for initial complaint: 90 days from the date of receipt of notification

Required complaint documents:

Complaint form

Copy of rejection notice

Documents proving legal rights

In practice, the complaint procedure is usually applied when the application is complete but still unreasonably rejected.

The above is an article titled “What to do if your copyright registration application is rejected?”. Hopefully, the information above will help you understand the reasons for rejection and how to handle it appropriately so that you can quickly complete and resubmit it in accordance with the law.

FAQ

1. Is the fee refunded if the application is rejected?

Generally, the registration fee paid is non-refundable, even if the application is rejected. Therefore, you need to carefully check your application before submitting it to avoid unnecessary costs.

2. Does a rejected application affect copyright?

No. According to the Intellectual Property Law, copyright arises from the moment the work is created and expressed in a certain physical form, regardless of registration.

Does copyright registration create rights or is it only evidentiary?

Written by Editor VCD on 9 March, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright Registration, Copyright-related rights. No Comments on Does copyright registration create rights or is it only evidentiary?

In practice, many individuals and organizations still believe that copyright is only protected by law after registration and issuance of a certificate. However, this understanding does not accurately reflect the nature of copyright protection under Vietnamese law. The article “Does copyright registration create rights or is it only evidentiary?” below by VCD will help you understand this better.

When does copyright arise?

According to Clause 1, Article 6 of the current Intellectual Property Law, copyright arises from the moment a work is created and expressed in a certain physical form, regardless of whether it has been published or not, or whether it has been registered or not. This regulation clearly demonstrates the principle of “automatic protection,” meaning that copyright is formed implicitly on the basis of actual creative acts, regardless of any administrative procedures.

Thus, as long as the work is in a tangible form such as text, drawings, data files, sound recordings, video recordings, lectures, computer software, etc., the author automatically has moral and property rights as stipulated by law. The failure to register does not diminish or restrict the existence of copyright.

The Legal Nature of Copyright Registration

Copyright registration is an administrative procedure carried out at a competent state agency (Copyright Office) to record information about the author, owner, and work. When the application is valid, the state agency will issue a Certificate of Copyright Registration.

Clause 3, Article 49 of the Intellectual Property Law stipulates: A copyright registration certificate is evidence proving that copyright and related rights belong to the grantee, except in cases where there is evidence to the contrary. This provision shows that the nature of registration is not a condition for establishing rights, but only aims to confirm, record, and facilitate the proof of rights when disputes arise.

Therefore, from a legal perspective, copyright registration is a form of recognition, not a granting as with industrial property rights (e.g., trademarks, inventions).

Does copyright registration create rights or is it only evidentiary?

According to Clause 1, Article 6 of the Intellectual Property Law, copyright arises from the moment the work is created and expressed in a certain physical form, regardless of the registration procedure. This regulation reflects the principle of automatic protection, whereby the author’s rights are recognized by law as soon as the creative activity takes place, not through a state agency granting or establishing them. Therefore, copyright registration is not a condition for the creation or legalization of rights.

In legal terms, the registration procedure is merely an administrative record and creates legal evidence of the rights holder. Clause 3, Article 49 of the Intellectual Property Law stipulates that a copyright registration certificate is evidence proving ownership, unless there is evidence to the contrary. This means that the holder of the certificate benefits from a legal presumption mechanism regarding ownership rights, reducing the burden of proof in case of disputes.

In practice, this evidentiary value is very important. When defending rights before a court or competent authority, the registered holder only needs to present the certificate instead of having to prove the creative process, the time of creation of the work, or the transfer of rights. At the same time, registration also facilitates commercial exploitation activities such as transfer, licensing, capital contribution, or investment cooperation, because ownership rights are clearly established. Conversely, without registration, even if the right still exists, the subject may face difficulties in gathering evidence and risk disputes.

Therefore, it can be affirmed that copyright registration does not create rights but mainly has evidentiary value and ensures legal security, serving as a necessary preventive measure to effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of authors and owners.

The role of copyright registration

Although copyright registration is not a condition for creating rights, as rights are automatically established from the moment the work is created, in practice, it remains an important legal mechanism. Through the registration procedure, the state agency issues a Certificate to officially record information about the author, owner, and work, thereby establishing a clear legal basis for protection status.

First, registration has evidentiary value in case of disputes. According to Clause 3, Article 49 of the Intellectual Property Law, the Certificate serves as proof of ownership, unless there is evidence to the contrary. This helps reduce the burden of proof, shortens the resolution time, and improves the efficiency of handling infringement cases.

In addition, registration facilitates commercial exploitation activities such as transfer, licensing, capital contribution, or business cooperation, while also contributing to dispute prevention by clearly defining the subject and scope of rights from the outset. Therefore, although not mandatory, registration is still a necessary measure to protect and enforce copyright safely and effectively.

The above is the article “Does copyright registration create rights or only have evidentiary value?” that VCD has sent to you. We hope this article is useful to you.

Sincerely,

FAQ

Question 1. Does copyright arise without registration?

Yes. According to Clause 1, Article 6 of the Intellectual Property Law, copyright arises automatically from the moment the work is created and expressed in a certain physical form, regardless of registration.

Question 2. What is the significance of copyright registration if it does not create rights?

Registration has legal evidentiary value; A certificate of ownership serves as proof of ownership, facilitating disputes and commercial exploitation such as transferring or licensing the work.

Can information be modified after copyright registration?

Written by Editor VCD on 4 March, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright Registration, Copyright-related rights. No Comments on Can information be modified after copyright registration?

During the copyright registration process, many individuals and organizations encounter errors such as incorrect author names, owner information, publication dates, or descriptions of the work. So, is it possible to modify information after copyright registration? This article from VCD will help you understand the legal regulations, legal basis, and adjustment procedures under the Intellectual Property Law.

Why is copyright registration necessary?

Before learning about modifying information after registration, it’s necessary to understand the meaning of the copyright registration procedure as stipulated by the Intellectual Property Law.

According to Vietnamese law, copyright arises automatically from the moment a work is created and expressed in a certain physical form. This means that the author is still protected by law even before the registration procedure is completed.

However, copyright registration is still encouraged due to its significant legal benefits, such as:

Creating clear legal evidence of ownership in case of disputes

Officially recording information about the author, owner, and publication date of the work

Facilitating commercial exploitation activities such as transfer, licensing, or capital contribution using copyright

Limiting the risk of copying, misappropriation, or copyright disputes during the use of the work

Thus, the Copyright Registration Certificate is not only an important legal basis but also a foundation for protecting and exploiting the value of the work. If the information on the Certificate is incorrect or no longer relevant, timely amendment and updating is necessary to ensure the rights of the author and owner.

Can information be modified after copyright registration?

The law allows copyright owners to amend, supplement, or renew their Copyright Registration Certificate if the registered information is inaccurate or has changed.

Common cases requiring amendment of information after copyright registration include:

Incorrect author or owner name

Incorrect address or contact information

Incorrect type of work

Incorrect publication date

Change of ownership due to transfer, inheritance, or business merger

Change of organization name or legal status of the owner

This adjustment helps ensure that the legal information remains accurate and reflects the actual situation.

According to the Intellectual Property Law, the Copyright Registration Certificate is a document issued by a competent state agency to record information about the author, owner, and work.

In addition, the implementing guidelines allow for:

Reissuing the Certificate when it is lost or damaged

Replacing it when the information changes

Adjusting the content when there are errors or changes in ownership

Thus, the law does not restrict amendments, as long as the applicant provides valid supporting documents.

Some notes when amending copyright registration information

To ensure a smooth process of amending or replacing the Copyright Registration Certificate, the applicant needs to prepare a complete application and comply with the regulations of the Intellectual Property Law. Missing information or supporting documents may result in the application being requested for additional information or being rejected.

Below are some important points to note:

Carefully check the information before submitting the request: Accurately review the content to be amended, such as the author’s name, owner, address, type of work, or the content to be changed. Clearly identifying errors or content requiring correction will help avoid multiple revisions, saving time.

Prepare complete documentation proving the change: Depending on the case, relevant documents such as personal identification, new business registration certificate, name change decision, copyright transfer agreement, inheritance document, or other legal documents proving the validity of the correction should be provided.

Ensure the transfer of rights has a clear legal basis: In case of a change of ownership, the transfer or assignment of rights must be documented in writing according to regulations. The transfer agreement or written agreement must have the full signatures of all parties and clearly state the scope of the transfer.

Update promptly when changes occur: When errors or changes to information arise, the correction procedure should be carried out as soon as possible. Delayed updates can cause difficulties in commercial exploitation, copyright transfer, or in the event of copyright disputes.

Preparing complete and accurate documentation from the outset not only shortens processing time but also ensures that the Copyright Registration Certificate remains legally valid, facilitating the protection and exploitation of rights in practice.

The above is an article titled “Can information be modified after copyright registration?”. Hopefully, the information shared has helped you understand the legal regulations, the cases where adjustments are permitted, and the procedures to follow under the Intellectual Property Law.

Sincerely,

FAQ

1. Do I need to re-register the copyright from scratch when the information changes?

No. In most cases, you only need to go through the procedure of renewing or adjusting the information on the Certificate, not re-registering the work.

2. What are the consequences if I don’t amend the information when changes occur?

Inaccurate information can cause difficulties in proving rights, transferring ownership, licensing exploitation, or resolving disputes. Therefore, it is advisable to update it promptly to ensure the legal validity of the Certificate.

Is selling fan art a violation of copyright?

Written by Editor VCD on 4 March, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright Registration, Copyright-related rights. No Comments on Is selling fan art a violation of copyright?

Fan art is a popular form of creative expression, especially in the illustration, design, and craft business communities. However, when fan art is used for printing and commercial sale, copyright issues become a concern. So, does selling fan art violate copyright? This article will help you understand the legal regulations under the Intellectual Property Law and how to mitigate risks when doing business with fan art.

What is fan art?

Fan art is a work created by fans based on a pre-existing work. Fan art content often relates to:

Characters from animated films and movies

Images from comics, novels, and games

Portraits of celebrities

Symbols, mascots, or brand identities

Examples: Recreating anime characters in one’s own style, designing movie character posters, or drawing portraits of artists for sale.

Legally, fan art is considered a derivative work, meaning it is a work created based on an original work that is already protected by copyright.

Is fan art protected by copyright?

According to Vietnamese law, derivative works can still be protected if they meet certain conditions.

According to Clause 2, Article 14 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law: “A derivative work shall only be protected under the provisions of Clause 1 of this Article if it does not infringe upon the copyright of the work used to create the derivative work.”

This means that fanart can be protected by copyright if it contains independent creative elements (drawing style, composition, new ways of expression, etc.). However, this protection does not legalize the unauthorized use of the original work. If fanart uses copyrighted images or characters without permission, the work can still be considered a violation.

In other words, you have rights to your own creation, but you do not have the right to exploit elements belonging to the owner of the original work without their consent.

Is selling fan art a violation of copyright?

Although fanart is a popular and well-received form of creativity, using it for commercial purposes requires special attention to legal issues. So, does creating fanart for sale violate copyright?

According to Article 20 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law, copyright owners have important property rights, including:

a) Creating derivative works;

b) Performing the work before the public directly or indirectly through sound recordings, video recordings, or any technical means at a location accessible to the public, but where the public cannot freely choose the time and parts of the work;

c) Directly or indirectly reproducing all or part of the work by any means or form, except as provided in point a, clause 3 of this Article;

d) Distributing, importing for distribution to the public through sale or other forms of transfer of ownership of the original or copies of the work in tangible form, except as provided in point b, clause 3 of this Article;

d) Broadcasting or communicating the work to the public by wired, wireless, electronic information networks, or any other technical means, including providing the work to the public in a way that the public can access at a location and time of their choosing;

e) Renting the original or copies of cinematographic works or computer programs, except where the computer program is not the primary subject of the rental.

This means that any activity exploiting the economic value of the original work, including adaptation, redrawing, printing, and commercialization, is under the control of the owner.

When fanart is used for commercial purposes, related activities may be considered commercial exploitation of the derivative work. Specifically, the following cases pose a potential risk of copyright infringement:

Recreating characters and images from films, comics, games, or works protected by copyright.

Using fan art to print on products such as posters, t-shirts, keychains, stickers, or other commercial items.

Selling the product on social media, e-commerce platforms, or directly at fairs and events for profit.

In these cases, if the creator has not obtained permission or authorization from the owner of the original work, the aforementioned commercial exploitation may be considered copyright infringement under the Intellectual Property Law.

The above is an article titled “Is Selling Fan Art a Copyright Infringement?”. To minimize legal risks, you should increase your own creative elements, avoid copying originals, and proactively seek permission or purchase usage rights when necessary.

Sincerely,

FAQ

1. When is selling fanart legal?

You can legally sell fanart when you have permission from the copyright holder, or when the copyright protection for the original work has expired. Additionally, fanart that is purely inspired, clearly creative, and does not confuse with the original work will reduce legal risks.

2. What are the consequences of selling copyrighted fanart?

Violators may be forced to remove the product, destroy the goods, compensate for damages, and face administrative penalties as prescribed by law. In cases of large-scale violations or high illicit profits, more serious liability may be considered.

Can a work be registered under multiple owners?

Written by Editor VCD on 4 March, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright Registration, Copyright-related rights. No Comments on Can a work be registered under multiple owners?

In current creative activities, many works are created by a single individual with the participation, investment, cooperation, or contribution of various organizations and individuals. This reality raises questions about determining and recognizing the legal status of the entities involved in the work, especially during the registration process under the Intellectual Property Law. So, can a work be registered under multiple owners? This article by VCD will help you.

Overview of Copyright Owners

In the legal relationship concerning copyright, it is necessary to clearly distinguish between the author and the copyright owner. The author is the person who directly creates the work through their intellectual labor, while the copyright owner is the entity holding the property rights to the work, including the right to commercial exploitation, permission to use, and the right to dispose of the economic value of the work.

According to the Intellectual Property Law, copyright arises from the moment a work is created and expressed in a tangible form. At the same time, ownership of the work is established for the entity with the corresponding legal basis. The owner can be the author themselves, or an organization or individual commissioning the creation, receiving a transfer, inheriting, or being transferred the rights by agreement.

Thus, the law does not implicitly equate author with owner. In many cases, property rights may belong to a business, agency, or multiple individuals simultaneously. This is the legal basis for the formation of a co-ownership regime for copyright.

Can a work be registered under multiple owners?

Intellectual property law does not stipulate that each work has only one owner. Therefore, a work can absolutely be owned by multiple organizations or individuals if there is a valid legal basis.

According to the Intellectual Property Law, copyright owners can be the author, or the agency, organization, or individual commissioning the creation, hiring the creator, receiving the transfer, or being transferred the rights by agreement. This shows that ownership rights arise not only from direct creative activity but can also be formed from investment relationships or contracts. Therefore, when multiple parties contribute capital, effort, or jointly agree to exploit a work, property rights may belong to all parties as co-owners.

In practice, co-ownership is often found in commercially valuable works such as films, software, or design products. When registering copyright, these entities can jointly have their names on the Certificate of Copyright to acknowledge their rights. It should be noted that registration only serves to confirm and prove ownership; it does not create new ownership rights.

However, when multiple owners exist, the exploitation of the work requires the agreement of all parties. Activities such as licensing, transfer, or commercial use often require mutual consent; without a clear agreement, disputes are easily likely to arise. Therefore, the parties should establish a specific management mechanism and rights allocation from the outset.

Thus, a work can be registered under multiple owners, but it simultaneously requires coordination and transparent agreement to ensure effective and lawful use of the work.

Notes on registering copyright for co-owners

First, the parties need to clearly identify the basis for the formation of joint ownership. The registration authority usually requires supporting documents such as creative work contracts, work contracts, capital contribution agreements, transfer contracts, or documents confirming co-ownership. A lack of clear legal basis can lead to the refusal of a certificate or subsequent disputes.

Second, a specific agreement on the percentage and scope of rights for each owner is necessary. The law allows parties to freely agree on profit-sharing ratios, licensing rights, transfer rights, and decision-making mechanisms. Without such an agreement, in principle, all commercial exploitation decisions require the consent of all parties, which can reduce flexibility in business operations.

Thirdly, when filing registration documents, it is necessary to ensure complete and consistent information for all co-owners, including legal name, address, documents proving legal status, and signatures. Errors in information may lead to amendments, re-issuance, or affect the evidentiary value of the Certificate.

The above is the article “Can a work be registered under multiple owners?” that VCD has sent to you. We hope this article is helpful to you.

Sincerely,

Question 1: Can a work be registered under multiple owners?

Yes. According to the Intellectual Property Law, there is no limit to the number of owners of a work. In cases where multiple organizations or individuals jointly invest, jointly agree to create, or jointly receive the transfer of property rights, the parties can become co-owners and be recognized as jointly listed when registering copyright. Registration only serves to confirm and prove rights; it does not create new rights.

Question 2: What issues should be considered when registering co-ownership?

The parties need a clear legal basis for the co-ownership relationship, such as a contract or written agreement; they should also specifically define the percentage of rights, the management mechanism, and the distribution of benefits from exploiting the work. A transparent agreement from the outset will help avoid disputes and ensure the use and disposal of the work are convenient and in accordance with the law.

Distinguishing between legitimate and infringing derivative works

Written by Editor VCD on 2 March, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright Registration, Copyright-related rights. No Comments on Distinguishing between legitimate and infringing derivative works

Derivative works are a common form of creation where a new work is formed based on a pre-existing work. However, not all adaptations, modifications, translations, or reinterpretations are legal. So, what is the boundary between legal derivative works and copyright infringement? Let’s explore this in the article below.

What is a derivative work?

According to Clause 8, Article 4 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law: “A derivative work is a work created on the basis of one or more existing works through translation, adaptation, modification, transformation, selection, or arrangement.”

Simply put, a derivative work is a new work formed from the foundation of an original work, through a process of recreating it in a different form of expression or with certain changes or additions to its content, structure, language, or method of expression.

Common forms of derivative works include:

Translating books and stories from foreign languages into Vietnamese

Adapting novels into films, plays, and comics

Adapting song lyrics and scripts to suit new contexts

Selecting and arranging articles into anthologies and collections

A distinctive feature of derivative works is that they still bear the imprint and core elements of the original work. Despite new creative elements, the content, ideas, plot, characters, or structure remain closely related to the original work. Therefore, creating derivative works is always linked to the rights of the author or copyright owner of the original work.

Conditions for a derivative work to be considered legal

The law does not prohibit the creation of derivative works. On the contrary, this is an activity that is recognized and encouraged, as it contributes to enriching creative life. However, since derivative works are always based on the foundation of the original work, this creation must respect the rights of the author or copyright owner.

According to Articles 14 and 20 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law, the right to create derivative works is a property right belonging to the copyright owner. This means that, in principle, no one can arbitrarily adapt, modify, translate, or create derivative works without permission.

For a derivative work to be considered legal, it must simultaneously meet the following conditions:

Condition 1: Permission from the copyright owner (when the work is still under protection)

This is the most important and decisive condition. While the original work is still under copyright protection, any actions such as translation, film adaptation, content modification, selection, rearrangement, etc., must be with the consent of the copyright owner.

This permission should be documented in writing (contract, agreement on the use of the work) to avoid future disputes. Without permission, even if the derivative work has new creative elements and significant intellectual investment, it will still be considered a copyright infringement under Article 28 of the Intellectual Property Law.

Condition 2: It must not harm the moral rights of the original author.

Even with permission to create a derivative work, the creator must still respect the moral rights of the original author under Article 19 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law, especially the right to be credited as the author and to protect the integrity of the work.

A derivative work must not: distort the content of the original work; misrepresent the original spirit and message; or alter it in a way that affects the honor and reputation of the original author. In other words, the new creation must not distort the core value of the original work.

Condition 3: Case where the original work’s copyright protection has expired

When the copyright protection period for a work has expired, the work belongs to the public. At this point, anyone can use it to create derivative works without permission and without paying royalties.

However, even in this case, the user must still acknowledge the author’s name and respect the integrity of the work because moral rights are protected indefinitely.

In short, a derivative work is only considered legal when its creation does not infringe on the property rights and moral rights of the original author. This is the crucial legal boundary that distinguishes between legitimate creation and copyright infringement.

When does a derivative work infringe copyright?

In reality, many people believe that simply “renovating,” “editing,” or “creatively adding” is enough to create a completely different work. However, legally, if the new work is still based on the original work but does not comply with the regulations of the Intellectual Property Law, that act is still considered copyright infringement.

According to Article 28 of the Intellectual Property Law, any act of using a work without the permission of the copyright owner is considered infringement. Among these, creating derivative works illegally is a very common form of infringement.

Below are typical cases where a derivative work infringes copyright:

Case 1: Unauthorized adaptation or modification

While the original work is still under protection, any act such as adaptation, translation, modification, or reinterpretation requires the consent of the copyright owner.

Examples:

• Adapting a novel into a film without the owner’s consent

• Rewriting song lyrics and releasing them commercially

Even if the creator invests effort in editing and creating new content, this is essentially still an act of illegally exploiting the original work.

Case 2: Using the core elements and characteristics of the original work

In many cases, while not a verbatim copy, the original work still uses the main plot, characteristic character system, or setting and content that strongly reflect the original work…

When readers and viewers can still easily recognize the “shadow” of the original work, the new work is still considered to be illegally exploiting the original author’s creative material. This is a very common mistake in adaptations and comic book adaptations without permission.

Case 3: Failure to acknowledge the author’s name and source of the work

Even with permission to create a derivative work, the creator must still respect the author’s moral rights according to Article 19 of the Intellectual Property Law.

Failure to acknowledge the author’s name, fail to acknowledge the source of the work, or intentionally mislead others into believing it is entirely their own creation, is still considered a violation of moral rights.

Thus, a derivative work becomes a copyright infringement when its creation infringes upon the property or moral rights of the original author, regardless of the form of “new creation.”

Distinguishing between legitimate and infringing derivative works

Below is a more detailed and clearer comparison table to help readers understand the legal boundaries between legal derivative works and copyright infringement:

Criteria	Legitimate derivative works	Derivative works infringe copyright
Legal basis	– There is a contract or written permission from the copyright owner or the original work whose protection period has expired. – The exercise of the rights granted by the copyright owner is carried out correctly.	– Not seeking permission while the original work is still under protection. – Arbitrarily exercising rights belonging to the owner.
Scope of use	Within the permitted scope, purpose, timeframe, and territory.	Unauthorized expansion of exploitation and use beyond the agreed scope.
Respect for personal rights	Include the author’s name, but preserve the spirit and core values of the work.	Unauthorized expansion of exploitation and use beyond the agreed scope.
The extent of use of the original work	Controlled, within permitted limits.	Retaining the original plot, characters, and distinctive setting makes the original work easily recognizable.
Purpose of exploitation	Transparent, legal, and with consent.	Unauthorized commercial exploitation or public dissemination
Legal responsibility	No violation	You may be required to remove the content, pay compensation, or be fined for violations.
For example	Adapting a novel into a film involves a copyright agreement.	Making films and comics based on popular novels without permission.

The above is an article titled “ Distinguishing between legitimate and infringing derivative works”. Understanding the legal requirements for creating derivative works will help you avoid copyright infringement risks and legally exploit the value of existing works. Before adapting, modifying, or translating, ensure that you fully respect the property and moral rights of the original author.

Sincerely,

FAQ

1. Is it a violation to not credit the original author when creating a derivative work?

Yes. This is an infringement of the author’s moral rights according to Article 19 of the Intellectual Property Law, even if you have been granted permission to create the derivative work.

2. When is it permissible to create a derivative work without permission?

When the original work’s protection period has expired, anyone can use it to create a derivative work without permission and without paying royalties. However, personal rights must still be respected, such as attributing the author’s name and not distorting the content of the work.

Is it permissible to freely exploit a work when co-authored?

Written by Editor VCD on 2 March, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright exploitation cooperation services, Copyright Registration. No Comments on Is it permissible to freely exploit a work when co-authored?

When multiple people collaborate on a work, the rights to exploit and use it are often misunderstood. Many co-authors believe they can freely publish, commercialize, or allow others to use the work without consulting the others. So, what does the law say in this case? Let’s explore whether co-authors can independently exploit a work in the article below!

What is Co-authorship?

The concept of co-authorship is not just a descriptive term in creative activity, but a concept with significant legal implications in determining rights and obligations regarding a work.

In practice, many people believe that simply “participating” in the creation process is enough to be considered a co-author. However, intellectual property law sets very strict criteria for determining this status.

Clause 1, Article 38 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law clearly states: “Co-authors are those who jointly and directly create a work.”

This regulation emphasizes two mandatory elements:

Jointly participating in the creation: The element of “directly creating” is a core condition. The law only recognizes co-authorship for those who actually create the creative content expressed in the work.

Creating a joint work: A co-authored work must be the result of a process of jointly developing the content, jointly shaping the structure, and jointly developing ideas into a complete product.

This means that not just anyone involved in the work is considered a co-author.

Examples:

Two people co-write the content of a book → co-authors

One person writes, another proofreads → not co-authors

One person provides the idea, another expresses it as a complete work → the person who expresses it is the author

Many disputes arise due to confusion between the person assisting and the person directly creating the work. Therefore, correctly understanding the concept of co-authorship from the outset not only helps determine the correct rights, but is also an important basis for avoiding legal risks when exploiting and using the work later.

Is it permissible to freely exploit a work when co-authored?

In reality, many copyright disputes arise not from who is a co-author, but from not understanding what type of co-authorship the work falls under.

Based on Clause 2, Article 38 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law: “Copyright in a co-authored work shall be exercised according to the agreement of the co-authors; in cases where the work has separate parts that can be used independently, each co-author has the right to use that separate part without infringing on the rights of the other co-authors.”

This regulation shows that the law does not view all co-authored works in the same way. Instead, the law divides them into two completely different cases in terms of legal nature, leading to completely different exploitation rights.

The answer to “Can a co-author freely exploit a work?” depends entirely on the type of work. The difference between an inseparable work and a work with separate parts will determine whether a co-author can freely exploit it or not.

Case 1: Inseparable Co-authored Works (Unified Works)

This is the most common type of work in practice. The defining characteristic of this type of work is that the contributions of the co-authors blend together, forming a single entity, to the point where it’s impossible to define the creative boundaries of each individual for independent use.

Examples:

A song with lyrics and music written by two people

A film script with content created by a group of people

A comic book series with storyline and characters created by multiple people

The contributions to the work cannot be separated for independent use. Therefore, for this type of work, the property rights are shared by all co-authors; no single co-author can independently exploit the entire work. All of the following actions require the consent of all co-authors:

Copying

Distribution, publishing

Uploading online

Adaptation, modification

Commercialization

Even if you are the largest contributor of content, the original owner, or the registered copyright holder, you do not have the right to exploit it independently.

Case 2: Co-authored works with separate parts that can be used independently

Contrary to the above case, this type of work is characterized by the fact that each person’s creative part exists relatively independently and can be separated without affecting the value of the remaining part.

Examples:

A book with many chapters, each written by a different person

A collection of short stories by multiple authors

A document set with many independent parts

In this case, each person’s creative part can be separated without affecting the others’ parts. In that case, each co-author has the right to exploit their own portion, provided that:

They do not use another author’s work.

They do not infringe upon the rights of other co-authors.

Example: You wrote chapter 3 of a book with 10 chapters written by 10 people. You can publish chapter 3 separately under your name.

The above is the article “Is it permissible to freely exploit a work when co-authored?”. Correctly identifying the type of co-authored work and having a clear agreement from the beginning not only helps protect the rights of each party, but is also an effective way to prevent legal disputes arising during the use and commercialization of the work.

Sincerely,

FAQ

1. Do co-authors need to register joint copyright to have their rights recognized?

No. Copyright arises from the moment the work is created and expressed in a certain physical form, regardless of registration. However, registering copyright in the names of all co-authors will be important legal evidence in case of disputes.

2. If one co-author exploits the work without permission, what rights do the other co-authors have?

The remaining co-authors have the right to request the cessation of the infringing act, demand an apology, compensation for damages, or file a lawsuit in court in accordance with the provisions of the Intellectual Property Law.

Does an author have the right to reclaim a transferred work?

Written by Editor VCD on 26 February, 2026. Posted in Announcement, Copyright exploitation cooperation services, Copyright Registration, Copyright-related rights. No Comments on Does an author have the right to reclaim a transferred work?

After signing a copyright transfer contract, many people mistakenly believe they can “reclaim” their work at any time because it is their own creation. However, intellectual property law stipulates something completely different. So, does an author have the right to reclaim a transferred work? This article from VCD will help clarify this.

What constitutes a transferred work?

Before understanding the right to reclaim, it’s necessary to understand the nature of a “transferred work.”

According to Article 45 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law: “Transfer of copyright and related rights is the act of the copyright owner or related rights owner transferring their ownership rights to another organization or individual under a contract or according to relevant legal provisions.”

Thus, transfer is the transfer of ownership rights, not just permission to use. This means that, after the transfer contract takes effect, the property rights to the work no longer belong to the original author or owner, but to the transferee. In other words, from the moment of transfer, the transferee becomes the new legal owner of the property rights associated with the work.

Note:

Authors cannot transfer moral rights (except the right to publish the work).

Only property rights are transferable.

Property rights stipulated in Article 20 of the Intellectual Property Law include:

“a) Creating derivative works;

c) Directly or indirectly reproducing all or part of the work by any means or form, except as provided in point a, clause 3 of this Article;

d) Distributing, importing for distribution to the public through sale or other forms of transfer of ownership of the original, copies of the work in tangible form, except as provided in point b, clause 3 of this Article;

e) Broadcasting, transmitting to the public the work by wired, wireless, or network means electronic information or any other technical means, including providing the work to the public in a way that the public can access at a place and time of their choosing;

e) Renting the original or copies of cinematographic works, computer programs, except where the computer program is not the primary subject of the rental.

Once a transfer contract is signed, the transferee becomes the legal owner of this property right.

Does an author have the right to reclaim a transferred work?

The author cannot arbitrarily reclaim it, except in certain special cases permitted by law. Because after the transfer, the property right belongs to the transferee. If the author arbitrarily reclaims it, it will be considered an infringement of the new owner’s rights. However, the law still provides a mechanism to protect the author’s interests in certain cases.

Cases where the author has the right to request the revocation of transferred rights

According to Article 47 of the Intellectual Property Law on the cancellation and termination of copyright transfer contracts: If the transferee fails to perform or improperly performs the obligations committed in the contract, the transferor has the right to request the cancellation of the contract and claim compensation for damages.

Therefore, the author does not have the right to revoke the rights for subjective reasons, but only in the following cases:

Case 1: The transferee breaches the contract

This is the most common case when transferring copyright. Once the transfer agreement has been signed, the transferee has clear obligations such as:

Paying the transfer fee, royalties, and remuneration on time.

Exploiting the work within the agreed scope and purpose.

Respecting the author’s personal rights.

Not using the work in a way that negatively affects the author’s reputation.

If the transferee violates these obligations, the author has the right to request termination of the contract, compensation for damages, and return of the transferred rights.

Examples:

The publisher fails to pay royalties as agreed.

The company arbitrarily modifies the content of the work during exploitation.

Using the work for offensive or unethical advertising purposes.

Exploiting beyond the scope agreed upon (e.g., only allowed to publish the book but adapted it into a film).

In this case, the author is not “reclaiming the work for personal gain,” but rather protecting their legitimate rights due to the other party’s violation.

Case 2: Contract with a clause allowing for revocation

In many licensing agreements, the parties may agree in advance that after a certain period, the author has the right to reclaim the rights. If the recipient does not exploit the work, the rights will automatically return to the author.

Example:

After 5 years, the rights automatically return to the author if not renewed.

If the recipient does not exploit the work within 12 months, the rights will be returned to the author.

The author has the right to repurchase the transferred rights at a specified price.

Rights are only transferable within a certain geographical area.

If the contract contains such clauses, then revocation is not a breach, but rather the fulfillment of the agreement. This is why drafting a rigorous contract from the outset is extremely important.

Case 3: Contract invalid according to law

According to the 2015 Civil Code, a civil contract may be declared invalid in cases such as:

One party was deceived, threatened, or coerced when signing

The signatory lacks legal capacity

The content of the contract violates legal prohibitions

The form of the contract is not in accordance with regulations (e.g., not in written form)

When a contract is declared invalid, the legal consequence is that the parties return to each other what they have received. This means that the property rights to the work will return to the author.

What rights does the author retain after the transfer?

Even after transferring copyright, the author retains moral rights under Article 19 of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law, including:

“1. Naming the work.

2. Using their real name or pseudonym on the work; having their real name or pseudonym mentioned when the work is published or used;

3. Publishing the work or allowing others to publish the work;

4. Protecting the integrity of the work from distortion; preventing others from modifying or abridging the work in any way that harms the author’s honor and reputation.”

Therefore, even though the right to exploit cannot be revoked, the author still has the right to prevent the use of the work in a way that distorts its content and negatively affects them.

The above is an article titled “Does an author have the right to revoke a transferred work?”. Hopefully, it will help you understand the nature of copyright transfer and the limitations of the author’s right to revoke after the contract takes effect.

Sincerely,

1. Can an author reclaim their work simply because they are dissatisfied with how the transferee has exploited it?

No. Subjective “dissatisfaction” is not a legal basis for reclamation. An author can only request termination of the contract and reclaim their rights if the transferee violates their committed obligations or if there is a reclamation agreement in the contract.

2. If the transferee does not exploit the work for a long period, does the author have the right to reclaim it?

Only if the contract clearly stipulates that if the work is not exploited within a certain period, the rights will return to the author. If the contract does not contain this agreement, the author cannot unilaterally reclaim it.