“Removing copyright sticks” is a familiar term when referring to the act of protecting the copyright of the author or owner on a certain Internet platform. Many countries around the world have issued this mechanism, also known as the Notice and Takedown Process associated with natural copyright laws. The US’s Digital Millennium 1998 (The US Process). Decree 17/2023/ND–CP detailing several articles and measures to implement the Intellectual Property Law on copyright and related rights promulgates the notification and removal process for the first time, including “Process 72 hours and 10 working days” and “24-hour process” (Vietnam process). If we compare it to The US Process, what are the similarities and differences in the Vietnamese Process that will be shown in the article below?
1. Process of “removing copyright sticks” and “removing copyright sticks” of Vietnam and America
The popular digital content notification and removal mechanism in the world today operates under The US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) and this mechanism is also known as the “DMCA notice and takedown process”. In general, this mechanism is quite simple and includes 3 steps:
- Step 1: Submit a request (complaint) along with the link containing copyright-infringing content submitted by the subject to the designated representative of the online service provider (“OSP” or “ISP”) to receive a claim for copyright infringement.
- Step 2: The online service provider is obliged to remove or disable the link that infringes on copyright quickly, and at the same time notify the digital content owner or user of the removal. remove or disable access. Here, the link owner can exercise the right to appeal (object) with a request to restore the removed or disabled digital content.
- Step 3: Users will have digital content that has been removed or disabled access restored by the online service provider within 10-14 working days from the time of appeal unless notified by the owner of the online service provider who brought the case to court.
The steps to carry out the Vietnam Process will be similar to The US Process. However, unlike The US Process, the Vietnamese Process does not follow step by step but is a dual process, and is divided into two processes including a “72-hour process and 10 working days” at the request of the right holder or ownership of works and “24-hour working process” as required by enforcement agencies under Decree 17/2023/ND-CP.
- 72 hours and 10 working day process: Online service providers will rely on supporting documents (including evidence of rights holder status, infringement, location, and link to the content) number suspected of infringement) sent by the rights holder, within 72 hours, the online service provider will temporarily remove or block access to the digital content suspected of infringement and at the same time notify the subject. rights and the party that owns the digital content. Within 10 working days from the date of temporary removal or blocking as mentioned above, if the online service provider does not receive a notice objecting to the temporary removal or blocking accompanied by documentary evidence to prove that such objection will remove or prevent access to that digital content. In case of receiving an objection from the party requested to be removed, within 72 hours, the online service provider will restore the removed or blocked digital information and forward the party’s written objection with evidence. required for the rights holder.
- 24-hour process: No later than 24 hours from receipt of a request from an enforcement agency, the online service provider must remove or prevent access to digital information content that infringes copyright, and related rights, and must also notify the party whose digital content is removed, and must report the implementation results to the requesting enforcement agency within no more than 24 hours. In case of objection by the party whose digital information content is removed or blocked or by the online service provider, one of these entities has the right to make a complaint, denounce, or initiate a lawsuit according to the law to the decisions of enforcement agencies.
2. Legal issues
2.1. Verify the copyright owner of audio and video recordings
One of the best practical examples of the American Process is on the online platform YouTube. Currently, to protect the rights and interests of the author or owner of the work, in addition to copyright protection tools such as Content ID or Copyright Match Tool, YouTube also provides another measure: Submit a complaint request to YouTube to “remove copyright”. The step-by-step process is similar to The US Process.
However, practice shows that the DMCA process has been revealing its loopholes and laxity when it seems that YouTube or other online service providers do not carefully verify the legal status of the complainant to remove infringing content, especially when the complainant may intentionally falsely claim to be the author or owner of audio or video recordings on that platform. Agreed, YouTube also tries very hard to limit this false declaration by sending the complainant an email confirming the removal as well as requesting information and rights to the work, but that seems not enough. As a result, there are still cases where many audio and video recordings on YouTube are unfairly “copyrighted” or even the author or owner of that work is suspended from the channel containing his or her work or recording.
One of the noises related to this YouTube process is when musician Giang Son and many other artists expressed frustration when the song they composed was copyrighted by a media unit, BH Media claimed ownership of the video on YouTube. Next, VTV said that the National Funeral video of General Vo Nguyen Giap broadcast on the VTV1 channel or the National Anthem was also owned by BH Media on YouTube.
2.2. Time limit for “removing copyright sticks”
The US Process or YouTube Removal Process does not explain what “expeditiously remove” or “request immediate deletion” means. This can have a negative impact when online service providers can extend their responsibility to remove infringing content while still being able to enjoy the “safe harbor” mechanism, which is a mechanism related to the removal of infringing content relating to the responsibility or exemption of online service providers for copyright infringements committed by users. On the other hand, rights holders can abuse the “copyright stick” mechanism to hold back users’ efforts to restore removed content for as long as possible.
Therefore, it can be said that Vietnam’s “72 hours and 10 working days process” has overcome the limitations of the DMCA process in that it requires stricter requirements on the obligation to prove rights holder status in addition to proving rights holders. Proving copyright infringement can thereby help prevent abuse of “copyright beating” by rights holders. Furthermore, the Vietnam Process imposes an obligation on online service providers within 72 hours to remove or restore infringing digital content instead of the vague “quick removal” provision of the Process. It is meaningful for the United States to establish a more balanced mechanism in resolving the complex three-way relationship involving online service providers, users, and rights holders, which can, for example, minimize the possibility of service providers’ Online cases of abuse delay or favor rights holders.
3. Conclusion
Besides being able to choose a “72-hour process & 10 working days” or “24-hour process” according to Decree 17/2023/ND-CP to protect copyright on the Internet, authors and copyright owners Authors and related rights with Vietnamese nationality can also use the Notice and Takedown Procedures under the DMCA regardless of the DMCA is a US copyright law. Because the Internet has no borders, copyright infringements can occur simultaneously on a global scale, resulting in courts in many different countries having jurisdiction to handle infringements at the same time violations are sued by rights holders.
In other words, rights holders residing in Vietnam can sue online service providers in Vietnamese courts or even in US courts because each cross-border platform complies with the DMCA as such Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, NetFlix, Instagram, LinkedIn, App Store, and Google Play all currently have hundreds of millions to billions of users around the world, including tens of millions of users in Vietnam alone.
Above is the article: “Compare the process of “removing copyright sticks” in cyberspace in Vietnam and the US”. Hope this article will help you.
