( Verdict and comment judgment )

Do Van Dai *

Le Thi Nam Giang * *

Judgment No. 127/2007 / DSPT dated June 14, 2007 of the Appellate Court of the Supreme People’s Court in Hanoi

CONSIDERATION :

Based on the evidence and documents verified at the appellate trial, on the basis of fully considering the evidence and opinions of the litigant and other participants in the trial at the trial of the Appellate Trial Panel:

In 2001 and in 2003, Mr. Dao Thai Ton printed and republished the book “Truyen Kieu Text – Research and Discussion” by Mr. Ton in the author’s name. In this volume, Mr. Dao Thai Ton has recruited 10 articles in Part 2 (Discussion) with 4 articles printed by Mr. Nguyen Quang Tuan including:

– Lesson “Some remarks on studying Kieu Story” by the late scholar Hoang Xuan Han.

– Lesson “Please return to the right to comment on studying the Story of Kieu”.

– Lesson “About the article Hoang Xuan Han and the restoration of the original work of Story of Kieu”.

– The reply of Mr. Dao Thai Ton on the article “Multiply a commentary on studying the Story of Kieu”.

Because Mr. Dao Thai Ton, when printing 4 of Tuan’s articles, is included in his research work “The Story of Kieu Story – Research and Discussion”, Mr. Sun did not ask Mr. Tuan for permission, so Mr. Tuan filed a petition to sue Mr. Ton for copyright infringement, and asked Mr. Sun to compensate for the loss of mental losses. Mr. Dao Thai Ton’s side admitted that he had printed four Tuan’s articles but he did not have to ask Mr. Tuan, since Tuan’s articles were printed in the press, which was published. His purpose was to include Tuan’s four articles in his work to rebuild the debate faithfully, scientific research rather than commercial purposes and allowed by law.

Consider:

Mr. Dao Thai Ton and Mr. Nguyen Quang Tuan are long-time overseas students in studying the essay of Truyen Kieu. Therefore, for many years, on the mass media, many of their debates have appeared about the study of Kieu’s text. Therefore, to acknowledge and evaluate Mr. Ton’s introduction of 4 articles of Tuan in the 10 articles Mr. Ton included in the discussion of the book “Transmitting Research and Discussion”, whether or not it infringes copyright. must evaluate objectively, comprehensively, assess in terms and context of the release of this work.

The reason, Mr. Dao Thai Ton gathers 10 articles in the discussion, in which there are 4 articles by Mr. Nguyen Quang Tuan, these articles clearly reflect this. These are all debates on the method of studying the Tieu Kieu study text proposed by Professor Hoang Xuan Han before his death and the debate has been very lively for many years (1997-1999). When studying four articles of Mr. Tuan, Mr. Sun had to extract the text and point out 82 cognitive errors in his 4 articles (the total number of 4 articles of Mr. Tuan was 16,545). the word, there are 82 errors) that in the comment Mr. Ton criticized Mr. Tuan as saying that Mr. Tuan was dishonest and poor in terms of expertise, but until the dispute, Mr. Tuan did not have a re-argument. Thus, it is obvious that Mr. Ton has faithfully reconstructed the whole debate for the purpose of research and information dissemination, Mr. Ton must print all 4 of Mr. Tuan’s articles in a complete way so that readers can fully understand. the content to debate. Tuan’s articles are not garbled, concatenated, distorted, and the author’s name is still included in the book that clearly represents the source of the work, the author. And although it is “full-text printing” but in fact, Mr. Ton cited, because Mr. Sun interjected the paragraphs in his writings. Obeying his comments, the purpose is for readers to easily compare and recognize errors in Tuan’s articles. Thus, it is necessary to affirm that this is a scientific research work, a creative body of Mr. Ton, but Mr. Ton is not merely a collection of articles by many authors to print. books for commercial purposes. On the other hand, in fact, Mr. Ton received 7,000,000 dong of royalties, which was received money from the work of “Truyện Kiều Text – Research and Discussion” in accordance with the law on royalties, Mr. Sun was also not allowed to share the profits from the printing of the book’s books, under which Mr. Sun did not have to receive the money of Mr. Tuan’s four items. According to Articles 750, 751, 760 Ministry Civil law in 1995, Decree 76 / CP and reference to the content stipulated in Article 19 of the Intellectual Property Law, Mr. Sun’s work is not illegal. Specifically, in Article 760 of the 1995 Civil Code stipulates: “Individuals and organizations may use other people’s works that have been published or disseminated, if the work is not banned from copying and the use is not intended business purposes and does not affect the normal exploitation of the work, does not harm other interests of the author or owner of the work; individuals and organizations using the work are not required to obtain permission and do not have to pay remuneration to the author or owner of the work, but must write or remind the author’s name and origin of the work. ”

Thus, it is clear that Mr. Sun printed 4 of Tuan’s articles for the purpose of criticizing in the discussion that there is no copyright infringement.

Considering that the Court of First Instance argued that Mr. Sun’s infringement of copyright occurred from 2001-2003, based on Clause 3, Article 46 of the Decree Decree 100/2006 / ND-CP dated September 21, 2006 of the Government detailing and guiding the implementation of a number of articles of the Civil Code and the Intellectual Property Law regarding copyright and related rights to apply Using the Civil Code in 1995 when considering and deciding is correct. However, in the evaluation of evidence, the Court of First Instance has made a mistake in assuming that the use of the work does not require permission, not a remuneration is a citation of the work, not printing the entire article of the author, and at the same time, based on the opinion of the individual, the Director of the Copyright Department of the Ministry of Culture and Information is referring to suggest that his use of 4 articles Compliance that did not seek Tuan’s permission was a violation of copyright and so the first instance applied Article 750 of copyright regulation including the moral rights and property rights of the author to his work. creating and applying Article 751, Article 759 on moral rights, the right to request protection to determine Mr. Tuan’s four articles was subjected to Mr. T n putting into scientific research works to argue, comments are violations and the application of sanctions prescribed in Articles 27, 609, 610 and 615 of the Civil Code in 1995, forcing Mr. Ton to pay Usually the damage to Tuan is not correct, but the Court of First Instance should apply Articles 760, 761 of the Civil Code in 1995 to deny Mr. Tuan’s petition to comply with the current law.

Considering Mr. Dao Thai Ton’s appeal requires Mr. Tuan to honor his honor, damage his health and material because Mr. Tuan sued to slander him about 3 acts for that Mr. Sun had fabricated Mr. Tuan to seize the Kim Van Kieu Story of 1886; fabricating Mr. Tuan took the copy of Lieu Van Duong from Mr. Ton’s pupil, and fabricated Mr. Tuan to fake the cover of Doan Truong Tan Thanh. Considering this, the Court of First Instance does not set a resolution, because the act of slander due to criminal legal relations is adjusted, Mr. Vu has withdrawn this request from the first stage so the Court of First Instance has not approved His counterclaim is lawful. An act that is not covered by the Civil Code cannot be considered in a civil case and at the appellate trial today lawyer Nguyen Thang Canh is also gay with Mr. Ton about withdrawing the appeal to this section. .

For the above reasons, apply Clause 2 of Article 275 of the Civil Procedure Code.

DECISION:

Accept Mr. Dao Thai Ton’s appeal and correct the first instance verdict.

– Apply Article 760, 761 Civil Code 1995.

Apply Point b, Clause 2 of Resolution No. 45/2005-QH11 dated June 14, 2005 of the National Assembly on the implementation of the Civil Code.

Declaration: The petitioner commits an infringement of the copyright and damages of Mr. Nguyen Quang Tuan by Mr. Cu Huy Ha Vu, representing Mr. Dao Thai Ton.

– Accept the withdrawal of Mr. Dao Thai Ton’s counterclaim at the appellate trial.

– Uncle’s other requests.

Cost: Mr. Nguyen Quang Tuan is subject to 3,750,000 civil court charges of first instance (deducted VND 195,000 paid according to receipts No. 003334 dated February 13, 2006). ).

– Mr. Ton does not have to file a civil court fee.

From the effective date of the judgment, the judgment enforcement party must also bear interest for the amount of money not yet executed under the overdue debt interest rate due to The State Bank shall stipulate corresponding to the time of not executing the judgment.

The appellate judgment is legally effective from the date of sentencing.

ban-quyen

Comments

  1. Use of others’ works . In order to encourage the creator’s creativity and reasonably offset the costs that the author must spend on the creative process, during the term of the protection of the work, the authors and owners of the work shall enjoy the exclusive to his work. However, in order to avoid the exclusive abuse of the owner of the work and to ensure that the public has the right to use the work for the purpose of developing science, literature and educational purposes, the law All countries have regulations on the use of works without permission, without royalty. Regulating cases of using other people’s works without permission, without paying remuneration always plays an important role in the copyright law of the country.

There are countries like the United States that regulate this issue in detail from Article 107 to Article 112 US Copyright Law [1] . In accordance with US copyright law, fair use of works such as copying or any other form prescribed for the purpose of commenting, criticism, reporting or teaching, research and learning is does not violate copyright. Such consideration must be based on the following factors: 1. Purpose and characteristics of use; 2. Nature of protected works; 3. The quantity and nature of the part used in the protected work as a whole; 4. The impact of such use on market potential or on the value of protected works [2] . In addition, the US Copyright Act also provides 05 laws from Article 108-112 to specify details of reasonable use cases of works. So is France. The Law on Intellectual Property also stipulates the use of other people’s works. For example, according to Article L. 122-5, “when the work has been published, the author is not allowed to prohibit short analysis and quotes for reasons of criticism, debate, pedagogy, science or operative information. products where the analysis and citation are included if the author’s name and origin are specified ”.

In Vietnam we also have such a regulation in the 1995 Civil Code and Intellectual Property Law. However, the boundary between the acts of use works of others that are deemed permissible and are not considered permissible are too fragile and often disputed. The case where we will comment on the verdict is an illustration and deserves attention.

  1. Controversial circumstances . For ease of tracking, we should know about the situation in which the dispute arises. Specifically, in 2001 and 2003, Mr. Dao Thai Ton printed and republished the book “Truyen Kieu Text – Research and Discussion” by Mr. Ton in the author’s name. In this volume, Mr. Dao Thai Ton has recruited 10 articles in Part 2 (Discussion) with 4 articles printed by Mr. Nguyen Quang Tuan including:

– Lesson “Some remarks on studying Kieu Story” by the late scholar Hoang Xuan Han.

– Lesson “Please return to the right to comment on studying the Story of Kieu”.

– Lesson “About the article Hoang Xuan Han and the restoration of the original work of Story of Kieu”.

– The reply of Mr. Dao Thai Ton on the article “Multiply a commentary on studying the Story of Kieu”.

Because Mr. Dao Thai Ton, when printing 4 of Tuan’s articles, is included in his research work “The Story of Kieu Story – Research and Discussion”, Mr. Sun did not ask Mr. Tuan for permission, so Mr. Tuan filed a petition against Mr. Ton for copyright infringement.

  1. Applying the Civil Code in 1995 . In this case, both the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal used the provisions of the Civil Code in 1995 to resolve.

Specifically, in the first instance judgment, the Court has applied “articles 27, 609, 610, 615, 750, 751, 754, 759 Civil Code 1995 “And the Court of Appeal used” Article 760, 761 Civil Code 1995 “to resolve disputes.

It is thought that the application of such law is convincing because the use of Ton’s other works was conducted in 2001 and 2003, time The 1995 Civil Code is still in effect. In fact, the Court of Appeal has also explained this problem in its judgment: “The Court of First Instance argued that Mr. Sun’s infringement of copyright occurred from 2001-2003, so it should be based Item 3, Article 46 of Decree No. 100/2006 / ND-CP dated September 21, 2006 of the Government detailing and guiding the implementation of a number of articles of the Civil Code and the Intellectual Property Law regarding copyright and related rights to apply the Civil Code in 1995 when considering and deciding is correct. “

  1. Specific legal issues . In fact, the citation of the above laws is still in a rather general form because Article 760, 761 of the 1995 Civil Code refers to many acts of using other people’s works without permission and remuneration. but only the real problem in this case is Mr. Sun’s behavior being a citation without asking for permission and paying remuneration to the author. Pursuant to Article 760, 761 of the 1995 Civil Code, in order to not be required to obtain permission and to pay remuneration to the author, the user’s behavior must satisfy certain conditions. First , use must be in one of the behaviors listed in Article 761 [3] ; second , this behavior must meet the requirements of Article 760 [4] .

I-Behavior in the list

5. Concept . Article 761, Civil Code 1995 gives us a list of acts of using other people’s works without permission, and remuneration for the author when meeting the requirements of Article 760. In this list, the act en “citing works without misrepresenting the author’s comments for comment or illustration in his work” is the content discussed in relation to this case.

BLDS uses the term “citation for works” but does not define how “quotations” here are understood. The guiding text is not really clear in this regard. Article 12 Decree 76 / CP stipulates: “The excerpt of the published work of another according to the provisions of points b, c and d, Clause 1, Article 761 of the Code does not become a major part of the work. new; This citation is limited to the extent of introducing, commenting or clarifying the issue in your work and must specify the author’s name and origin of the cited work. ” In language in Vietnamese, the citation is interpreted as “ leading a certain sentence or paragraph [5] . This definition is inadequate because only the “paragraph” is concerned, while the quotation can be used in other areas as well, but nonetheless, it cites an entire work that is not in the definition of ” quote”. According to one author, “ quotes are the use of another (insignificant) work of others to highlight the idea fake [6] . Thus, in general, “citation” cannot be used “all” of others’ works.

Note that the citation must be expressed by the quoter “in his work”. This request was not deeply analyzed by the Court but the Court also acknowledged that Mr. Sun’s document is a work so the request is satisfied. Specifically, according to the Court of Appeal, “it is necessary to affirm that this is a scientific research work, a creative body of Mr. Ton, but Mr. Ton is not merely a collection of articles by many authors to printed into books for commercial purposes ”.

  1. Determine . In the case, we found Mr. Sun used all of Tuan’s works but added some comments.

According to the Court of First Instance, “Mr. Ton himself acknowledged the 4 articles he printed in the book” The Story of Kieu – Study and Discuss “by the author. Mr. Nguyen Quang Tuan and he did not ask for permission from Tuan. Mr. Sun suggested that based on Article 760 – 761 of the Civil Code in 1995, Mr. Tuan’s four articles were public documents, published in the press, not in the category of prohibited copying and he used 4 This article is for scientific research, not for business purposes … He printed all of Tuan’s articles to comment … But in Article 761, the forms of using the works do not require permission, no remuneration it is just a “citation of the work …” rather than a full print of the author’s post. So Mr. Sun thinks that he printed Mr. Tuan’s four articles in “The Story of Kieu – Research and Discussion” does not have to ask Mr. Tuan because the law allows it to be unfounded “ [7] .

However, this is not an opinion of the Court of Appeal. Because, according to the Court of Appeal, “The reason, Mr. Dao Thai Ton gathered 10 articles in the discussion, in which there are 4 articles by Mr. Nguyen Quang Tuan, these articles clearly reflect that these are all articles. debate on the method of studying the Tieu Kieu study text proposed by Professor Hoang Xuan Han before his death and the debate has been very lively for many years (1997-1999). When studying four articles of Mr. Tuan, Mr. Ton had to extract the original text and pointed out 82 cognitive errors in 4 of Tuan’s articles (the total number of Tuan’s four articles was 16,545 words, then There were 82 errors) in which Mr. Ton criticized Mr. Tuan for saying that Tuan was dishonest and poor in terms of expertise, but until the dispute, Mr. Tuan did not have a re-argument. Thus, it is obvious that Mr. Ton has faithfully reconstructed the whole debate for the purpose of research and information dissemination, Mr. Ton must print all 4 of Mr. Tuan’s articles in a complete way so that readers can fully understand. the content to debate. Tuan’s articles are not garbled, concatenated, distorted, and the author’s name is still included in the book that clearly represents the source of the work, the author. And although it is “full-text printing” but in fact, Mr. Ton cited, because Mr. Sun interjected the paragraphs in his writings. Obeying his comments, the purpose is for readers to easily compare and recognize errors in Tuan’s articles ”.

  1. Comments . Contrary to the above statements, in this case, Mr. Sun’s behavior was not considered a citation, because here Mr. Sun reprinted the original four articles written by Tuan. Even in the judgment of the Court of Appeal also affirmed “full text printing”. We argue that this argument of the Court of Appeal is lacking in logic because the citation is different from the full-text printing of a work. It is not necessary to comment on a certain work that we must quote the original work and immediately Article 12 of Decree 76 / CP also affirms “ this excerpt is limited to the scope of introduction, comment or clarify the problem in your work ”.

In fact, resolving disputes about citing works is quite common in trial practice in some countries. In France, legislators also only allow “short quotations” as we stated in paragraph one and according to the Supreme Court, “copying an entire work in any form is not considered. is a short quote ”(Example: Cass. 1re civ., 7 nov. 2006). The reality of French law is very “strict” with the excessive citation of other people’s works. If the excerpt becomes an important part of the new work, it is a copyright infringement even if the commenter’s comments and comments are added to the citation [8] . We should also refer to the application of foreign citation rules when dealing with these issues.

Also, regarding citations, Article 761 also refers to the purpose of the citation. That is “to comment or illustrate in the work” of the citation. Here, Mr. Ton cited to “criticize” Mr. Tuan. Did Mr. Sun disrespect this purpose? However, the answer is not simple because “comment” also implies criticism. Moreover, if we only accept “quoting” to “praise” each other, this is not a good way: criticism can be an incentive to develop.

II- Requirements for accepted quotes

  1. Name and origin . In the requirements of Article 760 we see the requirement to “write or remind the author’s name and source of work”. This requirement seems to be based on the respect of the author’s moral rights and “professional ethics” when using other people’s work. This request seems to have been met in this case so we don’t focus on comments. At the Court, Mr. Ton confirmed that he printed 4 articles of Tuan in the book “The Story of Kieu – Study and Discuss”, he printed the full text and made the name of the author of those 4 articles, Tuan is the author of 4 posts above. And according to the Court of Appeal, “the author’s name is still included in the book clearly showing the origin of the work, the author”.
  1. Normal mining of works . According to Article 760, Civil Code 1995, “individuals and organizations may use other people’s works” without affecting the normal exploitation of the works, without prejudice to other interests of the authors or owners. possession of the work ”.

Is this requirement satisfied in the above case? The Court of First Instance did not address this issue because, perhaps, in the spirit of the Court of First Instance, because this is not a citation in the list of Article 761, this act has infringed copyright so it is not the most It is necessary to evaluate other requirements. On our side, the Court of Appeals thinks this is a citation. However, even if quoted in the meaning of Article 761, we still have to satisfy another requirement of Article 760.

In the above case, we can infer that Mr. Ton’s use of Tuan’s work is “affecting the normal exploitation of the work, not invasion.” harm to other authors or owners’ interests. Perhaps, because Mr. Ton brought all of Tuan’s works into his work, the reader did not need to search for documents that Tuan’s work was published. That means that the publication of Mr. Tuan’s work is not exploited normally and could therefore be considered to have violated the rights of Tuan or the organization that published Tuan’s work. If we allow a person to use the original work of another person with a few personal comments or comments, we will reduce the ability to consume the original work printed or published elsewhere. Therefore, the use of the original work of another person should not be accepted even if there is an additional personal comment.

  1. Professional role . It is quite interesting in this case to involve experts and thus give us the opportunity to study more about their role in resolving intellectual property disputes in court.

The field of intellectual property is quite complicated, so it is understandable that the need of expert comments is understandable. In this case, the Court of First Instance used personal opinion of the Director of the Copyright Department of the Ministry of Culture and Information. Specifically, according to the Court of First Instance, “The Hanoi People’s Court exchanged opinions with the Bureau of Copyright and Literature Copyright – Ministry of Culture and Information, the Office of Copyright and Literature Copyright asserting that Mr. Ton printed Tuan’s four articles in “The Tale of the Kieu Story – Research and Discussion” without Mr. Tuan’s consent is an infringement of copyright, not considered an excuse. Reasonable guide for the purpose of introducing, commenting or clarifying the issue mentioned in the work. Therefore, Tuan’s request for Mr. Ton to infringe copyright is grounded. ” However, according to the Court of Appeal, “in assessing evidence, the Court of First Instance has made a mistake in the assumption that the use of the work does not require permission, not a remuneration is a citation of the work. products, not the entire print of the author, and based on the opinion of the individual Director of the Copyright Department of the Ministry of Culture and Information to refer to the use of four Tuan’s articles Tuan did not seek permission to violate copyright, and so the first-instance has applied Article 750 on copyright, including the moral rights and property rights of the author for his creative work. issue and apply Article 751, Article 759 on moral rights, the right to request protection to determine Mr. Tuan’s four articles Mr. Ton put into a scientific research work to argue, comment is a violation and application of sanctions prescribed in Articles 27, 609, 610, 615 Civil Code in 1995, forcing Mr. Ton to compensation for Mr. Tuan is not correct, but the Court of First Instance should apply Article 760, 761 of the Civil Code in 1995 to deny Mr. Tuan’s petition in accordance with the current law ”.

Therefore, the expert’s opinion, even if the head of the Copyright Office is not binding on the Court. Thinking, this direction is convincing. The final decision maker is still a Court, not an expert.

  1. Similar circumstances in the future . As mentioned above, disputes over citing other people’s works are quite common in foreign countries. There is no reason that this type of dispute does not exist in Vietnam and the case is commenting as a testament. However, for the case, the Court used the Civil Code in 1995 while we now have revised Civil Code and have the Intellectual Property Law. If the same situation happens, how do we resolve it on the basis of new regulations?

The use of the work does not require permission, no royalties or remuneration under Vietnamese IP law, including [9] :

  1. Copy copy a copy for the purpose of personal scientific research, teaching;
  2. Reasonably quote the work without misrepresenting the author to comment or illustrate in his work;
  3. Quote a work without misrepresenting the author to write a newspaper, used in periodicals, in radio and television programs, documentaries;
  4. Quote works to teach in schools without false ideas, not for commercial purposes;
  5. Copy a work to store in a library for research purposes;
  6. Performing theatrical works, other art performances in cultural and propaganda activities without collecting money in any form;
  7. Record, record live performances to provide news or to teach;
  8. Photographing, broadcasting works of art, architecture, photography, applied art are displayed in public places to introduce images of that work;
  9. Turn works into Braille or other languages ​​for the visually impaired;
  10. Import copy someone else’s work for personal use.

However, the use of the work in the above cases does not apply to architectural works, plastic works, computer programs. Such use shall also not affect the normal exploitation of the work, without prejudice to the rights of the author or the copyright owner; must provide information on the author’s name and origin and origin of the work.

Compared with the provisions of the Civil Code 1995, the provisions of the IP Law 2005 have expanded the use of works without permission, without paying remuneration. However, if compared to the above case, Tuan’s behavior when printing verbatim four of Tuan’s works is also not an act of using the work without permission, not for remuneration for not belonging to the school. Which of the cases is specified in Article 25 above.

  1. Conclusion . Determining the boundary between using other people’s work without permission, paying remuneration, and consenting behavior is quite difficult in practice. The document has regulations but the rights of those who are protected depend much on the person who uses it. Balancing the interests of authors and others is necessary. However, the permission to use the entire work of others is something that should not be done even though the user part has a personal comment of the user. /.

* Juris Doctor, Head of Civil Law, University of Law .

* * Doctor of jurisprudence, Deputy Head of the Department of International Law, University of Law HCM

[1] See US Copyright Law, Act No. 17

[2] See Article 107 United States Copyright Law, Act No. 17

[3] Under this Law, «forms of using the work are not required allow, not pay remuneration

1- The use of works specified in Article 760 of this Code includes the following forms:

a) Duplicate works for personal use;

b) Quoting a work without misleading the author’s intention to comment or illustrate in his work;

c) Citing works without misleading the author’s intent to write newspapers, for use in periodicals, in radio and television programs and documentaries;

d) Citing works without misleading the author’s intention to teach and test knowledge in schools;

dd) Copy the work to store and use in the library;

e) Translating and disseminating works from Vietnamese into Vietnamese ethnic minority languages ​​and vice versa;

g) Performing theatrical works and other art performances in cultural activities, propaganda in public places;

h) Recording, recording live performances with the nature of reporting news or teaching;

i) Taking photos, television, introducing images of visual, architectural, photographic and art works in public places to introduce images of those works;

k) Transfer the work to Braille for the blind.

2- The right to use works specified in Clause 1 of this Article does not apply to copying architectural works, plastic works, computer software ” .

[4] Under this Law, «individuals and organizations may use the work of others that have been published, disseminated, if the work is not prohibited from copying and that use is not for business purposes and does not affect the normal exploitation of the work, does not affect rights Other benefits of the author or owner of the work; individuals and organizations using the work are not required to obtain permission and must not pay remuneration to the author or owner of the work, but must write or remind the author’s name and origin of the work ».

[5] Language Institute, Common Vietnamese dictionary , Publisher. Orient, 2002, p. 952.

[6] Le Net, Intellectual Property Rights , Publisher. National University, 2006, p. 72.

[7] Verdict 68/2006 / DS-ST dated December 26, 2006 of Hanoi People’s Court.

[8] See PY Gautier, Propriété littéraire et artistique , Puf 1999, p. 300.

[9] Clause 1, Article 25, Vietnam IP Law 2005.