Vietnam's Amended IP Law 2025 — What Actually Changed

Effective 1 April 2026, Vietnam’s amended IP Law significantly shortens application processing timelines, introduces the country’s first statutory provisions on IP subject matter created with the use of artificial intelligence, and adds a dedicated framework for managing and exploiting IP rights as assets — including as capital contributions and loan collateral.

01 · Administrative Reform

Shorter Processing Timelines — The Exact Numbers

This is the most tangible change for applicants. Figures under “Previous Law” are taken from Consolidated Text No. 155/VBHN-VPQH.

Substantive Examination Deadlines (Article 119, amended by Article 1(44) of Law 131/2025)

Application Type	Previous Law	Amended Law
Patents	18 months	12 months −33%
Trademarks	9 months	5 months −44%
Industrial Designs	7 months	5 months −29%
Geographical Indications	6 months	5 months −17%

For patents, the period runs from the publication date if the request for substantive examination is filed before publication, or from receipt of the request if it is filed after publication. For all other types, it runs from the publication date.

Publication Deadlines (Article 110, amended by Article 1(35) of Law 131/2025)

Application Type	Previous Law	Amended Law
Trademarks, industrial designs, geographical indications	2 months	1 month −50%
Patents with a request for early publication	No fixed deadline	1 month

The period runs from the date the application is deemed formally valid. For early patent publication, it runs from the date of the request or the date the application is deemed valid, whichever is later. Patent applications without an early publication request are still published in the 19th month from the filing or priority date.

Third-Party Opposition Deadlines (Article 112a, amended by Article 1(37) of Law 131/2025)

Application Type	Previous Law	Amended Law
Patents	9 months	6 months −33% (3 months if expedited)
Trademarks	5 months	3 months −40%
Industrial Designs	4 months	3 months −25%
Geographical Indications	3 months	3 months unchanged

Expedited substantive examination — entirely new (Article 119(2a)): In cases prescribed by the Government (Article 14a of Decree No. 100/2026/ND-CP), applicants for patents and trademarks may request expedited substantive examination. The examination period is 3 months, counted from the same starting point as standard examination. Where a patent application is examined on the expedited track, the opposition window is also shortened to 3 months.

Watch out — shorter deadline to request patent examination (Article 113(1)): The deadline to request substantive examination of a patent application is reduced from 42 to 36 months from the filing or priority date. If no request is filed in time, the application is deemed withdrawn. For utility solutions, the deadline remains 36 months, as before.

No more decisions accepting formally valid applications (Article 109(4)): After formality examination, valid applications are forwarded directly for publication. The date an application is forwarded for publication is deemed its formal validity date. The IP Office issues decisions only for applications found invalid.

When the new rules apply (Article 3 — transitional provisions)

Applications filed before 1 April 2026 continue to be processed under the law in force at the time of filing, except for the following, which follow the amended law:

Formality examination of applications not yet accepted as valid;
Opposition deadlines for applications published on or after 1 April 2026;
Substantive examination deadlines for applications published on or after 1 April 2026.

The 36-month deadline to request patent examination therefore applies only to applications filed on or after 1 April 2026.

02 · Applications & Conditions for Protection

Article 100 Rewritten — Applicants Now Answer for What They Declare

The previous Article 100 listed every required document in detail: the request form, documents describing the subject matter, powers of attorney, proof of the right to file and of priority, genetic resource disclosures, fee receipts, and more. The amended law replaces this with a general rule and delegates the details to the Minister of Science and Technology:

“An industrial property application shall comprise documents relating to the subject matter for which protection is sought and other relevant documents.” (Article 100(1))

The unity-of-application rule, previously in Article 101 (now repealed), has moved into Article 100 without substantive change. Each application may request one protection title for one subject matter, with three exceptions: a group of inventions forming a single inventive concept; a set of products or variants of an industrial design; and one trademark covering multiple goods and services.

What is new (Article 100(7)): The applicant is responsible for the information declared in the application. Where there are grounds to determine that the information is inaccurate or untruthful, the authority that granted the protection title may revoke the decision granting that title.

Partial designs and non-physical designs (Article 4(13)): An industrial design is now the appearance of all or part of a product, in physical or non-physical form. Circulating digital copies of a non-physical product bearing a protected design falls within the owner’s exclusive rights (Article 124(2)(d)).

Broader novelty grace period for designs (Article 65(4)–(5)): A design does not lose novelty if the application is filed within 6 months of a public disclosure made by the person entitled to file, or by someone who obtained the design directly or indirectly from that person. The same applies where the design was disclosed in an application or protection title published by the IP Office in breach of the law, or in an application filed by a person without the right to file.

Signs indicating Vietnam as the country of origin (Article 74(2)(đ1)): Signs indicating Vietnam as the geographical origin of goods or services are deemed non-distinctive, unless the sign was widely used and recognised as a trademark before the filing date, or it is a component of a distinctive sign registered as a collective or certification mark.

Security review of inventions (Article 89a(1)): An invention classified as a state secret in a technical field affecting national defence or security, created in Vietnam, and belonging to a Vietnamese citizen residing in Vietnam or an organisation established under Vietnamese law, may be filed abroad only with permission from the Ministry of National Defence or the Ministry of Public Security.

Pre-publication confidentiality (Article 111): The previous law already required patent and industrial design applications to be kept confidential until publication. The amendment widens the circle of those accountable: beyond civil servants, it now covers public employees and other staff involved in processing applications. Anyone who discloses application information faces disciplinary action and must compensate the applicant for any resulting damage.

03 · Artificial Intelligence & IP

What Is Settled and What Awaits Implementing Rules

Law 131/2025 is the first Vietnamese statute to address artificial intelligence directly in the IP context. It is important to distinguish the rules that already apply from those still awaiting Government regulations.

✕Inventors and designers must be human. Article 122(1) defines the inventor or designer as the “person who directly creates” the subject matter. The amendment adds consequences where this requirement is not met: the application is deemed formally invalid (Article 109(2)(c1)), protection is refused (Article 117(1b)), and a granted title may be invalidated (Article 96(1)(d)). According to the Vietnam IP Office, these consequences apply where there are grounds to establish that the inventor or designer is not a human being.

✕AI cannot hold IP rights. Under amended Article 4(1), IP rights are rights of “organisations and individuals”. AI systems fall into neither category.

✓Lawfully published materials may be used to train AI (Article 7(5)). Organisations and individuals may use lawfully published, publicly accessible texts and data relating to IP subject matter for scientific research, testing and training AI systems, provided that such use does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate rights and interests of authors and rights holders. For texts and data protected by copyright or related rights, use must also comply with Government regulations.

!Still pending: establishing rights where AI is used (Article 6(5)). The Government will regulate how IP rights arise and are established when the subject matter is created with the use of an AI system. How much human creative contribution is needed for a person to be recognised as author or inventor will depend on these regulations.

04 · IP Commercialisation

IP Rights as Capital Contributions and Loan Collateral

Entirely new Article 8a governs the management and exploitation of IP rights as assets. IP rights were already recognised as property under the Civil Code 2015, but this is the first time the IP Law contains a dedicated provision on the subject:

Internal governance	IP owners are responsible for keeping a separate internal register of IP rights that do not yet qualify for recognition as assets in their accounting books (Article 8a(1)).
Transactions	IP owners may use their rights in civil, commercial and investment transactions in accordance with the relevant laws (Article 8a(2)).
Capital & collateral	The State encourages the use of IP rights as capital contributions or as collateral for loans, in accordance with investment, enterprise and credit legislation (Article 8a(3)).
Valuation & transfer	The State supports Vietnamese organisations and individuals in valuing IP rights and applying assignment, licensing and IP-for-equity models (Article 8(3a)).

Amended Article 7(3) provides that the State may prohibit or restrict the exercise of IP rights, or compel rights holders to permit others to use them, to safeguard national defence and security, public order and safety, social morality and public health. What is new is Article 7(4): where multiple IP rights exist over the same subject matter, a later-arising or later-established right may be ordered by a court to cease being exercised if it conflicts with the normal exploitation of the earlier right.

05 · Enforcement in the Digital Environment

Wider Responsibilities for Intermediaries and Digital Platforms

The previous Article 198b covered only the copyright and related rights liability of intermediary service providers. The amendment extends its scope to IP rights in general and adds a new category of responsible party: digital platform operators.

1Intermediary service providers

Redefined in Article 198b(1) as businesses providing technical means and digital platforms for users to upload digital content to cyberspace, or providing online connectivity for the public to access that content. The previous definition referred only to “technical means” on “telecommunications networks and the Internet”.

2Digital platform operators new — Article 198b(5a)

Responsible for implementing measures to protect IP rights in cyberspace in accordance with IP, e-commerce and cybersecurity laws. In practice, this group includes social networks, e-commerce marketplaces and content-sharing platforms.

3New civil remedy for online infringement

Under new Article 202(7), courts may order the removal, concealment or disabling of access to information, content, accounts, websites, applications or internet address identifiers connected with an IP infringement.

4Mandatory destruction of counterfeit and pirated goods

Under new Article 202(6), counterfeit trademark goods and pirated goods must be destroyed, save for certain special cases prescribed by the Government.

Digital transformation of IP administration (new Article 11b): The State will drive comprehensive digital transformation of IP activities — developing digital infrastructure, online public services, digital platforms and databases for IP work — and invest in automating processes using big data and artificial intelligence to improve efficiency and transparency.

Legal basis: Law No. 131/2025/QH15 amending and supplementing a number of articles of the Law on Intellectual Property, passed by the 15th National Assembly at its 10th Session on 10 December 2025, effective 1 April 2026. “Previous Law” figures are taken from Consolidated Text No. 155/VBHN-VPQH dated 9 September 2025 issued by the Office of the National Assembly, which consolidates the IP Law as it stood before the amendments made by Law 131/2025. Implemented by Decree No. 100/2026/ND-CP. This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.