Intellectual Property Infringement in Vietnam: When Does It Become a Criminal Offence?

Making knock-offs, pirated copies, using fake trademarks — at what point does conduct move beyond administrative fines into criminal liability? This article analyses Article 225 (copyright and related rights) and Article 226 (industrial property rights) of the Penal Code: quantitative thresholds, the “protected in Vietnam” condition, the concept of “commercial scale” and the corresponding administrative fines.

1. How many levels of enforcement apply to IP infringement?

Articles 211 and 212 of the Intellectual Property Law 50/2005/QH11 (most recently amended by Law 07/2022/QH15, effective 1 January 2023) provide a multi-tier system: infringing acts are handled through civil and administrative remedies; where the elements of a crime are present, criminal prosecution applies under the Penal Code (Article 212).

2. Article 225: infringing copyright and related rights

Article 225 of the Penal Code (most recently amended by Clause 52, Article 1 of Law 12/2017/QH14, effective 1 January 2018):

• Clause 1: a fine of VND 50–300 million or non-custodial reform of up to 3 years — without the right holder’s permission, intentionally copying works, audio or video recordings, or distributing copies to the public, infringing rights protected in Vietnam, on a commercial scale OR with illegal profits of VND 50 to under 300 million OR causing damage of VND 100 to under 500 million OR infringing goods worth VND 100 to under 500 million;
• Clause 2: a fine of VND 300 million – 1 billion or 6 months – 3 years’ imprisonment — committed by an organised group; reoffending; illegal profits of VND 300 million or more; damage of VND 500 million or more; infringing goods worth VND 500 million or more;
• Clause 3 (additional penalties): a fine of VND 20–200 million, prohibition from holding positions or practising for 1–5 years;
• Clause 4 (legal entities): a fine of VND 300 million – 1 billion (Clause 1, applying where the entity was previously administratively sanctioned or convicted for the same conduct and reoffends); VND 1–3 billion or suspension of operations for 6 months – 2 years (Clause 2); additional VND 100–300 million and bans on business or capital mobilisation for 1–3 years.

3. Article 226: infringing industrial property rights

Article 226 of the Penal Code (most recently amended by Clause 52, Article 1 of Law 12/2017/QH14):

• Clause 1: a fine of VND 50–500 million or non-custodial reform of up to 3 years — intentionally infringing industrial property rights in trademarks or geographical indications protected in Vietnam, where the object is goods counterfeiting trademarks or geographical indications, on a commercial scale OR with illegal profits of VND 100 to under 300 million OR causing damage of VND 200 to under 500 million OR infringing goods worth VND 200 to under 500 million;
• Clause 2: a fine of VND 500 million – 1 billion or 6 months – 3 years’ imprisonment — committed by an organised group; reoffending; illegal profits of VND 300 million or more; damage of VND 500 million or more; infringing goods worth VND 500 million or more;
• Clause 3 (additional penalties): a fine of VND 20–200 million, prohibition from holding positions or practising for 1–5 years;
• Clause 4 (legal entities): a fine of VND 500 million – 2 billion (Clause 1, applying where the entity was previously administratively sanctioned or convicted and reoffends); VND 2–5 billion or suspension of operations for 6 months – 2 years (Clause 2); additional VND 100–500 million and bans on business or capital mobilisation for 1–3 years.

Easy to mix up: Article 225 starts at illegal profits of VND 50 million and damage of VND 100 million; Article 226 starts at illegal profits of VND 100 million and damage of VND 200 million. Law 86/2025 did not amend Articles 225 or 226 — both remain in their Law 12/2017 version.

4. The criminal threshold: how much money triggers prosecution?

Besides the quantitative thresholds above, both articles contain the qualitative element of “commercial scale” — which can push a case into criminal territory even where the goods’ value is low. Note that “commercial scale” has no quantitative definition in the law; assessment belongs to the prosecuting authorities. Directive 02/CT-TTg of 30 January 2026 requires studying Penal Code amendments toward broader scope and heavier criminal handling of industrial-property crimes — the framework may change.

5. “Protected in Vietnam” — the decisive condition

Both Articles 225 and 226 require the copyright, trademark or geographical indication to be “protected in Vietnam”. Practical consequences:

• A trademark famous abroad but not registered or protected in Vietnam cannot ground an Article 225/226 charge (Article 192 may be considered for counterfeit goods, or competition and other administrative law);
• Article 226 requires the offender to act “intentionally” — wilful fault is mandatory;
• Using works for personal, research or teaching purposes (Article 25 of the Intellectual Property Law) does not constitute infringement.

6. Administrative fines

• Industrial property: Decree 99/2013/ND-CP (amended by Decree 126/2021/ND-CP) — maximum fines of VND 250 million (individuals) / VND 500 million (organisations);
• Copyright and related rights: Decree 131/2013/ND-CP (amended by Decree 28/2017/ND-CP and Decree 129/2021/ND-CP; consolidated document 380/VBHN-BVHTTDL 2022).

7. Corporate liability

Commercial legal entities may face criminal liability under Clause 4, Article 225 (fines of VND 300 million – 3 billion, suspension 6 months – 2 years) and Clause 4, Article 226 (fines of VND 500 million – 5 billion, suspension 6 months – 2 years), plus additional business and capital-mobilisation bans. The individuals directly carrying out the conduct remain independently criminally liable.

8. Distinguishing from counterfeit-goods offences (Article 192)

Trademark-counterfeiting goods may simultaneously violate Article 192 (counterfeit goods) and Article 226. The specific charge is determined by the prosecuting authorities based on the nature of the conduct and the evidence. Conversely, genuine parallel-imported goods are not an Article 226 infringement where the goods are authentic.

9. What should brand owners do when infringed?

• Collect and preserve evidence of the infringement (products, invoices, advertisements, posts);
• Request an IP assessment to determine the scope of rights and the extent of infringement;
• Demand cessation; complain to the competent administrative enforcement authority;
• File a civil lawsuit for damages; report to the investigative authority where criminal signs exist.

Further reading

• Handling Counterfeit Goods and IP Infringement in Vietnam

The information above is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice.

For reference only, not legal advice. Content quality-checked by the AI Legal Council; not yet reviewed by a human lawyer.