An R&D engineer creates a breakthrough invention during working hours using company equipment — who has the right to file the application: the company or the engineer? And if the filing right belongs to the company, does the employee-inventor walk away empty-handed? Vietnamese law answers both questions with a nuanced allocation: the right to file and inventorship rights are two different things.
The filing-right allocation principle — Article 86.1
Article 86.1 of the Law on Intellectual Property (consolidated text 67/VBHN-VPQH dated 23 March 2026) provides three scenarios:
- Point a — self-created by the author: the author has the filing right if the invention was created “by their own effort and expense” — i.e., outside assigned duties, without the organization’s resources;
- Point b — assigned/commissioned work: “organizations or individuals that invest funds and material means in the author in the form of assigning or commissioning work” have the filing right — “unless otherwise agreed by the parties”. This is the most common scenario: an employee creates an invention within assigned duties using company resources → the filing right belongs to the employer, unless the contract/agreement provides otherwise;
- Point c — state-funded science & technology tasks (new from 1 October 2025 under Law 93/2025/QH15): the organization assigned to manage, use, or own the results of state-budget-funded science, technology and innovation tasks has the filing right.
Additionally: multiple parties co-creating or co-investing → joint filing right, exercisable only with unanimous consent (clause 2); the filing right may be transferred by written contract or inherited — even after the application is filed (clause 3).
Two notes on terminology and texts: (1) The Law on Intellectual Property does not use the term “service invention” for the private sector — the law only provides for “assigning or commissioning work” in Article 86.1(b); if the term is used conversationally, its statutory basis should be explained immediately. (2) Article 86a has been repealed — any older documents citing Article 86a are outdated and must not be cited.
The employee-inventor keeps two rights: naming + remuneration (Articles 122, 135)
“The filing right belongs to the company” does not mean “the employee gets nothing”. The law protects the inventor through two layers of rights:
1. Moral right: to be named as inventor (Article 122.2)
The inventor is entitled to be named as the author in the Invention/Utility Solution Patent and in published documents introducing the invention. This is a personal right attached to the individual, not transferred with the filing right.
2. Economic right: remuneration (Article 122.3, detailed in Article 135.1)
The invention owner must pay the inventor remuneration as agreed between the parties. Where there is no agreement, the law sets minimum rates:
- Self-exploitation in production/business: 10% of pre-tax profits earned, corresponding to the value contributed by the invention (point a);
- Licensing to others: 15% of the total amount received by the owner upon each payment, before tax (point b).
The remuneration obligation lasts throughout the protection term of the invention (Article 135.4) — potentially up to 20 years. For co-inventors, division is as agreed among them (Article 135.3).
Understanding the 10%/15% correctly: these rates apply only when there is no agreement — parties are free to agree on different (higher or lower) rates. Do not present them as rigid statutory mandates for all cases. Also, how to determine “10% corresponding to the invention’s contribution value” has no detailed guidance — a fertile ground for disputes, which underscores the value of agreeing in writing in advance.
Agreement is the key: a checklist for businesses
The phrases “unless otherwise agreed by the parties” (86.1(b)) and “remuneration as agreed” (135.1) show that agreement is central to this mechanism. Businesses should include IP clauses in employment contracts/confidentiality agreements from the outset:
- Define the scope: inventions created within the job scope (job description, assigned tasks) belong to the company’s filing right;
- Remuneration/reward levels: agree specific inventor remuneration (instead of defaulting to the 10%/15% rates and disputing how to calculate “contribution value”);
- Confidentiality duty: the employee keeps the invention confidential until the company files — because pre-filing disclosure can destroy novelty (Article 60), killing patentability;
- Cooperation duty: the inventor assists with information and signatures needed during registration and enforcement.
No invented notification duty: the law does not require employees to “notify the employer within X days” of an invention they created — no such deadline exists in the statute. If a business wants an internal notification process, it may set one in internal rules/agreements as a management matter, not a statutory obligation.
The typical dispute: the line between “assigned work” and “self-created”
In practice, the boundary between “created within assigned/commissioned work” (filing right to the company) and “created by one’s own effort and expense” (filing right to the inventor) is an evidentiary question: did the job description cover that research? Were company equipment, funds, or data used? Was it created during or outside working hours?
This is the classic dispute when nothing was agreed in writing upfront — hence the recommendation to clarify in writing when assigning work, rather than arguing after the invention gains commercial value. Avoid rigid conclusions like “every employee invention belongs to the company” for all situations — each case turns on its specific evidence.
Frequently asked questions
If the company holds the filing right, what does the engineer get?
Two statutory rights: to be named as inventor in the patent (Article 122.2) and remuneration — as agreed, or 10% of pre-tax profits (self-use) / 15% of pre-tax licensing receipts if no agreement (Article 135.1). The remuneration duty lasts the entire protection term.
Is “service invention” a legal term?
No. The Law on Intellectual Property does not use this term for the private sector. The corresponding provision is “assigning or commissioning work” in Article 86.1(b). When encountering “service invention” in documents, check it against the correct statutory terminology.
After the employee leaves, must the company still pay remuneration?
Yes. The remuneration obligation lasts throughout the invention’s protection term (Article 135.4), regardless of whether the employment relationship still exists — unless the parties agreed otherwise.
Cited legal instruments
- Law on Intellectual Property — consolidated text 67/VBHN-VPQH dated 23 March 2026 (Articles 60, 86, 122, 135);
- Law 93/2025/QH15 — effective 1 October 2025 (adds point c, clause 1, Article 86; remuneration rates in Article 135.1).
The provisions above were checked against the original texts as of 14 October 2026. Note: Article 86a has been repealed — do not cite it. Readers should verify the laws in force at the time of application.
See also
- Patent Filing in Vietnam — who has the right to file;
- Intellectual Property Infringement in Vietnam: When Does It Become a Criminal Offence? — protecting invention ownership.
Need to review IP clauses in employment contracts? FLAT Law Firm helps businesses draft provisions on filing rights, inventor remuneration, and invention confidentiality in employment contracts/NDAs, and advises on invention ownership disputes. Reach us via the Contact page.
The information above is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice. This article was researched and quality-checked by FLAT Law Firm’s AI Legal Council under internal procedures; it has not been reviewed by a practicing lawyer. The cited legal instruments were checked against the original texts as of 14 October 2026 — readers should verify the laws in force at the time of application.