Many technology companies investing in a database system tacitly assume: “I paid to build this database, so I own all the data inside it.” This is a common — and potentially costly — misconception. Under Vietnamese intellectual property law, computer software and databases both fall under copyright subject matter, yet what is actually protected differs fundamentally between the two.
This article compares the two under the Law on Intellectual Property (consolidated document 67/VBHN-VPQH of 2026, effective from 01/4/2026) — the only legal text cited here.
1. Common ground: both are copyright subject matter
Point m, Clause 1, Article 14 of the IP Law lists among copyright-protected works: “Computer programs, data compilations.” Note that the statutory term is “data compilation” — “database” is merely the everyday expression.
Sharing the same category, the two enjoy three important common features:
- Automatic vesting: copyright arises from the moment a work is created and fixed in a tangible form, regardless of registration (Clause 1, Article 6). Registration is not a mandatory procedure for enjoying copyright (Clause 2, Article 49).
- Same term: neither belongs to the 75-year group (cinematographic, photographic, applied-art and anonymous works) → economic rights last for the life of the author plus 50 years after the author’s death (Point b, Clause 2, Article 27).
- Evidentiary value of the certificate: although registration is optional, a copyright registration certificate holder does not have to prove ownership in a dispute, unless there is counter-evidence (Clause 3, Article 49) — the practical reason businesses still register.
2. Detailed comparison
| Criterion | Computer software | Database (data compilation) | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rights category | Copyright (work) | Copyright (work) | Point m, Clause 1, Art. 14 |
| What is protected | The expression of the set of instructions (source code, object code) | Creativity in the selection and arrangement of materials | Art. 22 |
| What is NOT protected | Algorithms, ideas, methods of operation, principles | The data/materials themselves inside; raw figures | Clause 3, Art. 15; Clause 2, Art. 22 |
| Protection conditions | Creative and fixed in tangible form | Creativity in selection/arrangement is mandatory — a mechanically listed database does not qualify | Clause 3, Art. 14; Clause 2, Art. 22 |
| Protected as | As a literary work, whether in source or object code | As a compilation work (conditionally) | Clause 1, Art. 22 |
| Patentable? | No | No | Clause 2, Art. 59 |
| Registration | Not mandatory (automatic vesting) | Not mandatory (automatic vesting) | Clause 1, Art. 6; Clause 2, Art. 49 |
| Economic-rights term | Life of author + 50 years | Life of author + 50 years | Point b, Clause 2, Art. 27 |
| Special rights | Agreed repair/upgrade; one backup copy | No equivalent provision | Clause 1, Art. 22 |
| EU-style sui generis right | Not applicable | Vietnamese law has none — protection only at the copyright level | Positive law |
(All bases cited are from the IP Law — consolidated document 67/VBHN-VPQH of 2026.)
3. Special rights exclusive to computer software
Clause 1 of Article 22 reserves two rules for computer programs that data compilations do not enjoy:
- The author and the copyright owner may agree in writing on repairing and upgrading the program;
- A lawful user of a program copy may make one backup copy (which must not be transferred to others).
These rules also apply to programs supplied as online services or platforms — under the applicable terms of use or licensing agreement.
4. Practical examples: a mobile app and a legal-document search system
Scenario 1 — mobile app: Company A hires developers to write a warehouse-management app. All source and object code is protected as a literary work. But the warehouse-sorting algorithm behind it — if it is merely an idea or method of operation — falls outside copyright protection (Clause 3, Article 15). A competitor re-implementing a similar algorithm in different code does not infringe A’s copyright.
Scenario 2 — legal-document search system: Company B builds a system of 10,000 legal documents classified by field, tagged and arranged under its own search logic. What is protected is the creativity in that selection and arrangement — not the content of each legal document. Conversely, if B merely scrapes data and lists it mechanically, with no creativity in selection or arrangement, the database does not qualify for copyright protection.
5. Practical recommendations for businesses
- Sign an NDA and a rights-transfer agreement from the moment software development or database building is commissioned — copyright does not automatically belong to the commissioning party unless the contract says so.
- Register copyright even though the law does not require it: the certificate carries strong evidentiary weight in disputes (Clause 3, Article 49).
- For databases, keep records proving the creative selection and arrangement process — the basis for demonstrating protection eligibility when needed.
- If the data has commercial value but creativity is hard to prove, consider parallel protection as a trade secret where statutory conditions are met, combined with technical access controls.
Is your business developing software or building a database and needs to determine the scope of protection? Reach us via the Contact page of FLAT Law Firm for copyright registration advice, assignment agreement drafting and a tailored IP protection strategy.
Note: This article provides general legal information for reference only and does not constitute legal advice for any specific case. The cited provisions reflect the law in force at the time of writing (14/10/2026) and may change; consult a lawyer or legal professional before applying them.
Transparency notice: This article was drafted by FLAT Law Firm’s AI content production system and is undergoing internal review (AI Legal Council QA and owner approval before publication). It has not been reviewed by a human lawyer.
