Handling Counterfeit Goods and IP Infringement in Vietnam

What is IP-counterfeiting goods and common forms

Article 213 of the 2005 IP Law (amended and supplemented by Law No. 07/2022/QH15, effective from 01/01/2023) defines “intellectual property counterfeit goods” in two groups: trademark and geographical indication counterfeit goods (goods and packaging bearing a trademark identical or difficult to distinguish from a protected trademark, used for the very same goods without permission); and pirated copies (copies produced without permission of copyright or related rights holders). “IP-infringing goods” is a broader concept, also covering goods infringing patents and industrial designs.

In the market, trademark-counterfeiting goods concentrate in consumer goods (fashion, cosmetics, food, pharmaceuticals, electronic components) — the most dangerous group being counterfeits related to human health. Pirated copies concentrate in cracked software, pirated books, audio and video recordings. Distribution channels have shifted strongly to the digital environment: livestreams selling counterfeits, closed groups, brand-impersonating websites.

Administrative measures: who handles, and how?

Administrative measures are the most used route because they are faster and less costly than civil lawsuits. Sanctioning authority in the industrial property field is set out in Decree 99/2013/ND-CP (amended by Decree 126/2021/ND-CP, Decree 46/2024/ND-CP and Decree 186/2026/ND-CP, effective from 15/7/2026): the Director General of the IP Office, specialised industrial property inspection teams, market surveillance, customs, police, commune-level People’s Committee Chairpersons, provincial-level People’s Committee Chairpersons and Directors of the Department of Science and Technology — depending on the act and its severity. Infringement of copyright and related rights falls under sanctioning authority under Decree 341/2025/ND-CP (effective from 15/02/2026, replacing Decree 131/2013/ND-CP).

The maximum fine in the industrial property field is VND 250 million for individuals and VND 500 million for organisations. In addition to fines, there are remedial measures: forcing removal of infringing elements, destroying exhibits, surrendering illegal profits, revoking domain names. The process begins with the rights owner’s infringement handling request accompanied by evidence of rights and evidence of infringement. The key point is the quality of the initial dossier: a valid certificate, infringing samples with purchase receipts, and an assessment conclusion when needed.

Market surveillance and customs border control

The market surveillance force (Ministry of Industry and Trade) directly inspects and handles counterfeit goods circulating domestically: inspecting production facilities, warehouses, sales points; temporarily seizing exhibits; sanctioning or transferring dossiers to higher authorities. Brand owners can provide information and genuine-versus-counterfeit identification experts during inspection campaigns, especially peak campaigns before Tet and major holidays.

At the border, customs apply inspection and supervision of import and export goods showing signs of infringement under Articles 216–219 of the IP Law; upon detecting a suspicious shipment, customs may suspend clearance procedures for the rights owner to verify. For counterfeits manufactured abroad, this is the most effective line of defence — stopping goods right at the border instead of chasing each retail point.

Civil measures: lawsuits and damages

When large damages are needed or the infringer is organised and large-scale, the rights owner may file a civil lawsuit. Article 202 of the IP Law sets out measures courts may apply: forcing termination of infringing acts; forcing public apology and correction; forcing damages; forcing destruction, distribution or non-commercial use of infringing exhibits and means.

Damages calculation under Article 205: total material damage plus the defendant’s profits; the deemed licensing fee; other legally appropriate methods; or if undeterminable, an amount set by the court but not exceeding VND 500 million. There are also moral damages of VND 5–50 million and reasonable lawyer fees. The overall orientation for handling IP infringement is presented in this article.

Criminal measures: when does conduct become a crime?

Criminal law intervenes only when conduct reaches certain thresholds. Article 226 of the 2015 Penal Code (amended 2017) provides the crime of industrial property rights infringement: wilfully infringing a protected trademark or geographical indication with counterfeit goods on a commercial scale, or illicit gains from VND 100 million to under VND 300 million, or damage from VND 200 million to under VND 500 million — the basic frame is a fine of VND 50–500 million or non-custodial reform up to 03 years; aggravated frames (organised, recidivist…) carry fines up to VND 1 billion or imprisonment from 06 months to 03 years. Commercial legal entities may also be prosecuted with fines up to VND 5 billion.

Article 225 provides the crime of copyright and related rights infringement for copying and distribution on a commercial scale or illicit gains from VND 50 million to under VND 300 million. In practice, the criminal route often starts from an administrative dossier: when the sanctioning authority detects signs of a crime, the dossier is transferred to the investigating authority.

IP assessment: key evidence

The question “do these goods infringe rights” often cannot be answered by impression and needs an assessment conclusion. Law No. 07/2022/QH15 for the first time recorded the evidentiary value of assessment conclusions in the IP Law, while limiting it: assessment answers only technical questions (whether there is confusing identity or similarity), while the conclusion on whether infringement occurred belongs to the competent authority.

The Vietnam Institute of Intellectual Property Science (Ministry of Science and Technology) is the most reputable state assessment organisation; there are also qualified private assessors and assessment organisations. An assessment conclusion is an almost mandatory document in administrative sanction dossiers for complex cases (especially industrial design and patent infringement) and carries great weight before courts.

Handling violations on e-commerce platforms and social media

Counterfeit distribution channels now lie mainly in the digital environment. The practical process includes: scanning and detecting infringing stalls (automated tools or test purchases); sending takedown notices with evidence of rights; monitoring removal and handling re-offending stalls under different names.

For violations on livestreams and closed groups, identifying the seller’s identity is harder — test purchases with full traceability, combined with requesting the platform to provide seller information as regulated, is an effective approach. When an online stall is tied to a brand-impersonating domain name, domain handling measures may also be combined; when counterfeits are advertised with images copied from the official website, copyright infringement additionally arises.

Evidence collection and multi-track coordination strategy

All handling measures stand on evidence. The standard evidence set includes: a valid IP certificate; infringing samples with purchase receipts; images and videos of production and display locations; an assessment conclusion; and documents proving damage.

The golden rule: do not “alert” the target before evidence is preserved — an early warning letter may cause the infringer to dissipate goods and erase traces. The correct sequence: collect evidence → legal assessment → choose measures → act simultaneously. Effective campaigns rarely use a single measure: combining administrative sanction requests against large production sites and warehouses; requesting customs to strengthen control; sending takedown notices to platforms; and preparing civil lawsuit dossiers or criminal denunciations against ringleaders. For foreign rights owners, authorising a single legal focal point in Vietnam to coordinate the entire campaign avoids duplication and lack of synchronisation.

Prevention: from protection registration to market monitoring

Handling counterfeits costs far more than prevention. The foundation starts with full protection registration: registering trademarks in Vietnam for brand names, logos and packaging; registering industrial designs for distinctive product shapes; registering copyright for packaging and advertising content. Before filing, conduct thorough trademark searches to avoid conflicts.

The second layer of prevention is market monitoring: monitoring new trademark applications to file timely oppositions; monitoring e-commerce platforms and social media to detect infringing stalls early; training authorised distribution networks to recognise and report counterfeits. The third layer is internal governance: supply chain control, anti-counterfeit stamps, QR codes for origin traceability, anti-counterfeit clauses in distribution contracts. All should be organised into a periodic intellectual property portfolio management programme — see the IP portfolio management checklist.

Frequently asked questions