-
 Usually
our turnover increases steadily, but there are periods of
several months at a time where our turnover does not increase.
The main reason for this is counterfeit products. The protection
of trademarks depends very much on a company's relationship with
officials in relevant government agencies. Most agencies don't
seem to think that dealing with trademark infringement is their
responsibility. In 2003, we received 33 official conclusions
that 22 other businesses infringed upon our "Golden Pig" (animal
feed) trademark, but punishment for these infringements were
problematic. In some cases, decisions were made but not be
implemented, for example the Hai Phong Market Control sub-Bureau
found that Song Hong company based in Hanoi violated our
company's trademark, but were unable to render punishment
because they do not have the authority to do so in Hanoi. I
would like the government to give full power and responsibility
to a single agency, and hold one specific individual
accountable. If responsibilities are spread out among various
agencies and no specific individual is held accountable, I don't
think counterfeit products can be dealt with effectively.
Mr. Nguyen Huu Loi,
Chairman, Managing Director, VIC Co. Ltd.
-
In our country, both
the Court and the administrative systems are involved in IP
enforcement. The administrative system alone includes many
government agencies—the Market Management Bureau, Science and
Technology Inspection, Economic Police and Customs. Of the many
authorities involved, it is hard to determine which one has
primary responsibility. In other countries, administrative
authorities are also involved in trademark enforcement but in
general only one or at most two agencies—customs and the
police—are involved. The Vietnamese model for market is based on
that of China's, but no other country in the world uses this
model. The number of authorities involved needs to be reduced in
Vietnam.
The maximum administrative fine of 100 million dong is too low a
punishment to be an effective deterrent towards the trademark
violator. Furthermore, a problem with the current regulations is
that the punishment is limited to the specific violation, for
example, a laundry detergent manufacturer that is found guilty
of copying a competitor's trademark would only be required to
dispose of the packaging that contains the violating trademark,
but would still be allowed to keep the detergent, change the
packaging and sell it. This is not an effective punishment.
The improvement of the trademark enforcement system is an urgent
task in the coming years to meet the requirements of WTO
accession.
Mr. Tran Viet Hung,
Deputy Director General,
National Office of Intellectual Property of Viet Nam
-
 Companies
that are victims of trademark infringements and consulting firms
like ourselves always want the maximum penalty to be applied. At
present, the maximum administrative fine is 100 million dong,
and is to be applied to cases of organized violation involving a
large volume of products and monetary values, but not large
enough to warrant a criminal penalty. In reality, there have
been many large-scale, organized violations…I don't understand
why the maximum fine of 100 million dong has not been applied in
practice.
Mr. Ho Vinh Thinh,
Partner,
Ageless IP Attorneys & Consultants
-
One of the biggest
problems is the situation of widespread and blatant trademark
infringement. This feeds the perception that Vietnam is not
interested in protecting IPRs and thus makes it less attractive
to foreign investors. Vietnam has many regional competitors for
investment, and corporate headquarters will continue to give
preference to those countries where they believe IPRs are
adequately protected.
Mr. Paul A. Norris,
International Lawyer, Baker & McKenzie
-
 One
of the primary reasons for the abundance of imitation and
counterfeit goods is the fact that Vietnamese businesses don't
see the long-term and chase after short-term benefits. Another
reason that is just as important is that Vietnam is still poor
and thus the budget allocated to investigation of infringements
and enforcement of laws is very small; the number of staff
allocated to IP enforcement is few, their level of skills and
expertise on the subject matter is limited; and the
collaboration between relevant government offices is weak.
Given the current situation, businesses should coordinate their
efforts to protect themselves from trademark infringement by
doing things like forming business associations, provide
financial support for activities designed to detect the
production of counterfeit and imitation goods, etc.
Compared with other countries in the region, trademark
protection in Vietnam is not the worst. However, we can and
should do a better job at trademark protection if we want to
have a competitive advantage in attracting foreign investment
over other countries in the region such as Singapore, Thailand
or Malaysia, all of which have much better trademark enforcement
mechanisms in place.
Mr. Pham Vu Khanh
Toan, Attorney-at-Law, Pham & Associates
>> More...
|
