According to the case records, Company T incorporated 20 musical works into its show without obtaining prior authorization and without paying royalties or other remuneration to the authors and copyright holders. VCPMC, acting under its authorization to manage and enforce these creators’ rights, initiated legal proceedings. In its first-instance judgment, the Hanoi People’s Court upheld VCPMC’s claims, ordering Company T to issue a public apology and pay damages exceeding VND 210 million. The royalty calculation was based on VCPMC’s internal fee schedule under Decision No. 14/QD-TTBVQTGANVN.

At the appellate stage, the court affirmed that Company T’s conduct constituted copyright infringement. However, relying on Decree No. 22/2018/ND-CP, the Court rejected the plaintiff’s royalty calculation, holding that VCPMC’s internal fee schedule could not be regarded as binding because it had neither been agreed upon by the organization exploiting and using the works nor had it yet received the opinion of Association N2, which directly manages VCPMC. Instead, the Court determined that a reasonable royalty rate was VND 3,000,000 per musical work, with reference to contracts that Company T had entered into with another musician for the same program. On this basis, royalties for the 20 works were fixed at VND 60,000,000.

The appellate Court also recognized reasonable expenses incurred for evidence collection, including VND 2,650,000 for the preparation of a bailiff’s record and VND 2,400,000 for ticket purchases used in compiling that record. Accordingly, the total damages payable by Company T were adjusted to VND 65,050,000. The Court dismissed the remaining claims due to insufficient supporting evidence.

This appellate judgment provides important guidance on the assessment of damages in copyright infringement cases. In particular, pursuant to Clauses 3 and 4 of Article 42 of Decree No. 22/2018/ND-CP, royalties, remuneration, and other material benefits should be determined based on a written contract reflecting the parties’ agreement. In addition, the assessment of compensatory royalties should ensure that the amount remains reasonable in light of the actual revenue generated from the performance.

The article cannot and does not contain any legal advice. The information is provided for general informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional advice.

Accordingly, before taking any actions based upon such information, I encourage you to consult with the appropriate professionals. The use or reliance on any information contained in this article is solely at your own risk.