6-year Implementation of Inter-ministerial IPR Action Plan: Difficulty Ahead

12:32:59 AM | 4/10/2013

Intellectual property rights (IPR) enforcement is limited because enterprises are indifferent to their legitimate interests. This conclusion is drawn from the review of the six-year implementation of the inter-ministerial action plan on cooperation on IPR infringement prevention (Action Programme 168). The action plan has been jointly carried out by the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Ministry of Public Security.
Many challenges ahead
Ta Quang Minh, General Director of the National Office for Intellectual Property (NOIP) under the Ministry of Science and Technology, said Vietnam has full legal systems and standards on commercial intellectual property aspects, confidently integrates into the world intellectual property system, and makes intellectual property an effective instrument to improve production and business capacity of enterprises.
 
In fact, some brand names have become one of the valuable assets of many companies. For example, with intellectual property registration, Duy Loi Company successfully protected its exclusive industrial design and asserted its position on the world market. After registering intellectual property rights, selling prices of Phu Quoc fish sauce, Luc Ngan litchi and Doan Hung grapefruit increased from 1.5 - 2 times.
 
The awareness of the society and business community of the tasks and roles of customs authorities in IPR enforcement and protection is also raised. According to the General Department of Customs, after five years of implementing Action Programme 168, the number of applications for intellectual property tracking at border gates is on the rise.
 
Nguyen Van Thuy, Head of Intellectual Property Rights Protection and Control Team under the Anti-Smuggling Investigation Department affiliated to the General Department of Customs, said many famous Vietnamese brands are faked in foreign countries and then smuggled into Vietnam. This reality has existed for years but the lack of coordination of brand-owning companies in the fight against IPR violations has slammed a brake on IPR protection.
 
The limited knowledge of intellectual property of some companies resulted in inaccurate requests for protection and infringement on other companies’ rights and interests. Some companies even simply think that intellectual property rights protection is the responsibility of customs authorities. For that reason, the effectiveness of intellectual property rights protection is not high. Some companies attach much importance to intellectual property rights protection but they prefer not making public violations on fears that the information may result in a drop in revenue.
 
Resolve of customs authorities
Mr Thuy said customs authorities are one of the forces assigned to prevent counterfeiting and enforce IPR. However, one of the biggest existing problems is the lax information exchange among enforcement forces. Each year, a considerable volume of counterfeit goods is seized and handled by enforcement forces but customs agencies only know this information from annual review reports or mass media rather than internal information channels created by enforcement agencies. This leads to insufficient and inaccurate information about seized volume, handling method, and source of seized items. As a result, customs agencies cannot use such information for their activities.
 
To effectively prevent IPR infringement, relevant agencies need to formulate a more reasonable and effective protocol for information exchange and sharing among enforcement agencies. Customs authorities will further study the experience of Vietnamese competent agencies and foreign customs authorities in collecting and analysing information, developing database, and applying IPR risk management techniques in order to promote effective IPR enforcement, prevent counterfeit, he said.
 
*Since 2007, customs authorities have received and handled 275 cases related to intellectual property rights at the border gates.
* In 2012, customs authorities received and handled nearly 100 requests for inspection and monitoring of IP-related imports and exports goods carrying brand names like Shiseido, Company, Limited, Lascos, Epson; for information addition for brand names like Panasonic, Panasonic Ideas and Ensure, for handling of fake automobile parts bearing such brand names as Seiken, Soiken and MTV Seiken in Vietnam.

Huong Ly