Lawmakers are proposing safeguards to prevent AI from exploiting artists’ voices, images, and creative styles without consent.
Experts are calling for Vietnam’s revised intellectual property law to include protection of artists’ voices, images, and creative styles against AI-generated deepfakes and unauthorized use by foreign platforms.
At a session discussing amendments to the Law on Intellectual Property (IP) on the morning of November 5, Associate Professor Dr. Bui Hoai Son, Standing Member of the National Assembly’s Committee on Culture and Education and a representative from Hanoi, stressed that the revised law must not only improve technical legal mechanisms but also act as a cultural firewall in the digital age.
Such reforms, he said, are crucial to protecting creators and asserting Vietnam’s cultural sovereignty in the global digital space.
Protecting artists’ digital identities from exploitation
Son supported the amendment of Clause 13, Article 4, which expands the scope of industrial design protection to include “non-physical products.” However, in a digital context, he argued, this must go beyond 3D models and also encompass digital images, voice profiles, performance styles, and digital personas.
He proposed explicitly adding such protections in the legal text to ensure that artists’ voices, likenesses, and creative styles are not copied, deepfaked, or commercially exploited by AI without consent.
“We must not allow Vietnamese artists to become free data suppliers for foreign AI companies,” Son emphasized, warning that without legal safeguards, cultural value may be reduced to a raw resource for global tech exploitation.
Referring to Clause 2, Article 7 of the draft, which prohibits IP rights from obstructing the use of national symbols like the flag, emblem, and anthem, Son recommended adding language to ensure this applies to both online environments and digital platforms. He also urged clarifying the responsibilities of individuals, organizations, and platform providers.
“This is how we safeguard the nation’s sacred symbols in the era of algorithms and AI-driven content moderation,” he said.
Regarding IP inspection, the revised Article 201 broadens the scope of subjects allowed to conduct assessments. But in an age where music, images, and content can be replicated by AI in seconds, Son argued that human evaluators alone are insufficient.
He proposed the inclusion of “digital inspection capabilities,” such as content recognition tools, AI data analysis, origin tracing, and copyright verification technologies. Without these tools, he warned, even the best laws would be powerless to resolve digital copyright disputes in practice.
He also called for the addition of emergency dispute resolution mechanisms for digital content and encouraged the use of technologies like content ID, watermarking, or blockchain to improve copyright enforcement.
