Need for transparency and objectivity in determining the value of intellectual property rights

On the morning of November 5, the National Assembly discussed in groups: the draft Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement (amended); the draft Law on Judicial Expertise (amended); the draft Law on amending and supplementing a number of articles of the Law on Anti-Corruption and the draft Law on amending and supplementing a number of articles of the Law on Intellectual Property. In Group 11, including the National Assembly Delegation of Can Tho City and the National Assembly Delegation of Dien Bien Province, the delegates highly appreciated many contents in the draft Law on amending and supplementing a number of articles of the Law on Intellectual Property. However, to meet current requirements, the delegates proposed to complete some contents.

Discussion scene at Group 11. Photo: Lam Hien

There needs to be more independent control mechanisms for capital contribution transactions.

Clause 4, Article 1 of the draft Law (supplementing Article 8a after Article 8 of the Intellectual Property Law) stipulates that owners are allowed to self-determine the value and establish a separate management list for intellectual property rights that do not meet the conditions for recording asset value in accounting books.

Emphasizing that the value of assets in accounting books must strictly comply with accounting and financial standards, National Assembly Deputy Nguyen Tuan Anh (Can Tho) noted that the draft Law has not yet clarified or referred to any legal provisions on the content of conditions for recording asset values in accounting books. According to the delegate, if there is no unified understanding, it will lead to different applications in practice, affecting commercial transactions, capital contributions, and capital mobilization. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the legal provisions and guidelines on the conditions for recording asset values in accounting books.

National Assembly Deputy Nguyen Tuan Anh (Can Tho) speaks. Photo: Lam Hien

Delegate Nguyen Tuan Anh also requested clarification on whether the regulation on allowing self-determination of value when contributing capital/mobilizing capital contains risks regarding transparency and objectivity or not? Could it lead to legal evasion, inflating asset values, leading to damage to shareholders and other investors?

"Requiring owners to self-determine the value may limit the role of third parties. If we self-determine, we want to achieve the value we decide, the second party contributes capital with us, and both parties agree; so the question is what will the third party do? In reality, there are many valuation organizations. So what is the role of this organization in participating in valuation? If these organizations participate, will it be more objective?", the delegate asked.

In addition, according to delegate Nguyen Tuan Anh, the listing of separate assets may violate the prohibitions in accounting law. Specifically, Article 13, Clause 3 of the Accounting Law prohibits the act of leaving out of the accounting books the assets and liabilities of the accounting unit or those related to the accounting unit. Without detailed instructions on separate management, it may lead to legal conflicts or violations.

"There needs to be more detailed, transparent and objective regulations in determining the value of intellectual property rights to avoid creating future legal risks as well as asset management." Emphasizing this, delegate Nguyen Tuan Anh suggested that, in addition to Clause 2, Article 8a on the Government's responsibility to prescribe general principles on value determination, it is necessary to study additional independent control mechanisms for capital contribution transactions.

Independent valuation is needed to ensure transparency and fairness.

National Assembly member Lo Thi Luyen ( Dien Bien ) also said that allowing intellectual property owners to determine their own value could lead to dishonesty in valuation (increasing the value compared to the real value), inaccurate valuation (too low or too high). The delegate said that when intellectual property owners use intellectual property rights to conduct commercial transactions, contribute capital, or mobilize capital, they may encounter difficulties in transactions or when disputes arise, the competent authorities will also encounter difficulties in handling them.

National Assembly Delegate Lo Thi Luyen (Dien Bien) speaks. Photo: Lam Hien

The delegate suggested that the content of intellectual property owners being allowed to self-determine the value and create a separate list for management should be assigned to the Government to specify the detailed records and procedures for self-determining the value, and it should be considered to have regulations assigning a state agency to appraise the value or an independent appraisal organization to ensure transparency and fairness in transactions related to intellectual property rights.

“If the provisions are as general as the draft Law, the intellectual property right owner can easily determine the value according to his/her own understanding and individual way of doing things, but will be unclear about the procedures and records, and whether the self-evaluation is correct or not, whether the results can be used to carry out commercial transactions, contribute capital, mobilize capital... is another matter, the feasibility of this provision is difficult”, said delegate Lo Thi Luyen.

Clearly define data ownership, exploitation and protection

Article 3 on Intellectual Property Rights, the draft Law amending and supplementing, stipulates: “Copyright subjects include literary, artistic and scientific works; copyright-related rights subjects include performances, sound recordings, video recordings, broadcast programs, cable signals, encrypted program carriers, satellite signals, encrypted program carriers”.

To suit the current situation and the rapid development of science and technology, National Assembly Delegate To Ai Vang (Can Tho) proposed to consider and add two subjects: digital technology, artificial intelligence and reporters and press organizations.

National Assembly Delegate To Ai Vang (Can Tho) speaks. Photo: Lam Hien

Given the current reality, artificial intelligence has created works such as music, literature, art..., delegates suggested that there should be clear regulations on copyright, for works created and identifying owners, on the rights and responsibilities of programmers, of intermediary service providers and inter-sectoral coordination mechanisms in dispute handling when copyright infringement occurs.

Also according to delegate To Ai Vang, press agencies and reporters need a legal corridor to protect their legitimate rights and interests, giving them more motivation to invest in original, high-quality content, promoting creativity and innovation in professional journalism activities and promoting sustainable development of the media industry in the context of the digital economy and implementing international commitments on intellectual property.

Delegate To Ai Vang also proposed to add some State policies to the draft Law. Specifically, add policies on Artificial Intelligence to determine who is the owner of works and inventions created entirely by Artificial Intelligence and the legal status of Artificial Intelligence in creative activities; who is legally responsible when Artificial Intelligence violates the Intellectual Property rights of others?

Along with that, supplement the policy of protecting Intellectual Property in the digital environment, for intellectual property violations on the Internet, such as: trading in counterfeit goods; strengthen cooperation with digital platforms, have higher responsibility in preventing and removing content and products that violate intellectual property; strengthen the international cooperation mechanism to handle violations with foreign elements.

"In the data economy, big data is an important asset, and it is necessary to have clear legal regulations on ownership, exploitation and protection of data, to avoid illegal data monopolization or abuse," delegate To Ai Vang emphasized.

Source: https://daibieunhandan.vn/can-minh-bach-khach-quan-ve-xac-dinh-gia-tri-quyen-so-huu-tri-tue-10394438.html