Controversy over the case of "preventing the dissemination of revolutionary songs"

On May 27, BHMedia Company met with press agencies related to the copyright controversy for "preventing the dissemination of revolutionary songs" recently.

BHMedia: VCPMC is "collecting overlapping fees"

BHMedia reported that since April 2025, the Vietnam Center for Music Copyright Protection (VCPMC) has blocked many revolutionary music videos on the YouTube platform with the aim of requiring video owners to pay additional royalties.

Tranh cãi quanh vụ — The video "National Guard" on the YouTube channel owned by BHMedia was blocked. Screenshot

BHMedia believes that these are videos that have been paid royalties by YouTube through the CMS (Content Management System). On the system, VCPMC has confirmed the copy rights (MR) and the communication rights (PR) on the video "National Defense Corps".

This system automatically distributes revenue from YouTube to rights organizations.

However, VCPMC did not announce that it had received MR money from YouTube, while still requiring channel owners to pay this additional amount to continue exploiting the video. After 1-2 years, VCPMC continued to request additional MR fees to renew the copyright.

In BHMedia's view, collecting money in this way is a double-fee collection, creating a burden for content producers, increasing production costs, and making publishers no longer interested in using works under the management of VCPMC. In the long run, it will affect the authors who have authorized the center.

BHMedia also believes that VCPMC’s current model is different from international practice. Currently, copyright representative organizations such as PRS for Music (UK), GEMA (Germany), ASCAP (USA)… after signing an agreement with YouTube will not block or require additional payment outside the system.

"The relationship between authors and producers and publishers is a symbiotic relationship. Because without producers and publishers, musical works will not reach the public, nor will they be able to generate copyright revenue," analyzed a representative of BHMedia. At the same time, he cited the modern model being applied in international music, where artists and authors not only allow but also encourage producers to create covers, remixes, and derivative versions to help the song spread more strongly. Thanks to that, authors benefit from the song's wide presence on digital platforms.

BHMedia believes that YouTube has built a transparent ecosystem, allowing for CMS rights verification, automatic distribution of revenue, and encouraging creativity and sharing. However, VCPMC's current approach is hindering that process.

The company also believes that VCPMC's contacting of individuals to demand additional royalties is not only against the YouTube platform's regulations but also against the provisions of Vietnamese law. According to Point a, Clause 3, Article 20 of the Intellectual Property Law, copyright owners do not have the right to prohibit organizations and individuals from copying works only to exercise other rights as prescribed by this Law. For example, copying videos posted on YouTube is only for the purpose of broadcasting videos (conveying works) for viewers on YouTube.

VCPMC affirms that BHMedia is misunderstanding

Responding to the information provided by BHMedia, VCPMC affirmed that BHMedia is misunderstanding and incorrectly applying the legal regulations on copyright.

According to VCPMC, the act of copying to post and commercially exploit works on online platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, etc. is not exempt from permission according to Point a, Clause 3, Article 20 of the Law on Intellectual Property, but is subject to the regulation of Clause 2, Article 20 of the Law.

Specifically, to be considered "copying solely for the purpose of exercising another right", the act of copying must satisfy two mandatory conditions: The purpose of copying is to exercise another right as prescribed by the Law; the subject performing the act of copying must also be the person exercising that other right.

According to VCPMC, in the case of commercial exploitation on YouTube, two separate entities participate in the process of using rights: The uploader (channel owner) is the one who exercises the right to copy, when creating a digital copy to store on the system; the YouTube platform is the party that exercises the right to communicate the work to the public through its technical infrastructure.

Since the two entities exercise two different rights, the obligation to request permission and pay copyright fees cannot be considered a single act to enjoy exemption. Therefore, BHMedia's claim that its copying act is exempt from permission is not in accordance with the regulations.

VCPMC said it has reported the incident to state management agencies.

Source: https://nld.com.vn/tranh-cai-quanh-vu-ngan-chan-pho-bien-ca-khuc-cach-mang-196250527195940986.htm