Skip to main content
European Commission logo
IP Helpdesk

Case Study 65: Estonian company – new collection of furniture in Vietnam

  1. Background 

On 16 October 2024, a French designer working for an Estonian company created in 2022) contacted the SEA IP SME Helpdesk (SEA HD) via email, following the recommendation of a French SME who was supported and advised by the SEA HD.

Explaining the current situation of the SME and the will to protect their original designs and creations in the future (in view of attending an international trade fair in March 2025), the IP Business Advisor (IPBA) suggested paying them a visit at their concept store/showroom, located in Ho Chi Minh City.

On 18 October 2024, the IPBA was received by the French designer and they discussed an IP protection strategy for protecting a new collection of furniture to be publicly released in early 2025. 

  1. IP issues raised

The meeting enabled the French designer to first introduce the brand, the various elements of furniture of the new collection, and their current IP protection strategy for existing designs. The IPBA was then able to help draft a new IP protection strategy for the SME.

Support and advice provided by the SEA HD 

  • The IPBA highlighted key IP concepts to keep in mind when doing business in Vietnam (first-to-file system for IPR, bad faith registration, registration of IPR needed for enforcement) and key IPR that are usually recommended for protection as a furniture designer. 
  • First, the designer was advised to consider trademark protection for Vietnam and the European Union (EU): from basic- (costs, how to file the application and where) to advanced-level information (which sign should be protected, which countries to cover, deciding between national or international registration routes, the need to perform a prior right search before filing a new trademark application). The SME already held a trademark registered in France, which could easily be used for following the international route.
  • Secondly, the IPBA briefed the designer on the importance of industrial designs for both Vietnam and the EU (sharing that non-registered designs could benefit from protection within the EU without the need for registration, which is not relevant for Vietnam). The IPBA highlighted the strict requirements for protection (notably the novelty requirement) and the need to be extra cautious whenever a new work is disclosed.
  • Thirdly, the IPBA stressed what copyright protection could bring to the SME, notably by organising and collecting evidence, plus using the optional but highly recommended local registration before the Copyright Office of Vietnam (which could turn out to be very efficient in case of local infringement). An introduction to the principles of the Berne Convention was also performed, as a similar strategy should be applied in Europe.
  • Finally, the designer asked several questions about IP enforcement in Vietnam and showed that they were willing to know how efficient the system was and if it was worth using some budget for registering IPR. The IPBA shared information on costs and efficiency (notably the preferred use of administrative actions in Vietnam despite non deterrent sanctions and low fines), as well as several tips when attending trade fairs (sharing the existence of a joint guide developed in-house by the European Commission initiative) and the way to secure evidence (during the process of creation but also in case of suspicion of IP infringement).

 

  1. Results 
  • IP awareness and knowledge both increased for the French designer, enabling him to make informed decisions, negotiate with future partners, and train staff.
  • Following the meeting, the designer had a meeting with the management team of the Estonian SME, then gathered sensitive information and contacted a local lawyer in hope of quickly launching local applications for trademarks, industrial designs, and copyright,after carefully discussing the budget available for IP protection strategy in Vietnam. 

 

  1. Lessons learnt 
  • IP knowledge and protective measures at an early stage of development are key (the entrepreneur contacted the SEA HD while developing the add-on). 
  • Contracts may be helpful in commercialising and further protecting IP. Some IPR can be registered faster than others (i.e. copyright in Vietnam) and should therefore not be forgotten.
  • An efficient IP protection strategy should cover the registration of several IPR (not only one) plus the monitoring of several channels (Internet, physical shops and competitors, social media and e-commerce platforms plus IP databases).
  • An IP protection strategy is dynamic and should evolve year after year, creation after creation, and also when signing new partnerships.
  • Adapt the IP protection strategy depending on the country of interest (the entrepreneur would also need to build a different strategy for Europe and neighbouring countries of Asia).
  • Contact a local IP agent or lawyer to help with the registration of IPR and drafting of template agreements. The SEA HD’s list of IP Experts intends to guide SMEs towards obtaining reliable and professional advice.