Tien said the textbook about customs procedures had received a copyright and ownership registration certificate from the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism’s Copyright Center on September 13, 2011.

In 2013, Cofer reissued the textbook and sold it to students without asking for permission from the authors (Dr. Nguyen Van Tien and MA Nguyen Viet Bang) and owner.

Tien believes that the behavior not only violates the intellectual property law, but also badly affects his prestige, because the reprinted textbooks contain many changes compared with the original version.

Meanwhile, Dr. Le Phu Hao, representing Cofer, said the author of the textbook, or Dr. Nguyen Van Tien, only holds the intellectual property right, while the copyright ownership belongs to the school.

Hao said that the textbook is published under the name of Cofer, and is funded by Cofer, while the author can enjoy 50 percent of the profits from publications.

Citing Cofer’s operation regulations, Dr. Hao said that the school has the right to use the results of products and scientific research to serve the school.

Hao denied that the author, Chien, is also the owner of the textbook, saying that if so, the name of the school must not have been found on the cover of the textbook, and therefore, the textbooks could not be sold.

Dr. Tien argued that in this case, one cannot say the scientific research work belongs to the school. He said the textbook on customs procedures wasn’t compiled to fulfill an order placed by the school.

In the latest news, Tien said the school called him to ask him to pick up his VND800,000 royalty.

Dr. Le Thi Nam Giang from the HCM City Law University, said the key issue is determining the copyright owner of the textbook.

There are two possible scenarios. In the first, Nguyen Van Tien and MA Nguyen Viet Bang wrote the textbook to fulfill the task assigned to them by Cofer, or they wrote the book under agreement signed between the two parties.

In this case, Cofer is the copyright owner. And therefore, only the school has the right to reissue and distribute the textbooks. This would mean that the school did not commit copyright infringement.

In the second scenario, Tien wrote the textbook for himself, not to fulfill the task assigned by the school, and he holds the copyright and is the owner of the textbook.