Debate over music licensing fees for cafes and restaurants in Vietnam has resurfaced. The contention arises from the interpretation that even if a business pays for a music streaming subscription, playing music for customers requires a separate license. The differences between South Korea's area-based fee structure and Vietnam's maximum fee have sparked varied reactions online.
According to local media, including VnExpress, Vietnam's intellectual property law mandates that cafes and restaurants obtain permission from copyright holders or their representative organizations and pay fees when using music for commercial purposes. Purchasing CDs, records, or USBs, or subscribing to music services like Spotify, Apple Music, or YouTube Music only secures rights for personal enjoyment.
As a result, playing music in a commercial setting is treated separately. Many music streaming platforms also restrict their services to personal and non-commercial use in their terms of service. Playing music in cafes, restaurants, shops, gyms, and at business-related events is not included in the allowances of standard subscription services.
◆ Vietnam Bases Fees on Area and Location
Vietnam calculates music copyright fees primarily based on the area of the business. Under current regulations, the annual fee is determined by multiplying a base salary by an adjustment coefficient, which is applied progressively based on the actual operating area. There are also regional differences; Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City apply a 100% rate, while lower-tier cities receive discounts ranging from 20% to 90%. The annual cap for copyright fees is set at eight times the base salary, approximately 2,024,000 dong (about $118).
The media also highlighted South Korea's approach, which, like Vietnam, bases music usage fees for cafes and restaurants on the licensed operating area. According to the Korea Copyright Commission's rate table, establishments between 50 and 100 square meters must pay 4,000 won (about 81,800 dong) per month.
The highest tier applies to businesses over 1,000 square meters, with a monthly fee of 20,000 won (about 410,000 dong). Rural areas benefit from lower rates, and establishments under 50 square meters are exempt from fees.
◆ Different Calculation Methods in the U.S., U.K., Singapore, and Thailand
In contrast, many other countries do not determine fees solely based on area. In the United States, multiple performance rights organizations, such as ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC, require business owners to obtain licenses from various entities. ASCAP primarily bases annual fees for restaurants and cafes playing background music on maximum occupancy.
The U.K. operates under a single licensing system called TheMusicLicence, where the basic fee is determined by the size of the establishment, and the number of internal speakers can affect additional charges. For venues under 400 square meters, the basic fee is set at £195.4 per year, with larger speaker systems or professional audio equipment requiring separate verification.
Singapore bases its fees on the actual number of seats. For venues using only background music, the first 40 seats incur an annual fee of 8.23 Singapore dollars (about $6), the next 40 seats are charged at 4.70 Singapore dollars, and from 81 seats onward, the fee is 2.35 Singapore dollars. Additional charges apply based on the size of screens installed, with a minimum annual fee of 275 Singapore dollars.
In Thailand, various entities collect music copyright fees. Among them, MPC Music charges annual fees based on the number of seats in restaurants, bars, pubs, and lounges. Establishments with fewer than 20 seats start at 18,000 baht (about $530), while those with over 201 seats can pay up to 85,500 baht.
◆ Mixed Reactions from Online Users
Online reactions to the issue have been mixed. One user expressed frustration, asking, "Is the highest fee for a 1,000-square-meter establishment in Vietnam really five times more expensive than in South Korea?" This comment compared Vietnam's annual cap to South Korea's fees for establishments over 1,000 square meters.
Some users downplayed the necessity of music in cafes. Another commenter noted, "People these days go to cafes more for conversation or work rather than to listen to music," suggesting that they sometimes request less music. He argued that the absence of music would not significantly impact cafe operations.
Conversely, some voices acknowledged the need for compensation for creators. One user stated, "If music genuinely aids business, it is reasonable to compensate the creators," adding that transparency and convenience in the payment process are essential for gaining public support.
Questions about the operational aspects of the system also arose. Another user inquired, "How would it be handled if a customer brings their speaker and plays their playlist?" They pointed out that in such cases, the customer is not conducting business, nor is the establishment playing music.
The debate over music copyright fees in cafes and restaurants extends beyond simply whether to pay fees; it raises questions about how to distinguish between personal listening rights and commercial performance rights. While South Korea and Vietnam share a commonality in area-based calculations, there are clear differences in the amounts charged and the criteria for exceptions.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.