Under the provisions of the Intellectual Property Law, cafes and restaurants must pay royalties when using musical works for business and commercial purposes. Many owners argue that since they have already paid for CDs or streaming subscriptions, collecting additional fees is "unreasonable".

However, industry experts explain that these two payments cover distinct rights. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, an international treaty with over 180 member states, including Vietnam, stipulates that authors have the exclusive right to authorize the public performance of their works by any means or process. Based on this, the laws of many countries protect the rights of authors and owners regarding the commercial use of music.

In Vietnam, according to Article 20 of the Intellectual Property Law, performing works before the public and transmitting works to the public by wired, wireless, electronic information networks, or any other technical means are considered property rights of the owner.

Therefore, using music for public enjoyment in business establishments like cafes and restaurants falls within the scope of legally protected property rights. Consequently, purchasing CDs, vinyl records, USBs containing music, or paying for Spotify, Apple Music, or YouTube Music subscriptions only grants users the right to own a copy or listen to music for personal use. When a cafe or restaurant plays music to serve customers, the establishment owner must still obtain permission and pay royalties to the owner or a representative organization.

Many online music streaming platforms clearly state in their terms and conditions that services are for personal, non-commercial use only. Monthly paid accounts allow for private, ad-free listening, offline downloads, or access to advanced features. These platforms explicitly state that users do not have the right to play music in cafes, restaurants, stores, gyms, schools, or at events with a business element.

In essence, the payment for music and the royalty fee are not "double charging" for the same right, but rather payments for two different exploitation rights related to the same musical work. The table below illustrates these two rights for a musical work:

Payment type

Paid to whom?

What is received in return?

Collecting music royalties is a common practice worldwide, not just in Vietnam. However, Vietnam's method for determining the fee is quite unique, primarily based on the business area. According to Decree 17/2023, as amended and supplemented by Decree 134/2026, the annual music royalty fee is determined by the following general formula:

The adjustment coefficient is calculated using a progressive method based on the actual area (m2) of the business establishment. Additionally, Vietnam applies varying fees depending on urban classification (Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City pay 100%, while lower-tier urban areas receive discounts from 20% to 90%). The annual royalty fee cap is 8 times the base salary, equivalent to 20,24 million VND.

South Korea has a mechanism similar to Vietnam, where fees for cafes and restaurants are determined by the licensed business area. According to the fee schedule published by the Korea Copyright Commission (KCC), establishments ranging from 50 m2 to under 100 m2 pay 4,000 KRW per month (approximately 818,000 VND per year); the highest fee, for establishments 1,000 m2 or larger, is 20,000 KRW per month (nearly 4,1 million VND per year).

The fee schedule also specifies that rural areas apply a lower rate, and establishments under 50 m² are exempt. South Korea does not impose a fee cap like Vietnam.

A restaurant in Hai Ba Trung ward, Hanoi. Photo: Phuong Anh

Many countries, however, do not base their calculations on area. These nations employ various approaches to determine music royalty fees for restaurants and cafes, often utilizing flexible variables such as seating capacity, speaker configuration, or operating days to create tailored formulas that align with actual commercial performance.

In the US, the copyright market is notably fragmented among multiple performance rights organizations (PROs) like ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. This often requires business owners to purchase licenses from several PROs simultaneously to legally play music without missing any songs. Each PRO, in turn, has its own fee schedule and royalty calculation formula.

The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) implements an annual licensing mechanism for restaurants and cafes playing background music. The fee is primarily determined by the establishment's maximum occupancy. Each venue is assigned a rate per occupant for recorded background music, which is then multiplied by the occupancy to determine the annual license fee.

If an establishment lacks an official occupancy figure from the authorities, ASCAP provides a conversion method based on floor area: one person per 20 square feet (approximately one person per 1,86 square meters). Consequently, establishments with larger capacities incur higher royalty fees, with occupancy being the core criterion, not area.

In the UK, the process has been streamlined by consolidating all types of copyright into a single license called TheMusicLicence. The annual royalty fee is calculated as a fixed fee based on the venue's area, plus an additional charge determined by the number of speakers. Under this system, a larger venue area results in a higher fixed fee. Specifically, the base fee for an establishment under 400 m2 is 195,4 GBP per year (over 6,8 million VND), increasing progressively with larger area tiers. However, this is not the final amount.

For example, two cafes of the same size in London, UK, would pay different music royalty fees if one only has two small speakers in a corner, while the other invests in a surround sound system with 10 powerful speakers. Furthermore, the formula includes a substantial penalty of up to 50% if an establishment is found playing music without a license before registration.

A cafe in Gia Dinh ward, Ho Chi Minh City. Photo: Quynh Tran

Singapore's fee determination by the Composers and Authors Society of Singapore (COMPASS) exemplifies a declining rate mechanism based on actual seating capacity. In stark contrast to a uniform rate, Singapore's formula is structured so that the more seats a venue has, the lower the royalty unit price per seat becomes.

For venues solely using background music, the first 40 seats are charged at the highest rate of 8,23 SGD per seat per year; the next 40 seats decrease to 4,70 SGD per seat per year; and from the 81st seat onwards, the unit price drops to just 2,35 SGD per seat per year. To calculate the final total cost, Singapore also applies cumulative surcharges based on hardware size, specifically an additional 45,83 SGD for each diagonal inch of screens installed within the venue. The minimum annual royalty fee is 275 SGD (nearly 5,6 million VND).

In Thailand, music royalty collection involves diverse organizations. One such performance rights organization, MPC Music, adopts an approach based on actual seating utilization. Accordingly, the annual fees for restaurant owners serving alcohol, bars, pubs, lounges, and similar establishments are set at fixed rates across different categories, starting from a minimum of 18,000 THB (approximately 14,2 million VND) for Category F venues (under 20 seats) and reaching a cap of 85,500 THB (approximately 67,6 million VND) for Category A venues (201 seats or more).

However, this seating-based fee only grants access to MPC Music's catalog. If owners wish to play exclusive songs from other major private record labels, they must purchase additional, independent catalog packages annually.

Tat Dat