Legal review: 15 October 2026 · Đọc tiếng Việt
An AI avatar provider contract should cover operation after delivery as well as the quality of the output. A business needs to control who can generate new statements, who labels AI content, who responds to incidents and what happens when the service ends.
Define the product and each party’s role
Buying a finished video differs from licensing a self-service account, receiving a dedicated model or integrating an avatar into a customer-facing chatbot. The work schedule should define inputs, outputs, functions, limits, acceptance criteria and post-delivery access.
Provider, deployer and user roles under the AI Law depend on actual activities. Outsourcing production does not automatically transfer every obligation of the business publishing the content. Risk classification must consider the system’s functions and context under the Law and Decree 142/2026/ND-CP; not every avatar has the same classification.
Create an approval process that leaves evidence
A practical process may include checking personal permissions, approving scripts, generating a sample, reviewing pronunciation and meaning, approving the final version, checking labels and publishing. This is a governance suggestion to adapt to the project, not a claim that each step is a mandatory administrative procedure.
Specify who can change scripts, export video and generate new speech. Interactive avatars also need topic boundaries, escalation to a human and suspension controls. AI generation does not remove the need to assess advertising, consumer protection and individual rights.
Allocate technical marking and visible-label responsibilities
Article 11 of the AI Law and Article 17 of Decree 142 address machine-readable technical marking of AI audio, image and video outputs, according to the allocated statutory responsibilities. Visible notices and labels are a separate layer, addressed in Article 18.
A deployer must clearly notify recipients when publicly providing AI content likely to mislead about events, people or its origin. Content simulating a real person’s appearance or voice requires assessment of the recognisable-label obligation. Labels must be understandable, presented before or when recipients encounter the content, and not designed to conceal its AI nature.
Article 18 permits suitable forms including labels on content, in titles, descriptions or captions, on the platform interface, or through audio notices. There is no single universal wording for all videos. Exclusively internal content not made public is exempt from visible labelling; subsequent public release calls for reassessment.
Allocate responsibility for supplying technical information, adding labels and checking the final publication. Review labels after editing, transcoding or reposting. For systems operating before 1 March 2026, assess the transition under Article 35 of the Law separately; it is not a general exemption for every campaign.
Incident contacts and effective suspension
Anticipate account compromise, statements outside the permitted scope, recording leaks, incorrect publication and removal difficulties. Agree emergency contacts, suspension powers, evidence preservation and investigation support.
Article 19 of Decree 142 contains specific duties for serious AI incidents. An event may also trigger personal data or cybersecurity obligations. The agreement must support the relevant legal reporting deadlines; a vendor’s support response time does not replace a statutory deadline.
Handover and service termination
- Inventory videos, scripts, accounts, dedicated models and data to be delivered or retained.
- Define continued use of existing videos and when new generation must stop.
- Revoke access for staff, distributors and subprocessors within the parties’ control.
- Agree return or deletion of recordings, derived data and backups, with evidence and applicable retention exceptions.
- Address technical limits if data has already been used for training; a broad deletion promise should be supported by a verifiable method.
KM UNION can review and negotiate agreements and allocate responsibilities between the business, the individual and the provider, coordinating with technical specialists on feasible handover, avatar suspension and data-handling provisions. The formal engagement identifies its scope and deliverables for the particular project.
Legal sources
- Civil Code 91/2015/QH13 — Article 32
- Personal Data Protection Law 91/2025/QH15
- Decree 356/2025/ND-CP
- AI Law 134/2025/QH15 — Articles 11, 35
- Decree 142/2026/ND-CP — Articles 16–19
Reviewed on 15 October 2026. This article provides general information and does not replace advice for a particular person, contract or project. Check the actual documents, applicable dates and transitional rules. English explanations are for reference; the authoritative Vietnamese legal texts apply. Contact KM UNION to agree a formal advisory scope.
Related articles
- Real-Person AI Avatar Contracts in Vietnam: Six Key Issues
- Employee and Influencer AI Avatars: Image and Voice Rights in Vietnam
- AI Avatars and Personal Data in Vietnam: Before You Upload
Contact KM UNION: legal@kmunion.vn · 0932 124 427.
