Social Science and Human Research Bulletin

This article investigates argumentative features in legal discourse on copyright disputes in Vietnam from a legal-linguistic perspective. Copyright disputes are not only legal conflicts over authorship, ownership, permitted use, infringement, and compensation; they are also discursive events in which different actors construct, challenge, and evaluate claims through language. Using qualitative discourse analysis, argumentation analysis, and legal-linguistic textual analysis, the study examines the typical argumentative organization found in statutes, pleadings, written submissions, expert materials, and judicial reasoning concerning copyright disputes. The findings show that legal discourse in this field is characterized by a strong dependence on statutory authority, a highly intertextual structure, a recurrent sequence of claim, legal ground, evidentiary ground, inference, and conclusion, and a frequent combination of legal, evidentiary, comparative, contractual, damage-based, and exception-based arguments. At the linguistic level, the discourse relies on specialized legal terminology, deontic modality, logical connectors, citation formulas, impersonal constructions, and evaluative expressions such as 'there are grounds to determine' or 'there is no sufficient basis to accept'. The study also shows that plaintiffs, defendants, and adjudicating bodies employ different argumentative strategies: plaintiffs tend to affirm rights and prove infringement; defendants tend to deny, distinguish, or justify the contested use; and adjudicating bodies tend to neutralize competing claims and transform them into authoritative legal conclusions. The article contributes to research on forensic linguistics and legal discourse in Vietnam and suggests that the study of argumentation can improve the drafting, interpretation, and evaluation of legal texts in copyright disputes.

argumentation, legal discourse, copyright disputes, forensic linguistics, intellectual property law, Vietnam.

1. Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. Longman.
2. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
3. Goodrich, P. (1987). Legal discourse: Studies in linguistics, rhetoric and legal analysis. Macmillan.
4. Government of Vietnam. (2023). Decree No. 17/2023/ND-CP detailing a number of articles of, and providing measures to implement, the Law on Intellectual Property regarding copyright and related rights. https://english.luatvietnam.vn/so-huu-tri-tue/decree-17-2023-nd-cp-detail-law-on-intellectual-property-regarding-copyright-and-related-rights-251358-d1.html
5. National Assembly of Vietnam. (2005). Law on Intellectual Property No. 50/2005/QH11.
6. National Assembly of Vietnam. (2022). Law No. 07/2022/QH15 amending and supplementing a number of articles of the Law on Intellectual Property. https://english.luatvietnam.vn/law-no-07-2022-qh15-amending-and-supplementing-a-number-of-articles-of-the-law-on-intellectual-property-224105-doc1.html
7. National Assembly of Vietnam. (2025). Law No. 131/2025/QH15 amending and supplementing a number of articles of the Law on Intellectual Property. National Database of Legal Documents. https://vbpl.vn/TW/Pages/vbpq-van-ban-goc.aspx?ItemID=187492
8. Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press.
9. Tiersma, P. M. (1999). Legal language. University of Chicago Press.
10. Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
11. Van Dijk, T. A. (1997). Discourse as structure and process. Sage.
12. Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2009). Methods of critical discourse analysis. Sage.