On August 27, the official Facebook page of the Tay Nguyen Museum of Contemporary Art (Dak Lak) - a private museum within a resort complex - showcased a painting titled The Monk by artist Le Minh Tri.

The work depicted a meditating monk, with hands clasped and face serene, presented in vibrant mosaic-like colors and geometric patterns.

gen n z7037676371963_e87da0e0bf8f4eb79a214d12fb43d4aa.jpg
The Monk by artist Le Minh Tri. (Photo: Tay Nguyen Museum of Contemporary Art)

The post immediately triggered backlash from the public and the art community. Many pointed out striking similarities between The Monk and a sculpture by Dinh Cong Dat first unveiled in 2002, echoing its concept and form.

Sculptor calls it unacceptable: “A museum is sacred ground”

Dinh Cong Dat asserted that The Monk was a copy of his original 2002 creation, which had been exhibited in Vietnam and the US since 2004 and later produced in multiple versions for the market.

“My works have been copied so many times that I stopped caring. But when a fake enters a museum - a sacred place for artists - it becomes an entirely different matter. A museum cannot display fake or copied works,” Dat said.
Works by sculptor Dinh Cong Dat. (Photo: Artist’s archive)

Le Minh Tri, however, denied accusations of plagiarism, insisting: “I did not copy anyone’s work. My art is always distinct. Monks are a universal figure in temples and daily life. I only modified the color palette. I see no resemblance to Dat’s works.”

Meanwhile, when contacted by VietNamNet, Bui Hoai Nam, founder of the Tay Nguyen Museum of Contemporary Art, demanded that journalists travel to Dak Lak, book a USD 500-per-night room, and “bring cash for at least a day since we have few guests,” before he would comment. He refused to work with local correspondents.

Private museums and the gaps in curatorial ethics

The museum has since deleted The Monk from its page, replacing it with a post about Dat’s original works. But the controversy remains.

Many argue this is not merely a copyright dispute but a wake-up call about the curatorial practices of cultural institutions, highlighting the urgent need for creative ethics.

Artist Dang Xuan Hoa warned: “Displaying a copy in a museum - a place visited by international audiences - is unacceptable.”

Luong Xuan Doan, Chairman of the Vietnam Fine Arts Association, stressed: “Copying, whether partial or entire, violates both artistic ethics and the law. More concerning is that private museums lack professional appraisal councils, making it easy for fakes to be exhibited.”

Artist Dao Hai Phong, whose works have often been forged, blamed weak social ethics: “Only those lacking creativity copy others. If plagiarism is not curbed, young artists will lose motivation.”

He proposed two solutions: artists must sharpen their craft to stand apart, and buyers must act with dignity. “People should feel ashamed to hang a fake in their homes,” he added.

Dat agreed, saying: “Silence in the face of wrongdoing is complicity. It erodes art itself.”

The struggle of copyright registration

The case also underscores the need for greater transparency and accountability in preserving and displaying art, alongside stricter enforcement of copyright protection.

Yet, according to Dat, copyright registration in Vietnam is highly impractical for prolific creators:
“I create daily. How could I register every sketch, statue, or painting? Even if I register, infringements usually result only in apologies, since the law offers no stronger sanctions. Proving damages is also difficult if the copy hasn’t been sold. Why would I spend my life suing hundreds of infringers, wasting money on lawyers?” he said.

W-dinhcong dat.jpg
Sculptor Dinh Cong Dat. (Photo: Artist’s archive)

He noted that even with full copyright registration, copying persists: “Infringers just apologize, while artists gain no real protection. Registration only covers one piece; slight variations require separate industrial design procedures, which take at least two years.”

Comparing with international practice, Dat explained: “In many countries, once an artist signs a work, copyright is automatically established, registration or not. This reflects reality, since works can be copied minutes after release. Registration is a legal convenience, not a prerequisite for protection.”

He emphasized that while laws are essential, even the best judicial systems cannot address every emerging issue immediately. “Life evolves faster than laws. Gaps must be filled by ethics and social attitudes. Today, thanks to the Internet, public opinion can safeguard truth and condemn wrongdoing. That is justice in action,” he concluded.

For Dat, copyright protection must be strengthened not just legally but also morally, supported by vocal community response. “If we think like decent human beings, we know copying is wrong. Only when society takes a clear stance will plagiarism be curbed.”

Tinh Le