April 28, 2015
To: Secretariat of Intellectual Property Strategy Headquarters, Cabinet Secretariat
Council for Intellectual Property Protection on Internet (CIPP)
CIPP Report for FY 2014
As you have already known as a participant, since FY2005, the CIPP has been committed
to the collaborative activities on the private-sector level by inviting the Secretariat ofIntellectual Property Strategy Headquarters, Cabinet Secretariat, National Police Agency,
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications,
Agency for Cultural Affairs, Japan Patent Office, and Consumer Affairs Agency as observersin order to solve the problem of the distribution of intellectual property rights (IPR) infringing
goods arising from Internet services.
We hope this report will help you plan IPR protection policies for FY2015 as it represents
a consensus of right holders (individuals and organizations) and Internet service operators.

[Overview]
1. Report of the Effectiveness Verification Committee


For Group 1, we confirmed that the infringing goods occurrence rate has been kept

at a low level as a result of the implementation of certain measures including voluntary
patrols by Internet service operators and removals upon notice from right holders.
For Group 3 (different from Group 3 up to the FY2012 report), although theinfringing goods occurrence rate for trademark-related auctioned items was high,countermeasures such as the suspension of accounts used by sellers of infringing goods
are being implemented, and other continued action against IPR-infringing goods is underconsideration.

2. Report of the Guidelines Committee
We checked the operation status of the “Guidelines for the Prevention of Distribution ofInternet IPR Infringing Goods” (hereinafter, referred to as the “Guidelines”) which wererevised in FY2010, and examined whether the Guidelines should be revised. Although
there are no apparent special circumstances this year necessitating the revision of theGuidelines, we confirmed that information will continue to be shared between rightholders and operators from here on, too.

1 / 101. Report of the Effectiveness Verification Committee(1) Effectiveness Verification Method
This year, as in previous years, we set up the “Effectiveness Verification Committee”
consisting of the individuals who were in charge of removal requests on the right holders’side and voluntary removal on the operators’ side. Effectiveness verification was performed
based on the implementation overview in Annex 1.
As described in the implementation overview, this year, too, auctioned items were divided
into two groups for carrying out the verification; (i) auctioned items that could be judged as
infringing upon a copyright or trademark based on their on-screen text or graphics, and thatwould allow right holders to request auction operators to suspend them (see Figure 1,horizontal axis, and Table 1), and (ii) auctioned items that were deemed as without doubtbeing infringing goods as a result of purchase and appraisal based on various pieces of
information by the right holder, even though there were no direct grounds in the provided
information (when checked against the Guidelines, etc,) that would allow auction operators
to remove such goods (see Figure 1, vertical axis and Table 2).
This year, too, member companies were categorized into three groups, Groups 1 to 3, andthere was no change from last year in the composition of each group. Details are as follows.
Group 1
3 member companies (same as up to the FY2012 report)
Infringing goods occurrence rate and occurrence rate of goods with a high probabilityof infringement both lowGroup 2
1 member company(Not targeted for analysis this year due to the scarcity of inspection parameters)

Group 3
1 member company
Countermeasures for IPR-infringement will be required in the future

2 / 10[Figure 1: Definition of “Percentage” and Descriptions of Goods]

Occurrence rate of goods
that right holders deemed
had a high probability of
being infringing goods froman objective viewpoint
although the requirements
specified in the Guidelines
were not met(occurrence rate of goods
having a high probability ofinfringement)Group 2

Group 3

Low infringing goods
occurrence rate

High in both % of
infringement andprobabilityGroup 1
Low in both % of
infringement andProbability

Percentage of auctioned IPR-infringing
goods meeting the requirements specified in
the Guidelines(infringing goods occurrence rate)

3 / 10(2) Verification Results
Table 1 Infringing Goods Occurrence Rate2012

Copyright

TrademarkTotal

Group 1# ofverified
items
9,205

Group 2

2013

0.11%

# ofverified
items
7,381

73

1.37%

Group 3―Group 1Group 220140.18%# ofverified
items
9,044

49

0.00%

37

0.00%

―

690

0.00%

602

0.00%

7,388

1.31%

7,833

0.71%

5,364

0.17%

277

5.05%

96

0.00%

70.00%

Group 3

―

―

1,040

58.85%

1,200

84.67%

Group 1

16,5930.64%

15,2140.45%

14,4080.08%

Group 2

350

4.29%

145

0.00%

440.00%Group 3

―

―

1,730

35.38%

1,802

56.38%% ofinfringement% ofinfringement% ofinfringement
0.02%

FY2012 values for Group 3 are not listed since its members differ from those of the following
years and lack continuity.
Table 2 Occurrence Rate of Goods having a High Probability of Infringement
2012

Copyright

TrademarkTotal

Group 1# ofverified
items
9,205

Group 2

2013

0.18%

# ofverified
items
7,381

73

24.66%

Group 3―

Group 1
Group 2

2014

0.58%

# ofverified
items
9,044

49

0.00%

37

86.49%

―

690

0.87%

602

0.17%

7,388

0.07%

7,833

0.29%

5,364

0.07%

277

3.97%

96

0.00%

7

42.86%

Group 3――1,040

13.37%

1,200

3.92%

Group 1

16,5930.13%

15,2140.43%

14,4080.36%Group 2

350

8.29%

145

0.00%

4479.55%

Group 3――

1,730

8.38%

1,802

2.66%% ofprobability% ofprobability% ofprobability
0.53%

FY2012 values for Group 3 are not listed since its members differ from those of the following
years and lack continuity.

4 / 10Graph 1 Changes in Infringing Goods Occurrence Rate of Group 1(Total for Copyrights and Trademarks)

2012

2013

2014

Group 1(The graphs for Groups 2 and 3 are omitted this time.)

Graph 2 Changes in Occurrence Rate of Goods Having a High Probability of Infringement ofGroup 1 (Total for Copyrights and Trademarks)

2012

2013

Group 1(The graphs for Groups 2 and 3 are omitted this time.)

5 / 102014

(3) Analysis of Verification Results
A. Copyright-related Auctioned Items (Tables 1 and 2)
For Group 1, the infringing goods occurrence rate decreased from the previous year to0.02%, and the occurrence rate of goods having a high probability of infringement also
decreased slightly to 0.53%.
For Group 2, analysis was not performed since population was scarce. Furthermore,
the fact that a sudden increase in the occurrence rate of goods having a high probability ofinfringement was observed when effectiveness verification was implemented is due to thefact that many goods having a high probability of being infringing goods were put up forauction by specific sellers, and prompt decisions cannot be made by only effectivenessverification this year as to if the situation worsens. We should study measures in the future
by closely observing also the results of effectiveness verification from next year onwards.
For Group 3, the infringing goods occurrence rate was 0.00%, and the occurrence rateof goods having a high probability of infringement also was at a low level of 0.17%.

B. Trademark-related Auctioned Items (Tables 1 and 2)
For Group 1, the infringing goods occurrence rate decreased from the previous year to0.17%, and the occurrence rate of goods having a high probability of infringement also
decreased to 0.07%.
For Group 2, analysis was not performed since population was scarce.
For Group 3, although the occurrence rate of goods having a high probability of
infringement fell from last year’s figure of 13.37% to 3.92%, the infringing goods
occurrence rate rose from the previous year to 84.67%, a situation which requires
extremely close attention. The operators concerned implemented measures such as thesuspension of accounts used by sellers of infringing goods, and implemented
countermeasures for preventing repeat offenses by sellers of infringing goods. The
effectiveness of the countermeasures in question will be periodically verified while taking
the opinions of the right holders into consideration, and is scheduled to be analyzed
based on the results of effectiveness verification from next year onwards.
C. Overall Trends (Tables 1 and 2)
For Group 1, which is taking proactive action against IPR-infringing goods, theinfringing goods occurrence rate remains stabilized at an extremely low level of less than
1%. Even with the occurrence rate of goods having a high probability of infringement
added on, the occurrence rate has remained at below 1% for four years consecutively.
For Group 2, graphical representation and analysis were not performed since

6 / 10population was scarce. Graphical representation and analysis were omitted for Group 3,
too, for lack of continuity with the Group 3 up to the FY2012 report.

(4) OtherIn the effectiveness verification process, information was shared regarding the fact that,continuing on from last year, many “manuals,” “product keys,” “tampered saved data,” and"recovery disks,” which are not evident in retail stores, were put up in software-relatedauctions. A survey into the current status of this is in progress by some right holders andoperators, and certain measures are being implemented after objective legal evaluation isperformed, and it has been reported that, from here on, a widening of the scope of thesemeasures also is under consideration.

2. Report from Guidelines Committee
The Guidelines Committee was set up as a venue for sharing information to address new
auctioning tricks as well as to check the operation status of Guidelines which were revised inFY2010.
Although it was confirmed that the newly revised Guidelines have no particular defects,
we reached the conclusion that information must be continually exchanged with a view torevising the Guidelines in the future so that further cooperation is built among right holders
and operators for taking swift and reliable action because the tricks used by those whoauction IPR-infringing goods change on a daily basis. (Details are according to Annex 2.)
3. Summary of Activities This YearAs stated above, it has been confirmed that we limited the occurrence rate of infringing
goods in Group 1 to an extremely low level this fiscal year by promoting a “JapaneseApproach” in which both right holders and operators respect each other’s positions andcollaboratively stand up against infringers. Currently, in Group 3, too, that has a highinfringing goods occurrence rate, these results have been taken in and countermeasures,such as suspending the accounts used by sellers of infringing goods, are already being
implemented; and, from here on, sufficient measures to lower the infringing goods
occurrence rate are to be studied and put into practice with collaboration between rightholders and Group 1 and Group 2 member companies.
From next year onwards, further study is scheduled for measures to take against IPR
infringement of not only Internet auction services but also Internet shopping malls, whichstarted to be discussed in the previous year, and measures to take against IPR infringementin new commerce services that use smart phone applications, and, these new kinds of

7 / 10operators have already been admitted to the council.
We would appreciate it if the government would introduce CIPP’s approach, which has
results unlike any other in the world, to other countries, and help the approach become
recognized as the de facto standard of measures against IPR-infringing goods on theInternet.

8 / 10Statistical Data
■ Overall Commercial Items

2010
YAHUOKU!

2011

2012

2013

2014

2,212

2,512

2,631

3,149

3,678

Rakuten Auction

284

319

317

317305

DeNA Shopping（Bidders）

766

785

888

1,048

707

MOBAOKU

451

432

367

331304In units of ten thousand.

All figures are daily average values in December. Of the DeNA Shopping figures, thefigures represent the total of commercial items as of the end of December during theperiod 2010 to 2012 when the service was named Bidders.

■ Voluntary Removals

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Copyright

38,33878,052

62,69462,40024,685Trademark74,025

139,792

233,273

54,791

90,680

Total

112,363

217,844295,967

117,191

115,365YAHUOKU!, Rakuten Auction, DeNA Shopping, MOBAOKU, and Shoppies (total offive services)■ Removal Requests from Right Holders

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Copyright

4,826

2,601

754

315

116

Trademark40,20071,64454,42844,90530,458

Total

45,026

74,24555,18245,22030,574

YAHUOKU!, Rakuten Auction, DeNA Shopping, MOBAOKU, and Shoppies (total offive services)

The figures on removal requests from right holders include cases where individual
items were removed and the removal of individual items results from measures tosuspend use by sellers.

Some right holders change target services and target goods to selectively monitor totake proactive action against IPR-infringing goods. For this reason it is difficult toanalyze trends in the number of removal requests from right holders by simply
comparing figures year by year.

9 / 10Principles of the Japanese Approach
1. Both parties (right holders and platform providers) shall be aware that they should
fully respect each other’s positions and then make collaborative efforts in standing
up against their common enemies, that is, infringers, in order to protect not only theirown interest but also interest of consumers among others.
2. Right holders shall be aware that they should enforce their own rights, which are notautomatically protected.
3. Platform providers shall be aware that they should make active efforts to protect
intellectual property rights for sound development of the Internet.
4. Both parties shall be aware in the course of the promotion of countermeasures thatthey should agree on the equal importance of the protection of intellectual property
rights and the securement of users’ freedom for business and secrecy ofcommunication, and that they should take actions not to undermine the value of bothaspects.

10 / 10