June 24, 2016
To: Secretariat of Intellectual Property Strategy Headquarters, Cabinet OfficeCouncil for Intellectual Property Protection on Internet (CIPP)
CIPP Report for FY 2015
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 Office, 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 observers
in order to solve the problem of the distribution of intellectual property rights (IPR) infringing
goods arising from Internet services.
We hope you will reference this report as a consensus of right holders (individuals andorganizations) 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, as the infringing goods occurrence rate for trademark-related

auctioned items decreased compared with the previous year, we were able to confirm
that the action against IPR-infringing goods is paying off.
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.
As a result of discussions, we were able to confirm that no particular problems occurred
after approximately five years of operation following the last revision. We were also able
to reconfirm that it is beneficial for both operators and right holders to exchange the latest
information regarding new types of infringement, etc. because the world of the Internet ischanging from day to day.

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 performedin accordance with Annex 1, “Effectiveness Verification Implementation Method.”
As described in the “Effectiveness Verification Implementation Method,” 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 theiron-screen text or graphics, and that would allow right holders to request auction operators tosuspend them (see Figure 1, horizontal axis, and Table 1), and (ii) auctioned items that weredeemed as without doubt being 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

Group 21 member company(This group is not subject to analysis because the service has been suspended)Group 3
1 member company(In terms of copyrights, this group is not subject to analysis because of the scarcity ofitems for the verification parameter)

2 / 10[Figuure 1: Definittion of “Perccentage” andd Description
ns of Goodss]

Occurrrence rate of goods
that rig
ght holders deemedd
had a hhigh probab
bility of
being infringing gooods froman objeective viewp
point
althoug
gh the requirements
specifie
ed in the Guuidelines
were nnot met(occurrrence rate ofo goods
having a high probbability ofement)
infringe

Group 2Grouup 3

Low innfringing goods
occcurrence rateeHigh in bboth % of
infringem
ment andprobaabilityGroup 1
Loww in both % ofoinfri ngement anndp
probability

Percentage
e of auctione
ed IPR-infrinnging goodss
meeting the requireme
ents specifieed in thes (infringing goods
goccurrrence rate)
Guidelines

3 / 10(2) Verification Results
Table 1 Infringing Goods Occurrence Rate2013

Copyright

TrademarkTotal2014% ofinfringement

Group 1# ofverified
items
7,381

Group 22015

% ofinfringement

0.18%

# of
verified
items
9,044

% of
infringement

0.02%

# of
verified
items
4,762

49

0.00%

37

0.00%

―

―

Group 3

690

0.00%

602

0.00%

―

―

Group 1
Group 2

7,833

0.71%

5,364

0.17%

2,292

1.83%

96

0.00%

70.00%――

Group 31,040

58.85%

1,200

84.67%

400

32.00%

Group 1

15,2140.45%

14,408

0.08%

7,054

0.77%

Group 2

145

0.00%

440.00%――Group 31,730

35.38%

1,802

56.38%

400

32.00%

0.25%

Table 2 Occurrence Rate of Goods having a High Probability of Infringement
2013

Copyright

Trademark

Total

2014

% ofprobabilityGroup 1# ofverified
items
7,381

Group 22015

% ofprobability

0.58%

# of
verified
items
9,044

% of
probability

0.53%

# of
verified
items
4,762

49

0.00%

3786.49%――

Group 3690

Group 1

7,833

0.87%

602

0.17%

―

―

0.29%

5,364

0.07%

2,292

Group 2

96

0.00%

7

42.86%―

0.00％―

Group 31,040

13.37%

1,200

3.92%

400

6.25％

Group 1

15,2140.43%

14,408

0.36%

7,054

Group 2

145

0.00%

4479.55%―

0.40％―Group 3

1,730

8.38%

1,802

2.66%

400

6.25％

4 / 100.59%

Graph 1 Changes in Infringing Goods Occurrence Rate of Group 1(Total of Copyrights and Trademarks)
12.00%
10.00%
8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%

0.45%

0.08%

0.77%

2013

2014

2015

0.00%

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 of Copyrights and Trademarks)
12.00%
10.00%
8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%

0.43%

0.36%

0.40%

2013

2014

2015

0.00%Group 1(The graphs for Groups 2 and 3 are omitted this time.)

5 / 10(3) Analysis of Verification Results
A. Copyright-related Auctioned Items (Tables 1 and 2)
For Group 1, the infringing goods occurrence rate slightly increased from the previous
year to 0.25%. The occurrence rate of goods having a high probability of infringement also
somewhat increased to 0.59%.
Group 2 is not subject to analysis because the service has been suspended.
Group 3 is not analyzed because of the scarcity of items for the verification parameter.
B. Trademark-related Auctioned Items (Tables 1 and 2)
For Group 1, the infringing goods occurrence rate slightly increased from the previousyear to 1.83%. The occurrence rate of goods having a high probability of infringement
decreased to 0.00%.
Group 2 is not subject to analysis because the service has been suspended.
For Group 3, the infringing goods occurrence rate decreased to 32.00% from 84.67% in
the previous year while the occurrence rate of goods having a high probability ofinfringement remained at a low level (6.25%). We believe that such decrease and lowlevel display the effectiveness of the countermeasures that have been implemented by
the relevant operators since the previous year to keep sellers of infringing goods fromreoffending.
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 a low level.
For Group 2, graphical representation was not performed because the service has beensuspended.
For Group 3, graphical representation was not performed because sufficient items werenot secured for the verification parameter.
(4) Other•

The Association of Copyright for Computer Software (ACCS) remarked, “Thecooperation between right holders and operators has paid off as the copyright-related
infringement rate has been almost 0% for these past several years. However, we areaware that there still exist illegally auctioned or offered items that are not covered by theGuidelines.”

6 / 10•We received a report that the percentage of infringement was high in terms of the items
that were set as targets by Honda Motor Co., Ltd. However, it is inherently impracticable
to deal with those items at the discretion of operators. In addition, there were items thatright holders and operators do not equally perceive as infringing items. Accordingly,
they were excluded from the report made by the Effectiveness Verification Committee
to this council.

•Union des Fabricants counted, as auctioned or offered items having a high probabilityof infringement, the bags and boxes for brand-name products as well as the auctioned
or offered items that are not brand-name products but are shown in the search resultsof a brand name (e.g., searches for which the brand name is set as a search keyword).
However, there were items that right holders and operators do not equally perceive as
infringing items. Accordingly, they were excluded from the report made by theEffectiveness Verification Committee to this council.

•Certain right holders voluntarily performed experimental verification of shopping malls
and flea markets. However, such verification was not included in the report from thecommittee because it was implemented solely for future reference and by means of anarbitrary verification implementation method.

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.
We found no particular problem in terms of the revised Guidelines. However, weconfirmed that it is beneficial for both operators and right holders to exchange the latest
information regarding new types of infringement, etc. because the world of the Internet ischanging from day to day.
In order to make the scope of the guidelines clearer, we discussed expanding it to include
operators and right holders other than the current members (as detailed in 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.
From next year onwards, we plan to work on measures against IPR infringement, not only
in Internet auction services, but also IPR infringement in Internet shopping malls and IPR

7 / 10infringement in new commerce services using smart phone applications. These new kinds ofoperators have already been admitted to the council.
We would appreciate it if the government would introduce CIPP’s approach, which hasresults 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

2011
2,512
319

YAHUOKU!
Rakuten Auction
DeNA Shopping785(Bidders)
MOBAOKU
432
 In units of ten thousand.
2012
2,631
317

2013
3,149
317

2014
3,678
305

2015
4,240
240

888

1,048

707

682

367

331

304

244

Figures are daily average values in December (for DeNA Shopping values only, thefigures are the total number of commercial items as of the end of December). Of theDeNA Shopping figures, the figures during the period 2011 to 2012 are from when theservice was named Bidders.

■ Voluntary Removals

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Copyright78,052
62,69462,40024,685
15,529Trademark139,792
233,273
54,791
90,68073,182
Total
217,844295,967
117,191
115,365
88,711 YAHUOKU!, Rakuten Auction, DeNA Shopping, MOBAOKU, and Shoppies (total offive services)■ Removal Requests from Right Holders

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Copyright
2,601
754
315
116
300
Trademark71,64454,42844,90530,45885,053
Total
74,24555,18245,22030,57485,353
 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 shouldfully 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