Skip to main content

This page has been translated using TexTra by NICT. Please note that the translation may not be completely accurate.
If you find any mistranslations, we appreciate your feedback on the "Request form for improving the automatic translation ".

Sub-Working Group on implementation of Data Handling Rules in the Platform (First)

Overview

  • Date and time: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 (2021) from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
  • Location: Online
  • Agenda:
    1. Opening
    2. Secretariat explanation (Digital Agency)
    3. Secretariat Explanation (Intellectual Property Strategy Promotion Secretariat, Cabinet Office)
    4. Question and Answer / Discussion
    5. Adjournment

Materials

Relevant policies

Summary of proceedings

Date

Tuesday, November 16, 2021 (2021), from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.

Location

Online Meetings

Attendees

  • Chief Inspector Watanabe
  • Member Ikawa
  • Fresh Shellfish Committee Member
  • Member Ota
  • Member Sawada
  • Committee member Shishido
  • Member, Tamaru
  • Member Tsuda
  • Member Mano
  • Member Mochizuki

Summary of proceedings

About Chapter 1: Introduction

  • The "absence of a fair trade market" mentioned as a hindrance to data distribution is an exaggeration, and it seems to mean that it exists but is not fully utilized.
  • Since DATA-EX is a platform constructed in cooperation with related ministries and agencies and Digital Agency, I understand that it is included in the scope of the guidance. On the other hand, it is not yet clear whether DATA-EX is a platform in private sector or not. Therefore, I would like you to discuss the positioning and category of DATA-EX in Digital Agency, not in this sub-working group.
  • Although it is a rule implementation to eliminate concerns and anxieties of stakeholders, since the purpose of building a platform is to create social value, it is better to mention positive aspects in addition to preventing and reducing negative aspects. This is the same in the "Conclusion" chapter as well as the "Introduction" chapter.

Chapter 2: "The Need for Agile Governance in the implementation of Data Handling Rules"

  • Platforms are classified into two types: trading markets and data service platforms. DATA-EX is a platform that links platforms in different fields. Data exchanges are one element. How to interpret such a federal platform needs to be examined in the future, whether or not to be examined in this version of the guidance.

Chapter 3 "Risk Analysis and Policy Setting"

  • Regarding Step 3, there is a sentence that says, "It is necessary to consider what kind of risk response measures will be implemented in accordance with the policy with a certain degree of image." It is better to add the phrase, "It is necessary to consider what kind of risk response measures will be implemented in accordance with the policy with a certain degree of image in advance." An example of a specific response measure described in Fig. 8 can be used.
  • Regarding Step 3, there is a statement that "In order to understand the timing when the rules need to be revised again, the factors that require the design of the decided risk response policies should also be examined." However, it is better to clearly state that not only the factors but also the review process should be examined in advance.

Chapter 4 "design of Rules, Operation and Evaluation of Rules"

  • Concerns and anxieties about data distribution are stated as reasons for the need for governance, but even if there are no concerns or anxieties, it is essential to comply with law. It is better to specify compliance with law as a major premise of governance.
  • It is necessary to review the explanation of Personal Information after clearly indicating it in Fig. 15. It is necessary to state that it is necessary to comply with the provisions of the personal data Protection Act when it is expected to be acquired as Personal Data at the provision destination.
  • Regarding the controllability of Personal Data in Step 5-3, in addition to obtaining consent, it is better to mention the response to disclosure requests from the Principal. Under the revised Act, when the Principal requests, it is required to provide information in electromagnetic records, and it should be stated that the platform needs to respond to disclosure in electromagnetic records. In relation to this, Step 5-4 refers to the case where the obligation to ensure data portability and interoperability is imposed on the platform operator in relation to the implementation of calibrated transactions, but since the purpose and the party to be protected are different from those in this case and the response to Personal Data disclosure requests required for the protection of the Principal, it is necessary to clearly distinguish them from each other.
  • Because interoperability is about interoperability, there are discussions about the rules for different platforms to work together, and the relationship between a platform and a third party service, such as a certificate authority, to ensure interoperability so that multiple third party services can be used instead of just one.
    Data portability is the debate over whether data entrusted to the platform can be taken outside. There are two types of data portability. The first is data portability for data provided by a person who participates in the platform and provides the data. The second is data portability for a person who provides data to a data provider (such as an observer). The second is whether there is no hindrance when a person requests portability to the platform via an information bank when the person wants to take out the data provided to the platform by the information bank with the consent of the person. These two issues need to be considered separately.

Chapter 6 "Conclusion"

  • The expression "negative impact" that is not used in the first sentence appears here for the first time. It is necessary to clarify what is specifically assumed by "negative impact", whether it represents the same negative impact as the stakeholder's concern / unease and data lock-in described in the first sentence, or it is a new concept such as a negative Minister in charge of Administrative Reform Okada impact that does not appear in the first sentence. It is better to reconsider whether or not to use this term.

The Role of the State

  • It is strange that the roles of the national government are described as one step in the rule-making procedure. Therefore, the roles of the national government should be described in "Chapter 6. End." Given the status of the platform construction, it is not necessary to describe the possible options in detail at this stage. However, the perspective needs to be clear, and the national government needs to be responsible for checking whether the platform built in the guidelines for our staff to follow of the comprehensive data strategy is consistent, especially when the national government is involved in building the platform, such as using public funds. This point needs to be described.
  • The role of the government also depends on whether the platform is publicly established, publicly and privately operated, or jointly operated by the public and private sectors. It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that excessive involvement in the private sector may put pressure on the private sector.
    In the data exchange market, the involvement of public institutions in some form is necessary, as in the wholesale market and the securities exchange market, there is a certain degree of involvement of the government. The involvement of public institutions has a positive effect by providing a certain level of security and reassurance against vague anxiety, which is one of the factors hindering data distribution.
  • In addition to the background of the establishment of the platform and the operating entity, the role of the government may also change depending on whether the data distributed is for the public interest, for example, whether it is data collected or provided by public institutions.
  • It is necessary to examine and indicate the judgment factors for when the platform's neutrality is insufficient or when the involvement of the government is necessary due to the need to protect the weak. If there is a judgment factor, it will also prevent a situation in which the involvement of the government itself becomes problematic.
  • The accreditation scheme for information banks is a scheme in which the government is involved in creating accreditation standards and conducting accreditation as a private sector project. It is a useful initiative as a form of national involvement. It would be good if the fact that there is such a useful initiative was stated somewhere in the guidance.
  • It is necessary to examine the revision of the guidance by understanding the status of individual platform operators, data providers, and data users in a macro manner, and by investigating whether the guidance is being utilized to advance data distribution in a three dimensional manner. In this field, platform construction is not yet sufficient, and what the problem is is not sufficiently understood. Therefore, it is important to continuously understand the status and examine the revision.

With respect to international data flows

  • As for the extent to which the guidance will refer to cases in which international data distribution occurs, at present, discussions on international data distribution in Japan are immature, and there is a concern that giving a direction in the guidance may be confusing. It is better to consider again after the discussions mature and the stance of the Government of Japan is established.
  • Government Access is in the process of drafting and discussing it at the OECD's Digital Economy Policy Committee. It is necessary to follow this. The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has also launched a study group on cross-border transfer of data. International cooperation should be a future assignment.
  • This guidance is mainly for domestic data distribution. However, in the case of data, it is not possible to exclude the case where data subject to some restrictions in a foreign country is handled on a domestic platform. Therefore, it is necessary not to neglect confirmation on the premise that data subject to some restrictions and restrictions in different jurisdictions will be introduced. For example, in the discussion of international standardization, it is discussed that if the data to be provided is subject to certain restrictions in a specific jurisdiction or if it is known that some regulation exists, this should be described in the data specification.