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 ".

Web3.0 Study Meeting (11th)

Overview

  • Date and time: December 13, 2022 (Tue) from 10:00 to 12:00
  • Location: Online
  • Agenda:
  1. Opening
  2. Proceedings
    1. Hearings with relevant ministries and agencies (Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Agency for Cultural Affairs, Cabinet Office, Cabinet Secretariat)
    2. Summary of the discussion so far (DAO, decentralized identity, metaverse, user protection and law enforcement)
  3. Adjournment

Materials

  • Agenda (PDF/64KB)
  • [Material 1] Materials to be submitted to Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications * Limited to members
  • [Material 2] Materials to be submitted to the Agency for Cultural Affairs * Limited to members
  • [Material 3] Materials to be submitted to the Cabinet Office * For members only
  • [Material 4] Materials to be submitted to the Cabinet Secretariat * Limited to members
  • [Material 5] Materials submitted by the Secretariat (Summary of discussions to date on DAO, distributed identity, metaverse, user protection and law enforcement * Limited to members
  • Minutes (PDF/261KB)

Minutes

Date

December 13, 2022 (Tue) from 10:00 to 12:00

Location

Online Meetings

Attendees

Members

  • Jiro Kokuryo (Professor, Faculty of Policy Studies, Keio University)

  • ISHII Natsu Shori (Professor, Faculty of International Information Studies, Chuo University)

  • Yuko Kawai (CEO of Japan Digital Design Co., Ltd.; Executive Director of the Strategic Planning Department of Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.; Executive Director of the Strategic Planning Department of MUFG Bank, Ltd.)

  • Keiji Tonomura (Attorney, Nagashima, Ohno & Tsunematsu Law Office)

  • Taiyō Fujii

  • Shinichiro Matsuo, Research Professor, Georgetown University

  • Noriyuki Yanagawa (Professor, Graduate School of Economics, The University of

Digital Agency (Secretariat)

  • Minister Kono, Senior Vice-Minister Okushi, Parliamentary Vice-Minister Ozaki, Director General Kusunoki, Councilor Nozaki

Minutes

Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, the Agency for Cultural Affairs, the Cabinet Office, and the Cabinet Secretariat explained the status of their efforts on Web3.0.
In the question-and-answer session and opinion exchange, the members mainly made the following remarks.

  • Member: creators, I recognize that there was a talk to consider soft law in the course of developing systems in the future. It seems that many of the private sector companies that have the strength to enter as the main body when developing soft law are large companies. For example, if people equivalent to platformers in this world or people like Web2.0 have no choice but to be the main body when forming soft law, I would like to ask how the Cabinet Office or the Agency for Cultural Affairs will consider individual creators and creator communities to form soft law or the subsequent system design. If there is any idea in the Cabinet Office or the Agency for Cultural Affairs on this point, I would like to ask you.

    • Speaker: My Number Card platform, will depend on the current situation and the Issue that will emerge in the future. As for the rights processing of creators, for example, the management system for bringing a specific work of a creator into the metaverse space and creating a second creation is basically the same as that of conventional posting sites such as YouTube, and the conventional Web2.0 type rights processing mechanism is defined on a contract basis, such as deletion and sanctions in the case of a violation after the person who uploads in advance and the person who brings it into the world performs the required rights processing.
    • Speaker: My Number Card In such a part, the rules have been formed with a certain degree of consideration for the protection of the rights of the rights holders from the platform side. In addition, the value of the metaverse can be increased by users engaging in various creative activities and bringing them in, as well as performing secondary creation and Nth creation. It seems that the current order has been formed in the growing business model in which the attractiveness of the metaverse space is increased by stimulating various creative motivations on the creator side and fostering a culture of mutual respect among creators.
    • Speaker: My Number Card metaverse becomes more universal, various types of users will enter and various things will happen. In doing so, whether or not to respond to the order formed among highly literate people like now by forming rules to the extent necessary will be a matter of future Issue awareness.
    • Speaker: My Number Card In doing so, from one perspective, there may be a direction to use Web3.0 and blockchain technologies, process rights with smart contracts, and secure them with systems. education Enlightenment is also an important recognition.

  • Member: As something that can be expected, how to protect rights in areas where Japanese are dominant is an important issue. How to legally consider rights over digital assets is a big Issue, including civil laws.

  • Member: In the age of blockchain, important health information and property information will be widely handled. Therefore, in terms of rights protection, various stakeholders must hold multi-stakeholder discussions earlier than the enactment of laws.

  • Member: On the other hand, in order to fully incorporate the opinions of people with weak power whose rights must be continuously protected, it is important but difficult to have people who express their opinions take time to participate in multi-stakeholder discussions and the formation of soft law every time. While there are difficulties that cannot be easily expressed in five letters of soft law, I would like to ask you if you have an image of what kind of management is being considered for the utilization of soft law and where the country can back up.

    • Speaker: My Number Card It is recognized that wide-ranging discussions, including multi-stakeholders, will be necessary in the future. The era in which only administrative authorities can make rules is over, and Web3.0 itself will be created under a distributed architecture. We have a general idea that decision-making, including rule-making and soft law, can be promoted under a distributed architecture, but we believe that it is necessary to examine it specifically in the future.
    • Speaker: My Number Card Web3.0, in the Trust field of the report of the Trust Sub-Working Group, we have started to work on the formation of a multi-stakeholder model. After the submission of a request to Digital Agency regarding the notification of disposition, etc., we are working on how to take it concretely in Digital Agency, but there are various Issue.
    • Speaker: My Number Card industry as our main business, but how to carefully pick up the voices of user organization and consumers is a challenge to deeply understand the discussion and take enough time to commit. I would like to work on it step by step, but Issue as you pointed out is being reviewed in our efforts.

  • Member: It is asked how to respond to the situation that changes one after another, but it should be fully considered.

    • Speaker: My Number Card , it is recognized that this area has been four to five years of grass-roots activity compared to other policy areas. I would like to try and find out what can be done in the future, including support to make it easier for young people to enter areas that are borderless and moving very quickly, and are being actively discussed in various international efforts.

  • Member: private sector side?

    • Speaker: My Number Card .

  • Member: Although the response by soft law is also stated in the materials of the Cabinet Office's Review Committee, it is not clear what the expression of soft law indicates. I would like to confirm whether the soft law referred to here means that the Diet will not newly create a law, but will try to form rules by a different approach.

  • Member: I fully agree with the idea of protecting the rights of creators with digital assets and making use of Japan's strengths, but in the background, there are copyrights and hard laws. For example, even if it is stipulated in the rules of platformers, if the Civil Code, which is a hard law, is in the background, it may be an idea of protecting the rights of creators while using hard law as a base. Therefore, rather than driving hard law behind, it may be important to utilize the advantages of hard law and combine soft law so as not to be a drag on the development of the metaverse.

    • Speaker: My Number Card soft law. Therefore, we launched this forum as a cooperation conference that brings together related ministries and agencies and people in private sector who have Issue awareness, lawyers, and people engaged in legal practice.
    • Speaker: My Number Card soft law, it is necessary to present a way of thinking in order to become a guide that can be taken anew for gray areas even if those who intend to enter the metaverse take a certain risk. In that case, it is important to interpret existing law, for example, how to legally structure the rights associated with NFTs, the content of the rights held by the holders of digital objects, the application of laws, the arrangement of the way of thinking, and the basis for distribution based on what. It is recognized that it is necessary to present the results in the form of soft law guidelines that are easy to understand for those who are considering entering businesses in the future.

  • Member: Regarding the relationship between Trusted Web and Web3.0, I would like to ask how much you think the world of Web3.0, which seems to be developing outside the mechanism of the state, and the world of Trusted Web, which is developing with the involvement of the mechanism of the state, should be joined or distanced, and where you think the interface should be created.

    • Speaker: My Number Card It is a difficult question to answer. Even if we look at it globally, there are various views and ways of thinking about the definition of Web3.0, and the definition has not been determined. The same discussion occurred when we discussed it at the Trusted Web Council. Since the definition of Web3.0 has not been determined, it is impossible to compare it with Trusted Web, which we are aiming for. It seems that there are some common points in terms of orientation in terms of incorporating the problems facing the Internet and the Web today in a distributed way and making validation possible. However, although there are common points, the definition of Web3.0 has not been clarified, so it is difficult to say whether there are any differences. Regarding the Trusted Web, it is stated that the person in charge will deal with interoperability as infrastructure while paying attention to the ideal way of identity management.
    • Speaker: My Number Card sees a different world is a difficult question to answer. When considering "Trust" in today's real society, there is "Trust" that can be established with the support of the government as the foundation of society, or there is "Trust" that can be realized by blockchains as decentralized technology. However, we should not limit ourselves to either of them, but should aim to create them by combining them. For example, the world view is to make all transactions validation by blockchains, but in order to build a more realistic "Trust" of human society, we should aim to enhance "Trust" in the digital space by combining various things.

  • Member: Not only Trusted Web, but also other places being considered for Web3.0 may need Trust. Whether to realize it only with technologies and blockchains, or to supplement it with governments and laws, is likely to depend on the definition and perspective I mentioned earlier. I understood that the government and laws are the foundation that supports Trust. Web3.0 also has various definitions. The idea of realizing Trust by technology and creating a distributed mechanism, with some involvement of laws and countries, seems distant from those who are strongly saying Web3.0.

  • Member: In any case, it is not the two extremes of country, law, or technology. It is somewhere in between, and the specific time of realization will differ depending on, for example, next year or the year after next, or 20 years later, and it will also differ depending on the development of technology. What we must consider as a point is that we cannot ignore current laws and systems, so we must remove Trust, which is supported by current laws and systems, and substitute it with technology.

  • Member: In addition, there is also a viewpoint that the current laws and systems have not realized Trust, and it will be improved by incorporating technology. In that case, there is a possibility that not only technology but also technology and law must be posted. The former is that technology and law are in an alternative relationship with a person, and technology is posted instead of laws and systems. Regarding new fields, it is a recognition that technology and law are used complementarily to create Trust in new fields. I think the story of Trusted Web is complementary, and it is close to the image that validation is possible in both technology and law for the new system, but I would like to confirm it. There will be discussions based on the current system, such as what will change in the current system, so at that time, if we can sort out what is complementary to technology and what technology and system is alternative, the outlook will be better.

    • Speaker: My Number Card as the first point, there may be a case in which the government becomes the origin of Trust. Or, in the current digital space, there is probably no choice but to trust the people of large platform operators. Various people are supposed to be confirming the origin of Trust at various places, and is it a sense of direction for Trust to decentralize the origin of Trust and to create a chain of Trust that is confirmed by society as a whole and to decentralize it?
    • Speaker: My Number Card The second point is that, for example, even the current personal data Protection Law has limits in terms of whether it functions with consent. If there is a place that can be complemented with technology, the way the law will be may change, and we are working to address the issue of whether it is necessary to seek a rebalancing between law and action.

  • Member: In the first place, I feel that it is a good opportunity to return to the discussion. Thinking about what Trust is will contribute greatly not only to Web3.0, but also to the future technology development and other areas. In that context, I would like to ask you to carefully examine the actual status of the businesses and services without running away from them. In addition, regarding the guidelines to be produced, we must consider whether the guidelines are in accordance with the philosophy of the law or whether they are correct. For example, tax system in Japan is a declared tax system, which is a system in which business operators declare that they have used their expenses and earned profits and pay taxes. We must consider whether it is correct to create detailed guidelines at the level of providing guidance to subsidiaries or providing guidance to industries we supervise, and to provide guidance on accounting treatment of cryptocurrencies, crypto assets, NFTs, etc. Copyright, which should have originally started as property rights, is complex and has been decomposed by distribution, etc., but when we consider what it originally was, I think that there will be an increase in the number of places that can be dealt with by the current hard law. It is also important to look back once.

Subsequently, the Secretariat provided a briefing on the compilation of discussions on DAOs and decentralized identity, metaverse, user protection and law enforcement.
In the question-and-answer session and opinion exchange, the members mainly made the following remarks.

  • Member: Public Personal Authentication, which is a distributed My Number Card identity, it may be necessary to delve into in what situations there is room for utilization and what benefits there are in using it. What is often problematic in relation to the My Number is that it is easy to be misunderstood whether the My Number is used or the information in the IC chip is used. Depending on how it is used, it is necessary to be aware of how to use it so that it is not misunderstood and not illegal because the place where the My Number is used is My Number System where it is likely to be illegal. Therefore, it is necessary to be aware of how to use it so that it is not misunderstood and not illegal. 3.0 Issue

  • Member: personal data, it is a recognition that the aspect of privacy rather than the personal data Protection Act comes to the fore. I would like you to consider the writing that it is necessary to consider not only the personal data Protection Act but also privacy and personal data protection.

  • Member: Regarding the part where the word "to be forgotten" is mentioned, it would be more accurate to explain the problem awareness here in writing rather than the word "to be forgotten." Since it is not the right recognized by the Supreme Court, it is possible to create a misunderstanding if it is written as if it had been established.

  • Member: I think it would be desirable to write thickly about the support of individual creators. In the first half of the discussion, there was also a talk about the support and protection of individual creators. I think it would be good to emphasize the points you want to emphasize and write in a balanced manner.

  • Member: .

  • Member: , I would like to ask you to clarify the actual situation of damage, in particular, in what cases young people have been harmed.

  • Member: ? If possible, if specific cases are found, it will lead to the consideration of solutions and responses in Issue.

    • Speaker: My Number Card In terms of cooperation with My Number Card, in addition to the need to confirm the identity of the wallet, we assume that there will be various ways to use it when new tokens such as NFTs and governance tokens come out.
    • Speaker: My Number Card number or a card, we basically have a card in mind, but how to use it is important, so we will work with business operators to consider what kind of method is appropriate within the current law. We have already started dialogue with domestic e-KYC business operators, so it would be good if we could be open.
    • Speaker: My Number Card , I would like to organize it in the direction of privacy because it is related to privacy in general rather than a problem under the Japanese protection law. Regarding the right to be forgotten, I would like to explain it in writing, taking into account the fact that it is an inherent problem and cannot be deleted or is made public.

  • Member: For each item, it would be easier to understand if the linkage of why this story is being talked about in the Web3.0 Study Meeting is concrete.

  • Member: Study Group itself, but it is difficult to say that it should be read. It will be easier to read and understand if I break down why I am talking about this and how it is related to Web3.0 at the beginning.

  • Member: First, regarding the summary of the DAO, I don't want to destroy the future of the DAO, but there are many things that have not been examined yet at this stage. Overall, I think it is good to have a tone that requires attention when facing the DAO. By summarizing it in this atmosphere at the beginning, I think the reader will be prepared. For example, regarding the DAO, some people say that it is a transfer from a stock company, but on the contrary, some people say that they have to consider various things. I think there are active supporters, promoters, and cautious groups. I think the sense of summarizing the report is that it will take a considerable amount of time before it will be recognized as a social infrastructure. Whether it will work or not is one thing, but even if it does work, it will take time. I think the overall impression is that it will take time. If consensus can be reached, if you write that there are both positive and negative factors, including the time frame, and that it will take time to resolve, I will be prepared to read the report.

  • Member: The second point is that it is necessary to look at the metaverse because it is a related area to Web3.0. How are the metaverse and Web3.0 related in the first place? The metaverse today is extremely Web2.0. There are people who host it, and there are many Web2.0 metaverses operated by those people. However, among each metaverse of Web2.0, there are metaverse-like developments in which the operation itself is made into Web3.0 and blockchain technology is used, Web3.0 developments in which blockchain technology is used to connect metaverses, and Web3.0 developments in the interuniverse. With such connections, I have the impression that it is easy to understand why the metaverse should be taken up at the Web3.0 Study Meeting and to understand the issues that will follow.

  • Member: It would be better to write about what can be done in the future or what we expect to be able to do in the future. Since various Issue have emerged in reality, it is true that many things will be written, such as Issue, problems, and how they should be handled by law. However, it is wasteful to hold a Web3.0 Study Group in Digital Agency and have many experts gather, but only talk about how to respond to the current law. Shouldn't we write about the philosophy of what we expect to be able to do in the future or what society is expected to realize as technology develops? If we try to realize that philosophy under the current law, it will be difficult. Or, shouldn't we write about the part that says that the philosophy does not work well under the current law and must be included in the current law? For example, regarding personal data protection and user protection, the current Web3.0 side is all on the wrong side of it, and personal data protection has such problems, and it is written that we must deal with them under the current law. However, from the original Web3.0 philosophy, it is true that we have thought that a distributed society will be realized because it is useful for personal data protection and privacy protection, or because we think that such things can be dealt with by technology. It would be better to write about the aspect that the technology side can make a contribution. It is true that this is insufficient, but after writing such a thing, it would be better to write that problems are emerging because the current technology cannot deal with them well. Therefore, it should be done in this way.

  • Member: About DID, I feel like I was dropped because I suddenly started talking about My Number instead of what I expected. I know that the story of My Number is realistically important, but it is quite different from the story of My Number. If you do not write about the philosophy of DID, the story of DID will look like only the government's My Number and the ID management of the Global Platform Company. I would like you to write down the philosophy of DID from the perspective of being read by various people.

  • Member: DAO, but without knowing anything about what is important in the DAO, we are talking about what kind of law can be used to recognize the form of the DAO. What can be realized by the DAO? There are no benefits of the DAO that cannot be realized by the current law, and there are no benefits of what is called the DAO. For example, I do not understand the story that the interests coincide because it is a DAO. The interests do not coincide even if there are blockchains. The interests do not coincide even if these members get together. The interests do not coincide even if a DAO is created. Even if a technology that can record all communication by several people is created, the interests do not coincide. Since it is more clear that the interests do not coincide, it may be possible to create a organization by gathering only those who agree, but the interests do not coincide in technology. I feel that there are parts in which excessive expectations that are not logical for the DAO are written, and I would like you to examine those parts a little more carefully. Regarding how much we can realize what we do not have in the current organization by being recorded by blockchains, there are benefits of being recorded, but I do not understand it well. In that sense, it is difficult to create a new law for that reason, and I do not know how much I can answer to the opinion that we are only creating a organization as a predecessor of the current law. However, since there are benefits, I think it is better to write it down properly. Regarding the DID, the story of the My Number is important, but it is not the first story to be brought, so it is desirable to bring it later.

  • Member: metaverse, this is not like Web3.0. It is true that the government will support industry in the policy proposal, but various frameworks across countries have been created in Web3.0, and one of them is the metaverse. Since individual creators who are doing the metaverse are suddenly in trouble, it is fine to write a story about government support, but it is not a story that comes in parallel.

  • Member: The first sentence of the section "Main opinions on expectations in Japan and the direction toward their realization are as follows" omits my remarks, so I would like to add it.

  • Member: The statement that "If bottom-up efforts to realize new ideas from area through DAO increase, it will be a major turning point at which Japan will be able to play the roles of global rule-makers" was certainly a remark, but it was hollow. Engineers, economists, and lawyers who have obtained the implications of blockchain and cryptography will discuss the same thing.

  • Member: blockchains alone will not solve anything, and whether there are blockchains or DAOs, the presence of two or more humans will cause governance problems. Since it is a problem of human work, technology alone will not make things any better, but various discussions may be taking place under the assumption that new ways of being can be created by blockchains when humans govern each other or configure some Trust.

  • Member: Trusted Web's yellow and blue fried egg On the far right side of the figure, there is a part that can be done by technology, but since it is done in human society, what to do with human beings is important.

  • Member: Blockchain paper is basically about how technology can help human governance or make human society trustworthy. The paper does not only write about technology, but also economic analysis and various things in a group of people who understand economics and governance.

  • Member: In Japan, under the banner of DAO and Web3.0, people who understand technology, people who understand life, and people who understand the economy can discuss the same thing. I think it is close to determining so-called governance rules. I think it is close to discussing soft law, but it is that such a foundation can be made by Japanese. Japanese are rarely rule makers and are often rule followers.

  • Member: Regarding the definition of DAO, Japanese people will experience that governance can be changed, and the number of people who have such experience will increase. The key is not to limit it to a simple term of human resource development, but to increase the number of people who can discuss on the same basis, so please include such a point in the description in order to strengthen the logic in the sentence.

  • Member: Web3.0, it is said that a safe and sound mechanism may be protected by applying e-KYC using My Number Card in the same manner as applied to AML and money-laundering. I think that is the only way in the current situation.

  • Member: If we are to realize this, we need to clearly express a concept such as Self-Sovereign Identity, and clearly express the concept of handling data under self-control and handling data with autonomy. In addition, at that time, as a way of managing identity, My Number is a dominant one of them, but I think it is good to position that there are other ways of doing it.
    Please send us a summary including the general remarks.

    • Speaker: My Number Card pointed out that this is not a mainstream discussion of DID, so I would like to consider the discussion, including how to connect it to future efforts and its position in the overall sense.

  • Member: DID is not the main one to the extent possible. It seems to be a story that extremely ordinary people do not understand well even if they see the report. This report is wide for the general public, and there are two aspects: the public relations part, which shows what Digital Agency and Japan will think toward Web3.0 or what they think Web3.0 will be like, and the strategic part, which shows what will be strategically realized in a realistic policy. The former requires an easy-to-understand and attractive story. At present, there is a tendency to focus on regulation, so I would like the report to describe the future possibilities in an easy-to-understand manner, rather than just needing regulation. In addition to the public relations story, there may be a part in the report that sets a major direction and a wedge to be strategically realized. It is not necessary to write that part in an easy-to-understand manner or appeal it, but I would like it to be written in a place where it can be realized in terms of policy. I would like the Secretariat to judge the writing style.

  • Member: DAO, it is difficult to know what kind of summary will be presented at the Web3.0 Study Group in Digital Agency. One is that there may not be much left at this point if we try to identify what cannot be truly achieved without a DAO. However, in the world of digital-first blockchains and Web3.0, it is natural to use tokens for governance, depending on how you think about it, and it is not desirable to leave the country without clarifying some legal positioning. If it is to be legally clarified, shouldn't the option to form a DAO in accordance with the law be presented at the same time? Various opinions are exchanged through tokens, and such opinions are analyzed by, for example, AI, and discussions are facilitated as much as possible. Although there is no unanimous view, it is possible to navigate opinions and form a unified view in digital organization. I will comment on how much will be written in the report.

  • Member: Web3.0 and Metaverse are both buzzwords, and they appear as words at the same time as last year and this year, but many people use them without understanding the relationship. If you write them carefully as a paper from which Digital Agency can see the whole, it will have a great impact.

  • Member: It is acceptable for the opening of each chapter to be a single paragraph, but if it contains a summary of the direction and the points of discussion that lead to the whole, the outlook will be better, so please respond.
    Since the opposing opinions are all lined up in parallel, it is difficult to understand where the metaverse stands. I would like you to make it easy to understand by kneading at least the first part of each large part.

The secretariat explained that the next workshop will be held on Friday, December 23.
The secretariat explained that the minutes of the meeting will be published after the members confirm the content.

End