Utilizing knowledge of anime and manga
Tackling generative AI and the "right to voice" from a government perspective

[Interview with Attorney Kotaro Tanabe (Part 2)]

Attorney Kotaro Tanabe has a deep knowledge of character content and supports many companies and creators. He is currently seconded to the Cabinet Office, where he is involved in creating an environment that is conducive to the development of anime, manga, and other genres from an administrative standpoint.
First partWe asked Attorney Tanabe about his reasons for focusing on the character business and the challenges facing the industry.

In the second part, we will hear more about his current work at the Cabinet Office, where he is seconded, as well as his efforts regarding the much talked-about generative AI and voice rights.

Acting as a coordinator across ministries and agencies
Involved in cutting-edge fields of intellectual property

-You have been seconded to the Intellectual Property Strategy Promotion Office of the Cabinet Office since January 2024. What was your reason for being seconded to the Cabinet Office in the first place?

When I thought about my long career as a lawyer, I had a vague feeling that it might be good experience to try working from a slightly different angle. That was the initial trigger.
I think lobbying is relatively popular overseas, but in Japan, lobbying itself is not yet common, and it is difficult to see what lawmakers and government officials are doing. So I wanted to get inside and see what government is like.

-- Could you briefly explain what kind of organization the Cabinet Office's Intellectual Property Strategy Promotion Secretariat is?

It is a special agency of the Cabinet Office that puts together the "Intellectual Property Promotion Plan," a government plan for the creation, protection, and utilization of intellectual property, and is an organization that plans, promotes, and generally coordinates important policies related to intellectual property. It can be thought of as an agency that acts as a control tower for each ministry and agency on matters that require cross-sectional consideration regarding intellectual property.
To give a simple example, the government is in a position to conduct cross-sectional studies of cutting-edge fields related to intellectual property, such as holding a conference on intellectual property and AI in 2024 and publishing a document called the "Interim Summary of the Intellectual Property Rights Study Group in the AI ​​Era."

-What kind of work are you in charge of, Mr. Tanabe?

Regarding AI, when I took up my post, a conference called the "Intellectual Property Rights Review Committee in the AI ​​Era" had been established, but no summary materials had been prepared at all. Therefore, together with my team members, we created the "Interim Summary of the Intellectual Property Rights Review Committee in the AI ​​Era" and published it in May 2024. Even after publishing the "Interim Summary," we also conducted interviews with related companies, and toward the end of fiscal year 2024, we were also involved in responding to a survey project regarding contracts when using the likenesses and voices of actors and other people in AI.
When I first took up my post, there was no forum where public and private sector practitioners involved in anti-piracy measures could gather together and discuss the issue. However, we have now formed the Anti-Piracy Public and Private Sector Practitioner-Level Liaison Conference as a forum for grasping the current situation and providing information, and we are currently running this conference and preparing its materials.
I am widely involved in matters related to AI and anti-piracy measures. I also draft the relevant parts of the "Intellectual Property Promotion Plan," prepare responses to questions asked in the Diet, and respond to requests for lectures from Diet members. Of course, I also do administrative work.

- I see. When lawyers are seconded to the government, there is an image that they are involved in legal reforms, etc., but this is a bit different.

The Cabinet Office Intellectual Property Strategy Headquarters is not in charge of individual intellectual property laws, such as the Copyright Act, so it is not generally involved in amending individual laws. On the other hand, I think one of its distinguishing features is that it is in a position to observe trends in intellectual property policy from a macro perspective. I think being involved in legal reform is one of the attractions of lawyers being seconded to the government, but I wanted to see how the government works and its logic, so I'm glad I came to the Cabinet Office.

AI "Interim Summary"
Aiming for a balance between technology and intellectual property rights

-As mentioned earlier, the publication of the "Interim Report of the Intellectual Property Rights Study Group in the Age of AI" at the end of last year became a hot topic. What are the key points of the "Interim Report"?

The Interim Report examines issues surrounding intellectual property and AI from the perspectives of law, technology, and contracts. It considers these three perspectives to be mutually complementary.
For example, even if it is legally possible to have AI learn data without permission, it would be acceptable to enter into a proper contract and pay a fee in order to obtain better data. The Interim Report believes that if a way of thinking based on these three perspectives gradually takes hold among the relevant parties, it will be possible to achieve both the advancement of AI technology and the appropriate protection of intellectual property rights.
I was also able to touch on other issues that are of great personal interest to me, such as the preservation of labor, style, and voice.
I believe that this is a compilation of materials that can only be compiled by the Cabinet Office Intellectual Property Strategy Promotion Secretariat, which allows for cross-sectional examination of important issues related to intellectual property.
In particular, with regard to "laws," the Copyright Act is under the jurisdiction of the Agency for Cultural Affairs, the Trademark Act and Design Act are under the jurisdiction of the Patent Office, and the Unfair Competition Prevention Act is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, so we had a lot of trouble coordinating the detailed wording with the relevant ministries and agencies. As a result of being so particular about the detailed wording, the writing felt a little unfamiliar in some places, and we (reluctantly) had to cut out a lot of the text, but we believe we have created a useful compilation of materials.
Some people have said that "the descriptions of intellectual property law in the Interim Summary are not very useful as a reference because the document was not issued by the ministries and agencies with jurisdiction over each law," but we have thoroughly discussed the matter with the relevant ministries and agencies with jurisdiction over each law and have adjusted the wording, so we believe that the document is still well worth referring to.

The Interim Summary is over 90 pages long, so if you just want to know the main points, please refer to my article "Key Points of the Interim Summary of the Intellectual Property Rights Review Committee in the AI ​​Era" (Civil Law Research Group "Law & technology” (105), 47-57, 2024-10).

A new challenge: the right to voice
Actively Support

--Recently, I've been hearing the term "voice rights" a lot. I learned on the news that performers are working to protect their voice rights.

The issue of the "voices" of performers, including voice actors, is a topic that has come to be debated head-on with the spread of generative AI, and it is something I am personally very committed to. Even though anime has become so established as a culture and is recognized as an important industry in Japan, there are in fact no provisions in the field of intellectual property law in Japan that directly protect the "voice" itself, which is an important element of anime. While there is the possibility of protection through rights recognized by precedents, such as publicity rights, the reality is that "voice" is in an unstable position where it is difficult to protect it.
In the age of generative AI, it is technically possible to synthesize voices of such quality that it is impossible to distinguish whether they are the voice of the voice actor or someone else, provided there is even a small sample. As a result, there are cases where a voice that is recognizable as the voice of a famous voice actor is used in a way that makes the voice actor feel uncomfortable, such as reading sentences that are different from the voice actor's own beliefs, making it appear as if the voice actor said those words themselves.
In response to this situation, the Japan Actors Union, as well as well-known voice actors, have come together to voice their voices and ask that they stop using their voices without permission. Contrary to some common misconceptions, we are not rejecting generative AI itself. I myself provide support by answering inquiries from voice actors and giving lectures on AI and intellectual property, and I also accept media interviews to address this issue.

Generative AI is a great tool to make people's lives more efficient, and it is certain that the technology will continue to advance in the future, but a person's "voice" is emitted through the organs of the body and is very closely linked to their personality. I think we need to give more consideration to these points.
Also, performers have different opinions about using their "voices" in generative AI. Some say they absolutely do not want their voices to be used, while others think it is OK for them to be used, or that it is OK for them to be used for certain purposes. All of these opinions should be respected equally.
With this in mind, I have accepted the position of auditor for the Japan Voice AI Learning Data Certification Service Organization (commonly known as AILAS), and am committed to activities to create a society in which people and voice AI can coexist and prosper, with the will of the voice owner being reflected.

-Finally, please tell us about your future prospects.

There is less than a year left in my term as the Cabinet Office Intellectual Property Promotion Office, so I would like to provide you with some useful results regarding AI and anti-piracy measures that you can refer to.

As a lawyer, I would like to continue to focus on issues related to content companies and individual generative AI, and I would like to further explore the issue of "voice." In addition, since the content industry has become one of Japan's core industries, I believe that lobbying will become even more important in the future. I would like to broaden the scope of my legal work by serving as a bridge between the government and the content industry.

【2025.6.18】