In the half-century following its enactment, many inadequacies of the old Copyright Law became apparent in terms of both content and systematization, and already before the war it was realized that a thorough overhaul was needed. However, no specific action was taken during World War II.
Immediately after the war's end, the people were faced with food shortages and serious difficulties in living. With the overnight collapse of the value system that had prevailed before the war, people were liberated from prewar and wartime regulations on speech and ideology, and there was a sudden increase in creative activity by individuals in every field including literature, art, music, drama, and movies. Against the background of the great ups and downs of such an era, attention turned toward the copyright system, which has the mission of a basic law for promoting culture. Soon after 1945 there were calls for a fundamental review of copyright legislation, especially in light of developments in reproduction technology and technology for transferring information, as well as an active movement for revision of the treaty and of domestic laws in various foreign countries.
The wholesale revision of the Copyright Law and enactment of the present Copyright Law took place in 1970 (Showa 45), a quarter-century after the war ended. But this does not mean that revision of the law was not addressed in the intervening period; efforts toward revision had already begun within the government immediately after the war.
The efforts made toward extensive revision from the end of the war until 1970 can be broadly divided into three pushes for revision.

First was the revision work in the Council to Draft a Revision of the Copyright Law, which began in 1950 (Showa 25). Although Japan was under occupation from September 2, 1945 until April 28, 1952, when the U.S.-Japan peace treaty took effect, during this period the Brussels Treaty for the Revision of the Berne Convention was approved. A directive was issued by the occupation authorities to revise the Copyright Law so as to comply with this Brussels revision treaty, and this became the major impetus for the council's revision work.
Despite vigorous debate and deliberation in the council from October 1950 (Showa 25) until the end of 1951 (Showa 26), it resulted in no plan for revising the law, and the council's activities were suspended amid the change in social circumstances brought about by the coming into effect of the U.S.-Japan peace treaty (which was signed on September 8, 1951 (Showa 26) and took effect on April 28, 1952 (Showa 27)). It has been suggested that one reason for this suspension may have been the strong views within Japan questioning the advisability of undertaking the serious work of overhauling the Copyright Law, which is a fundamental law in a country's culture, while the country was under occupation.
The second move toward revision was undertaken by the Copyright System Investigating Committee after the peace treaty took effect.

This investigating committee was set up in April 1953 (Showa 28) and was active from October 1953 (Showa 28) until 1961 (Showa 36). In particular, an inquiry concerning revision of the Copyright Law was submitted to it on September 7, 1954 (Showa 29), and at the fourth plenary session on September 28 a Special Committee on Revision of the Copyright Law was set up. Deliberations proceeded in this special committee concerning specific matters such as the issue of applied art, the issue of movie copyright holders, and how performers, record producers, and broadcasters should be protected.
The special committee conducted its deliberations on the assumption that a full-scale revision would be made to comply with the Brussels Treaty for the Revision of the Berne Convention (revised 1948). But ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention (which was established on September 6, 1952, came into effect on September 16, 1955, and was ratified by Japan on April 28, 1956) and the corresponding revision of domestic laws were more urgent, and the committee's deliberations ended with its 11th session on May 24, 1955, without having reached any specific conclusions.
The third move toward revision was the work of the Copyright System Deliberation Coucil beginning in 1962 (Showa 37), which resulted in the overall revision of 1970 (Showa 45).

Chapter 1: Protection of foreign copyright under the occupation

With the end of the Second World War, Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration on August 14, 1945 (Showa 20), and with the formal signing of the instrument of surrender on September 2 of the same year, Japan was placed under Allied occupation. The government of occupation lasted from this date for about seven years, until April 28, 1952 (Showa 27), when the U.S.-Japan peace treaty went into effect.
During the occupation, the protection of foreign copyright in Japan was placed under the jurisdiction of the Allied military authorities.
Except for the Okinawa region, the government of the Allied military occupation took the form of indirect control in which directives and memoranda were issued by the General Headquarters, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (GHQ-SCAP) to the Japanese government, which received them and issued and executed Potsdam orders (Potsdam imperial ordinances until enforcement of the new constitution, and Potsdam cabinet orders thereafter). But in practice this method was not followed, and sometimes the people were given directives and guidance directly from GHQ.

GHQ was organized into staffs (first through fourth), which were proper military organizations, and special staffs. The special staffs included, besides the General Staff (GS) and the Economy and Science Staff (ESS), staffs for the Civil Property Custodian (CPC) and for Civil Intelligence and Education (CIE), with work concerning copyright being entrusted to CPC and CIE.
CPC was the department in charge of administering the private property (including copyright) of foreigners, and it issued various memoranda concerning foreign copyright.
CIE, on the other hand, was the department in charge of Japan's democratization and education. In GHQ Circular No. 12 of December 5, 1946, departments representing the Allied Powers in Japan were notified of "matters concerning the importation and distribution in Japan of foreign magazines, books, movies, news, or photographs." This circular covered the treatment of translated editions of foreign books in Japan from the viewpoint of achieving the purposes of the occupation, and this work was entrusted to CIE.

Bypassing the Japanese government, CIE gave direct guidance to the Japanese people, including implementation of a bidding system for translated books through a civilian publishers' association.
Under the occupation, the use of foreign works by Japanese was strictly monitored by GHQ. Every use of a foreign work by a Japanese required the permission of CIE, and many direct orders and instructions were issued ordering the investigation and cessation of infringements of foreign works.
However, because there were many cases of translations published without the permission of CIE, CIE prepared a list of infringed works based on its own standards, without following the norms of the Japanese Copyright Law, the Berne Convention, or the U.S.-Japan bilateral treaty.

Based on this list of infringed works, CPC gave the Japanese government a memorandum, dated August 30, 1948, entitled "Application of orders concerning copyright." Among other things, this memorandum ordered that henceforth no foreign books could be published without prior permission, and that royalty of at least 10% of the retail price of the books on the list of infringed works was to be collected from the publisher and deposited into a GHQ administrative account at the Bank of Japan.
Appearing on this list of infringed works were 86 articles, 102 books, and 41 publishing companies, and the list is said to have included almost all translation publishing companies at that time. Among the works on this list were works of countries, such as Germany, which were not Allied Powers, as well as Soviet works not subject to mutual protection under copyright treaties. Moreover, such norms as the 10-year reservation of the right of translation under the Berne Convention and the principle of freedom of translation under the bilateral treaty between the United States and Japan were completely ignored. The list even included works, such as those of Nietzsche and Chekhov, whose period of copyright protection had expired in their own country.

The Ministry of Education replied to this memorandum in a document in the name of the director dated December 28, 1948, stating, "Besides the memorandum to the Japanese government, GHQ has carried out administration by means of guidance and instructions directly to the people. Thus, the Japanese government is not in a position to have full and accurate knowledge concerning the postwar rights and obligations of foreign copyright in Japan nor the procedures for the exploitation of foreign copyright. Accordingly, the Japanese government is not able to take measures to make known to the Japanese people the full relationships and circumstances concerning postwar foreign copyright. Therefore, it is believed that the Japanese people also lack full and accurate knowledge of the nature of foreign copyright and the procedure for exploiting them. In conclusion, the Japanese government petitions with regard to past problems to be allowed to decide on the basis of the Japanese Copyright Law whether there is an infringement of rights."

The upshot was that GHQ took no action concerning the works on the list of infringed works, but subsequently there was no alternative but to treat foreign works as indicated in the above memorandum.
In 1950, under CPC instruction, the Ministry of Education issued a circular from the Administrative Vice-Minister for Education entitled "Precautions concerning respecting foreign copyright" in February and a notification from the Director of the Administration Bureau entitled "Precautions concerning foreign copyright" in June.
In these notices was the statement, "If a full 50 years have elapsed since the death of the author, counted from the year following the year in which the author died, then the author's copyright may be considered to be in the public domain and the copyright to be extinguished, and in such a case it may be freely exploited." In this regard, criticism arose from the publishing world that this circular would create the legal fiction of translation right for 50 years (the so-called "50-year fiction" problem).

Thus, it may be said that while Japan was under occupation, the Japanese Copyright Law and treaty relationships were ignored, and foreign copyright were administered based on the independent judgment of the occupation authorities. Copyright matters at that time were not legally rational but, under the special circumstances of the country being under occupation, were unavoidably administered under the command of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (who at the same time was the U.S. commander of military forces in the Far East). This is thought of as having more the character of controlling information by controlling the publication of translations, rather than simply administering copyright as property right.

Chapter 2:Activities of the Council to Draft a Revision of the Copyright Law

The first work carried out after the war to overhaul the Copyright Law took place in the Council to Draft a Revision of the Copyright Law.
The Berne Convention was revised in Brussels in 1948, and in a memorandum dated August 7, 1950 (Showa 25), the Civil Property Custodian (CPC) of the occupation authorities ordered the Ministry of Education to prepare a plan for revision of the Copyright Law to conform with this Brussels revision treaty.
In order to promptly respond to this directive, a Council to Draft a Revision of the Copyright Law was set up in the Ministry of Education on August 17, 1950 under the Minister of Education.
It was decided that this council would be made up of no more than 60 persons, including persons of academic experience, persons recommended by relevant civil organizations, and members of relevant ministries and agencies.
On October 20, a memorandum entitled "Concerning drafting of a proposed revision of the Copyright Law" was referred to the committee by the Minister of Education, and deliberations began on October 24.
By the end of 1951 (Showa 26), the committee had held five plenary sessions and 16 special committee sessions. However, the fact that the deliberations were taking place under the special circumstances of the country being under occupation also conveyed an atmosphere that there was no need to come to hasty conclusions, and the committee's activities were halted without coming to any specific conclusions during the major social changes accompanying the signing of the peace treaty with Japan and the restoration of Japan's sovereignty.

Chapter 3:Conclusion of the peace treaty and protection of foreign copyright

The Treaty of Peace with Japan (Treaty No. 5 of 1952) was signed in an opera house in San Francisco on September 8, 1951 (Showa 26) by plenipotentiaries of 49 countries, including the United States of America. The treaty consists of 27 articles, plus attached protocols and declarations.

Concerning treaties between many countries, declaration 1 stated, "Except as otherwise provided for in this peace treaty, Japan recognizes that all international instruments between multiple countries that were valid as of September 1, 1939 and to which Japan was a party have full validity, and declares that all rights and obligations based on these instruments will be restored at the time when the peace treaty shall first come into force. Provided, however, that if, in order to be a party to any instrument, it is required that Japan be a member of an international organization it became no longer a member of on or after September 1, 1939, the provisions of this paragraph shall not take effect until Japan rejoins said organization." This fully restored the Berne Convention, which Japan had been a member.

Article 15 (c)(i) states, "Japan recognizes that cultural and artistic copyright existent in Japan on December 6, 1941 concerning copyright, made public and not made public, of Allied Powers and their nationals remain valid after said date, and regardless of whether a treaty or agreement that Japan was a party to on said date was abolished or suspended at the time of occurrence of the war or after said time under the domestic law of Japan or of said Allied Powers, Japan recognizes the rights that arise in Japan after said date due to enforcement of these treaties and agreements and that would have arisen had there been no war." In other words, the copyright of Allied Powers, the copyright of Allied Powers that were members of the Berne Convention, and the copyright under U.S.-Japan and other bilateral treaties that had been protected in Japan on December 6, 1941 (December 7 in Japan), which was the day before the occurrence of the Pacific War, whether those that were valid as of the day before the occurrence of the war or those that arose thereafter, were deemed to be fully valid during the period of the war and continuing thereafter. This meant that persons who exploited the copyright of these countries during or after the war had the legal obligation to pay a use fee. Under Article 27 paragraph 2 of the old copyright law copyright and Article 20 item 3 of its enforcement regulations, if one received a ruling of the Minister of Home Affairs, paid a deposit, and used a foreign work, the amount of the deposit was to be handed over to the Allied Powers after the war. There were also publishing companies that tried to publish translations while respecting foreign works, by paying deposits or laying aside reserves under the guidance of the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Article 15 (c)(ii) stated, "Without the need for any application by a rightholder and without the payment of any fee or any other procedure, the period from December 7, 1941 until this treaty becomes effective between Japan and said Allied Power must be added the ordinary period of these rights, and a period of six extra months must be added the period in which a literary work must be translated into Japanese in order to acquire the right of translation in Japan." This so-called "wartime add-on to the protection period" was a unilateral obligation borne by Japan. To enforce the provisions of Article 15 (c) of the peace treaty, "the Law Concerning Exceptional Provisions for Copyrights owned by the Allied Powers and the Allied Nationals" (Law No. 302 of 1952) was enacted in 1952.

Chapter 4: Abrogation of the U.S.-Japan copyright treaty and conclusion of the U.S.-Japan interim agreement

Under the provisions of Article 7 (a) of the peace treaty, it was necessary for an Allied Power to notify Japan within one year if it wished a treaty from before the war between that Allied Power and Japan to continue to be in effect or revived. There being no such notification from the United States with regard to the U.S.-Japan copyright treaty, under this provision this treaty was deemed to have been abrogated.
After the war and during the period of occupation, the administrative authorities of Japan and the United States continued to negotiate about the form and content of a treaty to be signed governing the protection of copyright, but the day on which the peace treaty was to go into effect, April 28, 1952, came with no agreement having been reached between the two sides.
Japan wanted to maintain the principle of freedom of translation in the U.S.-Japan copyright treaty in the new framework of copyright protection between the United States and Japan, but the United States would not accept this.
Negotiations continued even after the peace treaty took effect, but more than a year passed without agreement being reached. Article 12 of the peace treaty with Japan had a provision (Article 12 (a), (b), (c)) stating that until the relevant treaty or agreement was concluded, Japan was obligated to give Allied-country copyright national treatment for four years after the peace treaty took effect, provided that the Allied country gave the copyright of Japanese nationals national treatment. For the interim this provision was adopted and interim arrangements were concluded between the United States and Japan.
This is known as the "U.S.-Japan interim agreement" or the "U.S.-Japan interim arrangement," but formally it is called the "Official protocol exchanged between the United States and Japan concerning grant of national treatment concerning copyright under Article 12 of the peace treaty."

A protocol and supplementary letter concerning reciprocal granting of national treatment with regard to copyright were exchanged between U.S. Ambassador to Japan Allison and Minister of Foreign Affairs Okazaki in Tokyo on November 10, 1953 (Showa 28). Along with the release of a joint U.S.-Japan communique, in the United States a presidential decree was promulgated on the same day stating that United States copyright law would be applied to the protection of works of Japanese nationals, while in Japan a public notice of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was issued on January 13, 1954.
This U.S.-Japan interim agreement was to be applied retroactively after invalidation of the U.S.-Japan bilateral copyright treaty, that is, from the day on which the peace treaty with Japan took effect (April 28, 1952), and copyright protection between the United States and Japan would be regulated for the four years until a permanent copyright protection relationship was established between the United States and Japan (April 28, 1956) under the Universal Copyright Convention.
The U.S.-Japan interim agreement consisted of an exchanged protocol and supplementary letter, and under these protocols the United States and Japan each confirmed the existence of a copyright relationship between both countries, after April 28, 1952, on the basis of national treatment, and clarified the problems that have previously been pointed out concerning the copyright relationship between the two countries after the war.

Chapter 5: Activities of the Copyright System Investigating Committee

Japan rejoined international society once the peace treaty came into effect (April 28, 1952). With regard to the copyright system, however, a wholesale revision of the domestic copyright system had to be considered, and internationally Japan was faced with the problem of ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention and copyright problems with the United States.
Thus, on April 8, 1953, the Ministry of Education, Science & Culture abolished the Council to Draft a Revision of the Copyright Law, which had been dormant as an advisory body on copyright law since 1951, and newly set up a Copyright System Investigating Committee under the Minister of Education, Science & Culture.
The following special committees were set up in the Copyright System Investigating Committee, and the work of summarizing opinions on various topics proceeded initially in these special committees.

Special Committee on Revision of the Copyright Law (established September 1954)
Special Committee on Copyright Intermediate Services (established February 1955)
Special Committee on U.S.-Japan Relations (established February 1955)
Special Committee on Related Rights (established February 1957)
Special Committee on Copyright Notification (established March 1958)

Among the above committees, the Special Committee on Revision of the Copyright Law dealt with the issue of overhauling the Copyright Law. But this special committee discontinued its deliberations in May 1955 because concentrated consideration was necessary in the Special Committee on U.S.-Japan Relations, which had been established on February 22 that year, regarding the then-pressing issues of disposition of copyright problems between the United States and Japan and ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention. The work of overhauling the Copyright Law in the second session after the war therefore ended without producing any results.
In the Special Committee on Copyright Notification, which had been set up to consider specific labeling methods for the © symbol prescribed by the Universal Copyright Convention, the result was wider use of the symbol on works including books, newspapers, magazines, and movies, in line with the report of this committee.
The Special Committee on Related Rights summarized domestic opinions and produced a report concerning the draft of a related rights treaty (the Berne-UNESCO draft on related right (the so-called Monaco draft), the International Labor Organization draft (the so-called ILO draft), etc.) if the Japanese government were asked for its views by international bodies such as UNESCO or the Berne Secretariat or if government representatives were dispatched from Japan to intergovernmental committees on copyright.

Chapter 6: Ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention

Section 1: Ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention

Negotiations between Japan and the United States continued even after the U.S.-Japan interim agreement had been concluded.
During this period, the Universal Copyright Convention, which had been established in Geneva on September 6, 1952, went into effect on September 16, 1955.
With the coming into effect of this convention, the United States made clear its policy of proceeding with copyright relations with other countries on the basis of the Universal Copyright Convention rather than bilateral treaties, and U.S.-Japan negotiations took a new turn (the United States deposited the instrument of ratification on December 6, 1954).
Japan took the position of opposing dealing with the copyright relationship between the United States and Japan based only on the Universal Copyright Convention and insisted on the conclusion of a new bilateral treaty or extension of the U.S.-Japan interim agreement for some time, but the United States was not agreeable to this.
As stated above, in February 1955 the Ministry of Education, Science & Culture set up within in the Copyright System Investigating Committee a Special Committee on U.S.-Japan Relations, and consideration of the issues of dealing with the copyright relationship between the United States and Japan and ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention began on April 5. By October 18, this Special Committee on U.S.-Japan Relations had met 13 times and had produced an "Interim report on the course of proceedings of the Special Committee on U.S.-Japan Relations," but no conclusions were reached in this report either, nor did the committee's findings present any unanimous view.

Talks between the United States and Japan continued from March or April 1955 until about September, but the United States had no intention of extending the U.S.-Japan interim agreement or concluding a new bilateral agreement and continued to insist that matters should be governed by the Universal Copyright Convention. Thus, the views of the two sides did not converge.
In such circumstances, the U.S.-Japan interim agreement was set to lapse on April 28, 1956, while on the other hand, in order for the Universal Copyright Convention to take effect in Japan by that date, the instrument of ratification would have to be deposited by January 28, 1956, because under its Article 9, three months were required from the time the instrument was deposited until the ratification took effect. This meant that the proposed treaty would have to be submitted to an extraordinary session of the Diet at the end of 1955 which increased the urgency of the matter. In the end, the government decided to ratify the Universal Copyright Convention in order to avoid a state in which there would be no treaty at all between the United States and Japan.
A proposal for ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention was submitted to the 23rd session (an extraordinary session) of the Diet at the end of 1955 (Showa 30). This was approved on December 16, the instrument of ratification was deposited with the UNESCO Secretariat on January 28, 1956, and the Universal Copyright Convention went into effect in Japan on April 28 of that year.
Thus, both the United States and Japan have been members of the Universal Copyright Convention since April 28, 1956, and this is the basis of the permanent copyright relationship between the United States and Japan was established after the war.

Section 2:Law concerning the Exceptional Provisions to the Copyright Law required in Consequence of the Enforcement of the Universal Copyright Convention

Upon ratification of the Universal Copyright Convention, Japan enacted a Law concerning the Exceptional Provisions to the Copyright Law required in Consequence of the Enforcement of the Universal Copyright Convention (Law No. 86 of 1956: hereinafter in this section referred to as "Exceptions Low").
In ratifying the Universal Copyright Convention, Japan adopted exceptions to the protection period, the right of translation, and other matters as set forth in the convention with respect to copyrights of nationals of signatory countries to the Universal Copyright Convention, and the exceptions to the Copyright Law were prescribed by this Exceptions Law.

With regard to the seven-year compulsory license system for translation right, the general principle is that the right of translation is protected during the period of protection for the copyright (Article 5 paragraph 1 of the treaty), but exceptional measures are provided in paragraph 2, and once seven years have elapsed from the date on which a document is first published, under certain conditions a national of a signatory country may translate it into the language of his/her own country and publish it without the consent of the holder of the translation right. The conference to conclude the Universal Copyright Convention was held in Geneva from August to September 1952. With respect to the right of translation, a proposal put forth jointly by Japan, Turkey, and Greece to maintain the same translation right reservation as in the Berne Convention (although passed by the narrow vote of 11 in favor, 10 against, and 22 abstentions) met with strong opposition from the United States, which even threatened not to participate in the convention. Therfore it was decided to take another vote. On the subsequent occasion, the proposal of Japan and the other countries was defeated, and thus as a compromise proposal, a system of compulsory license (Article 5 paragraph 2 of the treaty) was adopted. Japan did not attend the signing ceremony on September 6, 1952, but signed on January 3, 1953. The subsequent debate in Japan concerning ratification of this convention was divided. Some time was therefore required for ratification, which has been attributed to the course of events at that time.

The problem of the protection of works subject to treatment as a domestic national in Japan under the provisions of Article 12 of the peace treaty are set forth in Article 11 of the Exceptions Law. That is, if a country is an Allied Power and was a signatory to the Universal Copyright Convention at the time of enforcement of the Exceptions Law, the same protection is thereafter afforded to works protected under the Copyright Law pursuant to the provisions of Article 12 of the peace treaty at the time of enforcement of the Exceptions Law. Article 12 of the peace treaty provides that until the relevant treaty or agreement is concluded, Japan shall give national treatment to the property of an Allied Power or of a national thereof for four years after the peace treaty first comes into effect (April 28, 1952). On the other hand, the Universal Copyright Convention follows the principle of nonretroactivity: in the absence of any measures concerning future protection of works that had been protected under the application of Article 12 of the peace treaty, there was concern that such works would not be protected in Japan in the future. Thus, it was decided that such works would continue to receive the same protection in relation to an Allied Power of the peace treaty that was a signatory to the Universal Copyright Convention prior to April 28, 1956 (the date on which Japan became a signatory to the Universal Copyright Convention).

Chapter 7: Activities of the Copyright System Deliberation Council

Section 1: Inauguration of the Copyright System Deliberation Council

By the early 1960s, work to overhaul the Copyright Law had already been underway for more than 10 years, from the time of the Council to Draft a Revision of the Copyright Law through the Copyright System Investigation Committee. No specific results had been achieved, however, and a new law had not to be presented to the people yet.
More than 60 years had elapsed since the enactment of the old Copyright Law in 1899, and during that time the Berne Convention had been revised and partially amended several times to keep up with the development of technology. But it could not be said that its text had been systematized, and the general public as well as the relevant bodies had gradually become increasingly aware that the legal system had not kept pace with the means of transferring information, including the rapid development and popularization of the broadcasting media of radio and television, as well as movies, phonograph records, and home sound recording devices.
Internationally as well, after World War II the Berne Convention had been revised in Brussels in 1948, and the major countries of the Berne Convention had revised their domestic laws to comply with the revised convention and were already signatories to the Brussels revision convention. But Japan was still not a signatory to the Brussels revision convention as of the early 1960s, and was only at the stage of being a signatory to the Rome Convention for the Revision of the Berne Convention, which had been concluded in Rome in 1928. And in Germany, which like Japan, having lost the war, had not received an invitation to the convention revision conference in Brussels in 1948, efforts to revise domestic laws in order to accede to the Brussels revision convention were steadily going forward.

In September 1961, a diplomatic conference was held to prepare and conclude a so-called related rights convention (an international convention on the protection of performers, phonogram producers, and broadcasters), and the need arose to consider the issue of joining this related rights convention.
Against this background, it was decided that a body to widely consider the copyright system would be established based on a law rather than under the authority of a minister, as the Council to Draft a Revision of the Copyright Law and the Copyright System Investigating Committee had been. A bill to partially amend the law establishing the Ministry of Education, Science & Culture was submitted to the Diet on February 7, 1962, and became law on March 22. This resulted in the establishment of the Copyright System Deliberation Council, which was a reorganization and enhancement of the previous Copyright Council, whose functions had been limited discretionary matters (enforced April 1, 1962). Also, the Copyright System Deliberation Council order was promulgated and enforced on April 1, 1962 (Cabinet Order No. 17 of 1962), 30 members were immediately appointed, and the first Copyright System Deliberation Council was underway.

Section 2: Course of deliberation and report of the Copyright Deliberation System Council

1. Course of deliberation of the Copyright System Deliberation Council

The Copyright System Deliberation Council was established in April 1962 by a partial amendment of the law establishing the Ministry of Education, Science & Culture, and on May 16 of that year, an inquiry was submitted by the Minister of Education, Science & Culture on "Important basic matters concerning revision of the Copyright Law and the system for protecting performers, record producers, and broadcasters (so-called related rights)."
The council identified the issues involved in revising the Copyright Law and establishing a system of related rights, set up five subcommittees according to these issues, and prescribed the matters to be considered by each subcommittee.
At a plenary session on November 4, 1963, the interim reports of the subcommittees were presented, and besides, an inquiry on "Improvements in the system of intermediate services concerning copyrights, etc." was submitted, and a sixth subcommittee was established to consider this issue.

Subcommittee 1 (literature, science, common matters)
Subcommittee 2 (art, applied arts, architecture, photography)
Subcommittee 3 (music)
Subcommittee 4 (motion pictures)
Subcommittee 5 (related rights)
Subcommittee 6 (system of intermediate services)

Each subcommittee held repeated hearings to discuss its assigned topics, hearing the views of interested parties and inviting relevant witnesses, and an interim report on the state of deliberations of each subcommittee was made public on November 4, 1963.
Deliberations continued, making reference also to the views of interested parties in response to this interim report, and on May 21, 1965, reports on the results of the deliberations of the subcommittees were presented at a plenary session.
At this plenary session, an overall discussion took place concerning the reports on the results of the deliberations of the subcommittees and the views of interested bodies, and on April 20, 1966, a report on the deliberations was put together at a plenary session and presented to the Minister of Education. At a plenary session on the same day, a report was given on the results of the deliberations of the sixth subcommittee on the system of intermediatery services (a report on ways to improve the intermediatery services system was presented about a year later, on May 10, 1967).
The ways in which to improve the system as pointed out by the report of the Copyright System Deliberation Council were later revised somewhat based on the opinions of affected organizations and the results of the 1967 conference in Stockholm for revision of the Berne Convention, but its broad outlines were implemented in the new law.

Chapter 8: Complete revision of the Copyright Law

Section 1: Course leading to submission to the Diet

There soon began the work of enactment according to the April 20, 1966 report of the Copyright System Deliberation Council, and the Draft Law Concerning Copyright and Related Rights (tentative draft of the Ministry of Education Cultural Affairs Bureau) was made public six months later, in October 1966. This tentative draft by the Cultural Affairs Bureau, consisting of 143 articles in its main text and 21 articles in its supplementary provisions, was prepared as the gist of the council's report in legal form, but it included measures that differed in content from the report in a number of points, as well as provisions that the report had not covered.
Later, based on the views of affected organizations, a preliminary review of the text of the draft was conducted by the Cabinet Legislation Bureau, and in January 1968, following completion of its first reading by the Legislation Bureau, its third draft was made public.
It took two years to progress from the report to a proposed law, but behind this situation was the fact that a full-scale revision of the Copyright Law would have wide-ranging effects on the community and related industries, with many issues to be resolved. Extreme care was required for coordinating between the affected groups and it was felt necessary to base the proposal on the results of the July 1967 conference in Stockholm for revision of the Berne Convention.

In March 1968, following completion of the third reading by the Legislation Bureau, the fifth draft was made public. The final review by the Legislation Bureau took place the same month, and on April 2 a Cabinet discussion was held to determine whether to submit the proposed law to the 58th session of the Diet, but at this time it was ultimately not submitted to the Diet.
The following year, on April 18, 1969, the 1969 draft law, a somewhat revised version of the 1968 draft law, was presented to the 61st session of the Diet, but was withdrawn in the House of Representatives.
Then, in February 1970, the 1970 draft law, which was the same as that in the previous year, was submitted to the 63rd session of the Diet, and was adopted in April of the same year.

Section 2: Outline of the Stockholm conference for revision of the Berne Convention

1. Holding of the Stockholm revision conference

A diplomatic conference was held in Stockholm, Sweden, from June 11 to July 14, 1967 to revise the Berne Convention on copyright and the Paris Convention on industrial property, and to prepare a treaty to establish a world intellectual property organization as a new international organization to modernize the administration of both the Berne Convention and the Paris Convention.
This was the fourth major revision of the Berne Convention since its establishment in 1886, following the overhauls worked out in Berlin in 1908, in Rome in 1928, and in Brussels in 1948.
The content of the protocol on developing countries prescribed as an essential integral part of the treaty proved to be the sticking point for the Stockholm revision treaty, and finally it did not go into effect and was abandoned with the effectuation of the Paris revision treaty of 1971. However the substantial provisions concerning the nature of the protection prescribed therein were carried over to the Paris revision treaty, and had an important influence on the work of overhauling the Japanese Copyright Law.
The content of the Stockholm revision treaty was a basis for the work of formulating the text of the law from the stage of a tentative draft of the Cultural Affairs Bureau in 1966 through to the stage of the third draft in 1968.

2. Trends affecting the 10-year reservation of the right of translation, and the results of deliberations at the Stockholm revision conference

Both before and after the war, the problem of the right or translation was always an important issue in Japan's copyright relationships with other countries, including the problem of the 10-year reservation under the Berne Convention and the principle of freedom of translation between the United States and Japan.
Article 7 of the old Copyright law provided that unless the copyright holder issued a translation within 10 years after publication of the original work, the right of translation was extinguished. In other words, if a Japanese version was not issued within 10 years after a foreign work had been published, the work could be freely translated into Japanese.

This provision specifying an exception for the duration of translation rights was based on an 1896 Paris addendum to the Berne Convention. The Berne Convention originally held that translation rights were extinguished in 10 years, but under the Paris addendum, translation rights had the same duration as other rights, and unless a work was translated into a language within 10 years after its publication, the right to translate the work into that language was extinguished.
Later, in the Berlin revision treaty of 1908, the provision prescribing an exception for the duration of translation right was deleted, and it was decided that translation right should have the same duration as other rights. But it was also recognized that member countries could reserve the practice of following the Paris rule as previously. Thus, Japan reserved that it would maintain an exception with regard to the duration of translation right. In the Rome revision treaty too, it was recognized that the benefits of the previous reservation could continue to be maintained (Article 27 paragraph 2). And in the 1948 Brussels revision treaty as well, it was held that this 10-year reservation for translation right could be maintained.

One reason cited for Japan's adoption of this measure was the considerable linguistic differences between Japanese and the languages of the West, making it impossible to generally make use of foreign-language sources in their original language, and making it especially difficult to translate from a foreign language into Japanese. Furthermore, in fact, as a considerable portion of the foreign works to be freely published under this measure are specialized scientific and research works, this reservation of translation right is said to play an important role in the exchange of scientific and cultural information.
The report of the Copyright System Deliberation Council stated, "It is thought that we have reached the stage where the reservation in the Berne Convention should be waived so that translation right are treated in the same way as general rights. However, considering the background of Japan's previous insistence on this point and the effect that a change would have on the publishing industry, such a step should be taken with great caution."

In the original revision proposal submitted to the revision conference in Stockholm in 1967, a protocol was to be newly provided for developing countries and no reservation would be allowed in the official text of the treaty. But Japan proposed at the conference that Article 27 paragraph 2 of the Brussels revision treaty be retained, arguing that whether to waive the benefits of the reservation thus far enjoyed by a member country was a matter that should be left to the independent judgment of that country, and that it would not be appropriate for a revision of the treaty to make it impossible to maintain these benefits. This proposal was accepted, and it was decided that under the Stockholm revision treaty a member country would be able to maintain the benefits of this reservation as previously (Article 30 (2)(a)).
Also, in a proposal from Monaco it was held that under the revision treaty a nonmember country that newly joined the Berne Convention would be able to exercise the same reservation concerning a right of translation as in the Brussels revision treaty.
On the other hand, in a proposal from Italy it was provided that equivalent protection would only be given to works of a country that exercised such a reservation with regard to translation rights (Article 30 (2)(b)). And the conference confirmed that reciprocity concerning this right of translation would not be applied to works whose home country was a country that maintained the previous reservation.

Section 3: Bill of 1968

A preliminary review by the Cabinet Legislation Bureau began based on the draft (the tentative draft of the Cultural Affairs Bureau), and in drafting the proposed law, reference was made to the results of the Stockholm conference for revision of the Berne Convention held from June to July 1967 as well as the views of interested bodies concerning the draft.
The first reading (examination) by the Legislation Bureau began in September 1967, and a full review of the proposed legislation proceeded.
In January 1968, prior to preparation of the final draft, an interim proposal was provided to interested bodies in the form of the "Draft Law to Revise the Entire Copyright Law (3rd draft)" to solicit their opinions and inform the public of the revision work.
This third draft was the interim draft that had almost gone through a review by the Cabinet Legislation Bureau, and was a result of the strong desire of interested parties in the broader community for it to be made public.
While incorporating the views of these interested parties, a proposed law was put together through public announcement of the fifth draft in March, and on April 2, 1968, a Cabinet decision was made to submit the draft law to the 58th session of the Diet.
Comparing the draft law of 1968 with the original proposal (the tentative draft of the Cultural Affairs Bureau), more than 50 changes had been made. In particular, a number of changes had been made with reference to the Stockholm revision treaty, including a provision that works of persons residing permanently in Japan would also be protected.

Section 4: Bill of 1969

The proposed law of 1968 ultimately was not submitted to the Diet, but a proposed Copyright Law was submitted to the 61st session of the Diet on April 18, 1969.
When the proposed law of 1969 was submitted to the Diet, in the considerations by the Liberal Democratic Party's policy council and executive council, the discussions focused on the following three points.

<1> To provide a reservation for the authors by special agreement concerning the conveyance of movie copyright to the movie company.
<2> To recognize the author's unconditional moral right to make movie works public.
<3> To recognize the right of performance of music by records to include general coffee shops, etc.

Consideration by the executive council took place in four meetings from January to April, resulting in a revised draft concerning the above three points. With the approval of the executive council on April 11, 1969, a Cabinet decision was made on April 15.
After the Cabinet decision of April 15, technical legislative revisions were made by the Cabinet Legislation Bureau on the same date, and it was submitted to the Diet on April 18 along with the "Bill Concerning Adjustment, etc. of Relevant Laws in connection with Enforcement of the Copyright Law."
On May 24, 1969, a "Bill for the Temporary Regulation Concerning Administration of Universities" to quell university disturbances was also submitted to the 61st session of the Diet, to which the proposed law of 1969 had been submitted.
The proposed copyright law of 1969 was considered over the course of seven meetings of the House of Representatives' Education Committee, including testimony by three witnesses, and thereafter a subcommittee to study the proposed copyright law was set up. But with the consideration of the Bill for the temporary regulation concerning administration of universities as well as other Diet matters at the end of the session, the proposed law was withdrawn before its consideration had been completed, along with a great deal of other proposed legislation. The bill for the temporary regulation concerning administration of universities was passed, and was promulgated on August 7.

Section 5: Temporary extension of the protection period

Until the new law was passed, measures for temporary extension of copyright had been devised four times since 1962.
That is, as relief for copyright whose protection period would expire while the work of revising the law was going on, extensions totaling eight years (three years for copyright in the name of an organization and photographs) were granted: three years by House member legislation in 1962 (except for copyright in the name of an organization, photographs, performance singing, and sound recordings), two years in the same range in 1965 (hereinafter government proposals), a further two years in 1967 (this time a two-year extension also for copyright in the name of an organization and photographs), and one year in the same range in 1969.

Section 6: Bill of 1970 and passage of the new law

The bill submitted to the 63rd session of the Diet in February 1970 had exactly the same content as the one the year before, the only changes being that it would go into effect on January 1, 1971, one year later than the bill of 1969 would have done, and that the content of the adjustment legislation was set forth in the supplementary provisions of the bill.
In the House of Representatives, after being deliberated in three meetings of the Education Committee, a subcommittee to study the bill was set up, and after it heard the views of and questioned 18 experts, including representatives of organizations that had an interest in the legislation, the articles of the bill were considered one by one in a free discussion in the form of an informal gathering. As a result, the bill was passed unanimously (Liberal Democratic Party, Social Democratic Party, Komeito Party, Democratic Socialist Party, and Communist Party) on April 9 without amendment.

In the House of Councillors, the Education Committee heard the views of experts focusing on the pending problems of photographs, movies, and related rights, and careful consideration was given to each problem. Proposals put forth on April 28 separately by the Socialist Party and the Communist Party to amend the provisions covering the conveyance of movie copyright, the period of protection for photographs, and the period of protection for related rights were rejected, and the original bill was passed by majority vote (the Liberal Democratic Party, Democratic Socialist Party, and Communist Party approved the original draft, while the Socialist Party and Komeito Party opposed the original bill).
The plenary session of the House of Councilors approved and adopted the bill on the same day.
Looking back on the steps leading up to the overall revision of the Copyright Law, almost eight years were required from the establishment of the Copyright System Deliberation Council in 1962 until the new law was passed. The new law came into effect about 25 years after the end of the war, and about 70 years after the old Copyright Law was enacted in 1899. It may be said that it was a great undertaking for the enactment of a basic law regulating a country's culture.

[ Copyright Update Japan top ]	NEXT PAGE
Copyright Update Japan 1999 Published by COPYRIGHT RESEARCH AND INFORMATION CENTER (CRIC).