|Shinto Teramoto||Last modified date：2019.09.18|
Executive Adviser to the President
Bacheler of Law
Country of degree conferring institution (Overseas)
Field of Specialization
Total Priod of education and research career in the foreign country
Study social network analysis of intellectual property law system, and providing intellectual property education, practical legal training, and in-house legal services (including, without limitation to, those to PR division of Kyushu Univ.) based on such study.
Also, acting as the Spokes Person of the Faculty of Law.
Also, acting as the Spokes Person of the Faculty of Law.
Research InterestsMembership in Academic Society
- My research is principally focused on observing the diffusion of information and/or the sharing of resources in society (mostly empirically, but incorporating quantitative research where possible); describing them by means of simple social network models; and designing a legal system to nudge business to promote diffusion of information and/or sharing of resources. The scope of my research extends to smart contract which enables distributed energy supply network and sharing economy platforms.
keyword : Social Network, Intellectual Property Law,Diffusion of Information, Sharing of Resources, smart contract
- Actualize Energetic Life by Creating Brain Information Industries
2014.12~2017.9 Program Manager Yoshinori Yamakawa
Japan Science and Technology Agency
Almost all of the unresolved social challenges that we face today are associated with neurological and psychological issues. These include the need for information technologies that can communicate user’s feelings in an information society, acquisition of professional expertise needed in a service economy, the prevention of a decline in brain functions in a rapidly aging society and so on. Needed are innovative efforts to use neuroscience to link the visualization of brain information and research into control technologies to the resolution of social issues. This program will make service models for brain information in the three sectors of health, education and information science publicly available. The construction of an innovation ecosystem through the creation of a brain information infrastructure will create the world’s first brain information industries and achieve energetic lifestyles.
|1.||Teramoto, Shinto, Protection of Patent License against Subsequent Patent Holder in Japan, The University of Tokyo Law Review, Vol.3, pp.191-213 (2008), 2008.08.|
|1.||Teramoto, Shinto, Simulating the impact of intellectual property rights on the innovation process, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Innovation and Management, 1099-1107, 2014.11, [URL].|
|2.||寺本振透, Protect Network Neutrality against Intellectual Property Rights - a legal and social network perspective, 2012 International Conference on Knowledge, Culture and Society (Jeju Island, South Korea)／International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research, vol. 42, pp. 7-11, 2012.06.|
|3.||Shinto Teramoto, Copyrightability and Scope of Protection for Works of Utilitarian Nature Under Japanese Law, Max-Planck-Institute for Foreign and International Patent, Copyright, and Competition Law; International Review of Industrial Property and Copyright Law (IIC), Vol. 28, No. 1, pp.51-74, 1997.01.|
|1.||Shinto TERAMOTO, Designing a Smarter Law that Enables Smart Contracts that are Useful in Everyday Life, Emerging Legal Issues for Artificial Intelligence -- Legal Liability, Discrimination, Intellectual Property Rights and Beyond, 2018.11, Suppose that a supplier of goods or services and a consumer enter into a contract for goods or services. If the terms and conditions of the contract are prefixed by the supplier unilaterally and the choice of the consumer is just to accept or decline, it is very easy to implement an automatic contracting process for them. Everyday, we experience such simple and automated contracting processes when we ride on the subway and buses using IC cards.
However, in many cases, the terms that each of the parties to a contract deems acceptable in advance are very abstract and have some flexibility. Such anticipated terms may include the conditions most preferred by a party to those least preferred. There is no guarantee that the resulting contract will satisfy both parties. The terms and conditions of the contract to be executed are likely to have multiple alternatives. The finally decided terms just represent one of many possible alternatives. It would be difficult for such terms to completely satisfy both parties.
In order to make smart contracts widely implemented in our society, a system that automatically matches the terms and conditions of both parties to a contract (hereinafter, referred to as a smart contract platform) must be able to establish a contract with fair and reasonable terms and conditions that can satisfy both parties in such complex situation. The currently spreading use of Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) using deep learning is likely to make such a smart contract platform realistic.
However, suppose that both parties to a contract could have gone through a human to human negotiation, and that the final terms are not preferable or disadvantageous to one of the parties. Possibly, such disadvantaged parties would try to persuade themselves that such undesirable or disadvantageous results were caused by their or their agent’s incompetence. However, if such undesirable or disadvantageous terms are caused automatically by a smart contract platform, the disadvantaged party may feel great frustration because they can hardly find a reason to blame themselves. Also, it is possible for a smart contract platform to manipulate the terms of a contract by utilizing the very wide scope of acceptable terms prefixed by the consumer, thereby, giving an advantage to the supplier. Such manipulation will be deemed unfair, even though it does not necessarily constitute fraud. Moreover, if a smart contract platform is provided exclusively by one or a very limited number of companies, the platform may be programmed to be advantageous or disadvantageous to specific or specific categories of suppliers. For example, a smart contract platform used to enable electricity supply companies and consumers who want to quickly charge their electric vehicles (EVs) to contract automatically may be programmed to increase the probability that established and conventional electricity supply companies can contract with consumers within the scope of the terms prefixed by the consumers. It is also probable that a smart contract platform will apply different terms and conditions, such as by giving priority to contracts with consumers of certain electricity supply companies, and give advantages to some of them, and cause disadvantages to others.
The implementation of smart legal tools in the society is likely to require us to design legal tools such as the obligatory disclosure of an automatic contracting process, auditing or monitoring by a third party, and competition among multiple smart contract platform providers, to ensure a fair smart contracting process, and also to prevent misappropriation of smart contract platforms for unfair purposes. However, designing such legal tools is likely to cause another problem. A law must be enforced based on the evidence required by the law itself. If a smart contract platform is organized and operated by a fixed algorithm that does not change and update itself automatically, it would be plausible to prove that the platform was programmed by ab human to cause unfair results. However, suppose that an A.I. implemented in a smart contract platform keeps learning and constantly and incrementally updates itself. It is improbable that lawyers could prove that a smart contract platform producing unfair results was really programmed by a human to cause such results. To tackle such problems would also be the duty of lawyers..
|2.||Teramoto, Shinto, Adjusting the strength of intellectual property rights to allow healthy competition,Istanbul, World Conference on Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 2015.05, The legal protection of a technology by means of patents and other intellectual property rights (“IPRs”) gives the right holder the power to exclude its competitors in the market where the products and/or services embodying such technology are diffused. Each supplier in the market faces the uncertainty of whether it can survive the competition. However, IPRs are likely to encourage the right holder to enter the market and become the forerunner, by alleviating such right holder’s uncertainty. It is likely that some of the followers, including local entrepreneurs in developing countries, may improve the forerunner’s technology and implement such improvements in better products or services. However, it is also probable that the IPRs of the forerunner will inhibit the further advancement of technologies and products or services, by obstructing the activities of the innovative followers in the market. The author assesses the degree of negative impact of the forerunner’s IPRs that inhibit any healthy competition between the forerunner and the followers by using a simple network model, which comprises of consumers and competing suppliers. Moreover, based on the analysis using the said network model, the author discusses how we can design an intellectual property
law scheme that can restrict the disadvantages caused by IPRs, while maintaining their advantage in encouraging entrepreneurs to enter the market. By means of a discussion using a network model that represents the specific aspects of the market, the author tries to assess the pros and cons of IPRs, especially in the markets of developing countries. The discussion suggests that the strength of IPRs should be adjusted to allow healthy competition between the forerunner and followers in order to give a reasonable degree of benefit to consumers..
|3.||Teramoto, Shinto, HOW THE LEGAL SYSTEM BENEFITS FROM SOCIAL SCIENCE, ICSSH 2015 : 2015 4th International Conference on Social Science and Humanity , 2015.04.|
|4.||Teramoto, Shinto, Who is best able to diffuse innovation: Government, Academia, Industry, or the Inventor?, The 9th Annual Kyushu University Law Conference "Understanding Regulatory Choice and New Economic Zones", 2015.01, [URL].|
|5.||Teramoto, Shinto, "Legal Regime and Practice of IP Security Rights in Japan", UNCITRAL - FSC - Dankook Univ. Joint Conference Challenges of Technology Finance for a Creative Economy - Practical Issues on Security Rights in Intellectual Property -, 2014.11.|
|6.||Teramoto, Shinto, Simulating the impact of intellectual property rights on the innovation process, 11th International Conference on Innovation and Management, Vaasa, Finland, 2014.11.|
|7.||Teramoto, Shinto, The Current Development of the Japanese e-Government Platform, 2014 International Cyber Law Seminar on Trustworthiness of The National e-ID in Accessing e-Public Services and Supporting e-Commerce, 2014.03.|
|8.||寺本 振透, What Makes Medical Records Safe in the Cloud?, 2014 Annual Kyushu University Law Conference: Social Capital, Networks, Law, 2014.02.|
|9.||寺本 振透, Assessing the Role of Intellectual Property Laws from a Social Network Perspective, ARS '13 International Workshop "Networks in space and time: Models, Data collection and Applications", 2013.06.|
- Japan Association for Medical Informatics
- AIPPI JAPAN
- Japanese American Society For Legal Studies
- Japan Law and Economics Association
- Intellectual Property Association of Japan
- International Network for Social Network Analysis
- Japan Association of Private Law
- Japan Association of the Law of Trust
- Japan Association of Industrial Property Law
- The Copyright Law Association of Japan