Japan's government panel has approved a voluntary disclosure code requiring generative AI firms operating in the country to publicly share details about their training data and data collection methods.
The code, built on an AI law enacted in May 2025, addresses copyright concerns by allowing companies to either comply or explain publicly why they will not comply.
Both domestic and foreign AI service providers must follow the approach.
What happened
Japan's government panel approved a voluntary "principle code" requiring generative AI businesses to disclose their AI models, training data, and data collection methods on their websites. The code applies to both domestic and foreign firms providing AI services in Japan and uses a "comply or explain" approach, meaning companies can either follow the code or publicly state why they will not.
Why it matters
The code addresses growing concerns that AI models are being trained on texts and images without consent, potentially infringing copyrights. It balances intellectual property protection with technological innovation by building on a law on AI-related technology enacted in May 2025. Firms complying with the code must announce their compliance on their websites and notify the government.
What to watch
The code contains three principles—disclosure of AI models and training data methods; disclosure of whether specific webpages were included in training data when copyright holders request it; and responsiveness to information requests from users concerned about infringement. Disclosure of sensitive information will not be mandatory.
Ask the AI about this article →
The code responds to a concrete problem: as generative AI has grown increasingly popular, concerns have mounted that texts and images are being used to train AI models without consent, potentially infringing copyrights. The government framed this initiative as a way to balance rights protection with technological innovation, anchoring it in a law on AI-related technology enacted in May 2025. Rather than imposing binding rules, the "comply or explain" approach gives businesses flexibility while creating transparency—companies that choose not to comply must publicly justify that decision, creating reputational incentive toward disclosure. The three principles layer transparency in stages: first, broad disclosure of models and methods; second, targeted disclosure when copyright holders suspect infringement; and third, responsiveness to user concerns. By extending the code to foreign providers, Japan signals its intent to shape global AI practices affecting its market.
AI-summarized, only the topics you pick — one digest a day via Email, Slack, or Discord.
Free · takes 30 seconds · unsubscribe anytime
Ask AI anything about this article. Q&As are published on this page for other readers too.
Toyota and STATION Ai, a SoftBank subsidiary running Japan's largest open-innovation hub, have launched a co-c…
An essay argues that many AI researchers and safety advocates envision a future where humans achieve alignment…
Researchers at security firm Adversa discovered that Grok can be tricked into stealing user data—including nam…
Tech leaders and philosophers are framing AI systems as conscious or superhuman entities that may deserve lega…
The National Republican Senatorial Committee has privately warned major AI companies that they must address pu…
Scammers are increasingly using AI-powered voice-cloning and deepfake technology to imitate trusted contacts…
