• Sitemap
• Japanese

¡¡On November 20th 2012, Medwatcher Japan submitted a written request concerning the T Point Service to the following: the Culture Convenience Club Co., Ltd (CCC) that operates the T Point service and runs Tsutaya, 5 companies including drug stores and others that are part of the T Point program, the Minister of Health, Labor and Welfare who has full power to guide, order and advise companies going against the Private Information Protection Law, the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, the Minister of State for Consumer Affairs and the Consumer Commission.

¡¡The T Point Service is Japan's biggest point service, used by approximately 40.93 million members.
When a customer hands over a T card when buying a particular product, personal information such as the product's name is used as follows:
¡¡­¡The information is given to CCC by the shop where the product is bought.
¡¡­¢The information can be used between CCC and other stores where the product was not purchased, for other purposes such as guidelines of operation.
¡¡­£The information can be given to stores that were not part of the T Point Program at the time of the customer's registration (stores that later decided to join).

¡¡ When a T Point Service member buys a medicinal product, personal information is sent to others as per the above 3 steps. It appears that the information used is the name and cost of the medicine.

¡¡ However, when buying medicine, members do not fully understand the above 3 steps and how their personal information is used.

¡¡Any information on medicine (purchase history) has a high standard of legal protection from the viewpoint of safeguarding a patient's right to privacy. Therefore, the T Point Service is problematic and goes against the Penal Code and the Personal Information Protection Law.

¡¡To explain more specifically, first of all, number ­¡, in which stores give CCC information on patients' medical products, effectively amounts to pharmacists or pharmaceutical distributors revealing confidential information (information on medicine) obtained during the course of their work. Such an act could be a breach of the Penal Code (Article 134, the unlawful disclosure of confidential information).

¡¡Secondly, ­¢ and ­£, in which personal information is used, without members' full understanding, between third parties such as stores that are part of the T Point Service System, is an infringement of the Private Information Protection Law (Article 23 Section 1).

¡¡Medwatcher Japan therefore submitted to CCC and pharmaceutical distributors a written request to cancel contracts with affiliated stores and to get rid of information on the purchase history of medicine. It also requested that each Minister in charge advise, order and guide affiliated stores and pharmaceutical distributors to do this.


¡ãWritten responses from CCC and pharmaceutical distributors¡ä

¡¡ In return, a written response arrived from CCC dated December 10th 2012. Responses were also received throughout December from 5 pharmaceutical distributors.

¡¡ However, each was only a page long and simply offered a conclusion in an abstract way. CCC's written response stated that the T Point Service "does not violate the Private Information Protection Law or Penal Code in any way," and "it can confidently state that there is nothing whatsoever that would infringe on T members' rights to privacy."

¡¡ Attached to CCC's response were some written opinions (referred to below as "opinions in writing") drawn up by lawyers commissioned by CCC. However, CCC impose restrictions of making this public on Medwatcher Japan (a group representative), stating that these responses are to be handled only by Medwatcher Japan and that CCC would send a copy of the opinions in writing received from their lawyers to Medwatcher Japan. The outline of the opinions in writing is as follows but the points below have raised issues and are unreasonable.

¡ãOutline of opinions in writing attached to the written response¡ä

£±¡¡The opinions in writing take the following 2 points as items to be studied and are investigating accordingly:

üñ Whether affiliated stores are breaching the Private Information Protection Law by giving CCC personal information on T members.
üò Whether pharmaceutical distributors (also affiliated stores) are breaching the Penal Code (Article 134, unlawful disclosure of personal information) by supplying information on T members' medicine.

£²¡¡ The opinions in writing state that 7 facts, including the following, are basic assumptions of the investigation: that "T members check and agree to the details of their contract when receiving their T card," and that "the personal information given by CCC to affiliated stores does not include any purchase history of medicine received from drug stores."

£³¡¡ Concerning Point i, the opinions in writing conclude that there is "basically" no breach of the Private Information Protection Law and interpret that in light of common sense it is clear" that the consent of T Point Service members has been received due to the existence of a contract (which contains regulations on the agreement of mutual use of personal information) and the presentation of a T card when making a purchase.

£´¡¡Concerning Point ii, the opinions in writing state that the purchase information of general medicine and those available with a prescription do not come under the issue of "confidence" mentioned in the Penal Code's Article 134 and like Point i mentioned above, because of the T members' contract (which contains regulations on the agreement of mutual use of personal information) and the presentation of a T card when making a purchase, state that in light of common sense T Point Service members have given their "consent" and that it is rational to understand that an agreement was drawn up to ensure no unlawful disclosure of personal information and because of this, there is "basically" no breach of the Penal Code.

¡ãProblems with the opinions in writing attached to the written response¡ä

£±¡¡ No substantial investigations have been conducted and the problems in question have not been answered at all.

Medwatcher Japan's written request saw the following as problematic: Systems ­¡­¢­£and the fact that T Point Service members do not fully understand the whole story of how their information is handled when they purchase medicine. In response, the opinions in writing do not touch upon these at all and state that members have given their consent due to the existence of a formal contract and the presentation of a T card when making a purchase.
The biggest problem in the system is that members may not fully understand the whole story so it is impossible to say that they have given their full agreement or consent due to the existence of a contract or by presenting a T card when making a purchase.
However, the opinions in writing do not mention or respond at all to the problems concerning points ­¡­¢­£ of the T Point Service and that members may not fully understand how personal information is handled when they purchase medicine. Instead, they contain nothing more than a conclusion based on a formal interpretation, with no substantial investigation.
The opinions in writing also state that the lawyers have imposed restrictions by saying "it's important to note that no investigations or checks into truth and accuracy have been conducted of their own accord." They also state that as a basic assumption, "T Point Service members agree to and check the details of their contract upon receiving their T card." However, it is inappropriate to establish such a basic assumption, given that the biggest problem here is whether T members really have given their full agreement.

£²¡¡The opinions in writing are using basic assumptions whose truth is unknown
¡¡¡¡In the 7 facts stated by the lawyers, some are important for the investigation of this problem, such as the fact that "the personal information CCC gives to affiliated drug stores contains no purchase information."
¡¡¡¡However, such basic assumptions cannot be checked objectively and can only be known by CCC and others. As mentioned above, the lawyers who drew up the opinions in writing for CCC have clearly imposed restrictions over the basic assumptions of the investigation, stating that "it's important to note that no investigations or checks into truth and accuracy have been conducted of their own accord." As this shows, the lawyers themselves have not carried out any investigations or checks of their own accord and the very fact that they cannot guarantee truth or accuracy is quite literally being used as a basic assumption during their investigation.
¡¡In this way, a set of opinions in writing drawn up based on "basic assumptions" whose truth is unknown is unpersuasive because the truth of the opinions themselves is not certain.

£³¡¡The object of the investigation into any breach of the Private Information Protection Law is mistaken.
¡¡¡¡ Concerning a breach of the Private Information Protection Law (point i mentioned above), Medwatcher Japan's written request raised the following as a problem: that the use by affiliated stores (third parties) of T Point Service members' personal information obtained by CCC (­¢­£ mentioned above) is a breach of the Private Information Protection Law. In response, the opinions in writing have mistakenly stated that investigations (Point i mentioned above) are underway into affiliated stores supplying personal information to CCC (­¡mentioned above).
¡¡¡¡ In this way, the opinions in writing do not correspond to Medwatcher Japan's awareness and understanding of the problem concerned and furthermore do not correctly understand the rules and objectives of the Private Information Protection Law (=that CCC is the one handling members' personal information).

£´¡¡No understanding of the importance of information concerning medicine
¡¡¡¡According to the opinions in writing, information on the purchase of general medicine and those available with a prescription do not come under "confidentiality" in Article 134 of the Penal Code because information on the purchase of general medicine is not something that a person would necessarily want others to find out about. As for medicine available with a prescription, the names of such products are not included (unlike general medicine) in the information given to CCC from pharmaceutical distributors.
¡¡However, medicine available with a prescription has been designated by the Minister of Health, Labor and Welfare as something that should be prescribed by doctors based on diagnoses due to reasons such as pharmacological effects. Whether a product comes under general medicine or one that is only available with a prescription can change according to the Minister of Health, Labor and Welfare and is not distinguished according to the importance of information.
¡¡More than anything, information on medicine is not something that a person would necessarily want others to find out about. It is a mistake to state this just because a product comes under general medicine (examples of such medicine include hair growth formula, medicine for athlete¡Çs foot, Candida or lice treatment).
¡¡¡¡And even though the name of a product only available with a prescription is not included in the information given to CCC as long as it's possible to identify the price, where the product was bought and how often, a certain amount of presumption is possible, so it is a mistake to deny confidentiality.
¡¡¡¡The opinions in writing do not show any understanding of the importance and meaning of information concerning medical products.

¢¨¡¡This topic was updated on February 14th 2013 following the written responses from CCC and 5 pharmaceutical distributors.

Table Of Contents

• Privacy Policy

Our members have other regular jobs and volunteer their services free of charge. Our secretariat also serves as part-time basis, and we are currently in the process of facilitating the secretariat function. Therefore, please note that due to limited resources, we might not be able to respond to each inquiry on specific medicine. Thank you for your understanding.