Corporate LawLast updated: 2026-11-095 min readPublic-source summary

MIC Issues Administrative Guidance to NTT DOCOMO over Provision of About 344,000 Users' Phone Numbers to Amazon Without Valid Consent: "Specified User Information" under the Telecommunications Business Act (6 November 2026)

This article compiles what Japanese government bodies have published, together with the statutory text. Links to the primary sources are included. For a specific matter, pleasecontact us.

Key Takeaways

  • ✓On 6 November 2026 MIC issued written administrative guidance (MIC ref. No. 105) to NTT DOCOMO, INC. over a leak of specified user information
  • ✓When the online application flow for certain price plans was revised, the notice on third-party provision to Amazon Japan G.K. was dropped, and the phone numbers and user identifiers of 344,213 people were sent without valid consent, according to MIC
  • ✓The guidance letter finds that continuing the provision for about four months amounted to gross negligence, and states that the leak breached the Act
  • ✓As causes it cites the lack of an adequate process to catch the missing notice, insufficient checking and coordination between departments, and weaknesses in the management system
  • ✓MIC gave a strict warning to implement preventive measures thoroughly and asked for a written report on their implementation by the end of December 2026

Not sure how this applies to your situation? Ask a lawyer — the first 30 minutes are free.

Share this article

On 6 November 2026 Japan's Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC) announced that it had issued written administrative guidance to NTT DOCOMO, INC. over a leak of "specified user information".

Specified user information is user information that the Telecommunications Business Act requires telecommunications carriers designated by the Minister to handle properly.

This page sets out what MIC published in its press release and guidance letter, and the wording of the relevant provisions.

Overview

ItemDetails
Date of release and guidance6 November 2026
ContactTelecommunications Business Department, Telecommunications Bureau, MIC
Type of measureWritten administrative guidance (MIC ref. No. 105)
AddresseeNTT DOCOMO, INC.
Recipient of the dataAmazon Japan G.K.
Data providedPhone numbers and user identifiers of 344,213 people
Provision referred toArticle 27-5 and other provisions of the Telecommunications Business Act
Reporting deadlineWritten report by the end of December 2026

Background

According to the press release and the guidance letter, the online application flow for DOCOMO's "docomo MAX" and other price plans was revised. In the process, the notice on third-party provision of user information to Amazon Japan G.K., which provides a benefit service for subscribers to those plans, was dropped from the important-matters explanation and other notes.

The responsible department did not notice this before the flow was finalised, and the phone numbers and user identifiers of 344,213 people were sent to Amazon Japan G.K. without valid consent from the subscribers concerned. MIC states that this came to light as a leak of specified user information.

The guidance letter records DOCOMO's report that the data was intended for notifying subscribers who had not yet used the benefit service, had not been used at the time of the report and has since been deleted, so there was no secondary harm.

Free Tool Related to This Article

Contract Risk Checker

Try our free simulator related to this topic.

Try for free →

MIC's findings

The guidance letter states that the phone numbers and user identifiers were information the recipient would use to match against its own account information and identify individual users. It finds that continuing to provide the data without valid consent for about four months amounted to gross negligence that could harm users' interests.

The letter gives the following causes:

  • No adequate process was in place, when revising the application flow, to confirm that the consent notice was missing
  • Human error and weaknesses in the management system, such as insufficient checking by the responsible department and poor coordination between departments
  • A possibility that the responsible and service departments did not have a sufficient sense of the norms on protecting specified user information

MIC states that DOCOMO, as a carrier designated under Article 27-5, is required to manage specified user information properly, and that the leak breached the Act and is regrettable.

Attorney Yusuke Abe

FREE CONSULTATION

Corporate Law: your first 30 minutes are free

  • ・Handled by Yusuke Abe, admitted in Japan and New York
  • ・Online (Zoom etc.) or at our office in Otemachi, Tokyo
  • ・In English or Japanese

Content of the guidance

Item in the guidance letterDetails
GuidanceA strict warning to implement thorough measures to prevent leaks of specified user information caused by third-party provision without consent and inadequate legal compliance, not only for online procedures
Measures DOCOMO has taken and plansTaken: correcting the application flow concerned and a full review of other application flows. Planned: appointing a person responsible for updating each set of terms, and informing and training the employees concerned
Action requestedReliable implementation of the preventive measures, renewed emphasis among employees on legal compliance regarding the protection of specified user information, and review of the information handling rules where necessary
ReportA written report on the implementation of the preventive measures by the end of December 2026

Relevant provisions

Article 27-5 of the Telecommunications Business Act provides that the Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications may designate a carrier that provides a telecommunications service specified by ministerial ordinance as having a large impact on users' interests, in light of its content, the range of users and its usage, as a carrier that must properly handle specified user information.

The Article defines specified user information as information about users obtained in connection with that service that is either:

  • Information falling under the secrecy of communications, or
  • Information that can identify a user (limited to certain users) and is specified by ministerial ordinance (excluding the above)

A designated carrier must establish "information handling rules" covering matters such as the security management of specified user information and the supervision of contractors, and notify them to the Minister within three months of designation (Article 27-6). It must also establish and publish, within three months of designation, an "information handling policy" covering matters such as the content of the specified user information it obtains and the purposes and methods of its use (Article 27-8).

Sources

  • MIC, press release on measures for the protection of specified user information addressed to NTT DOCOMO, INC. (6 November 2026, in Japanese) https://www.soumu.go.jp/menu_news/s-news/01kiban18_01000300.html
  • MIC, guidance letter (attachment, MIC ref. No. 105, in Japanese) https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/001100062.pdf
  • Telecommunications Business Act (e-Gov, in Japanese) https://laws.e-gov.go.jp/law/359AC0000000086

This page is based on what the government published and on the wording of the relevant laws. If you need advice on a specific matter, please consult a lawyer.

Free Tools for This Area

Share this article
This article provides general legal information and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal issues, please consult with a qualified attorney.

More Legal News

Related Articles

Can You Commercially Use Generative AI Output in Japan? Copyright Article 30-4 and Output-Stage Risk

A guide for businesses on whether generative AI output can be used commercially in Japan: Article 30-4 of the Copyright Act and its proviso, the similarity and reliance test at the output stage, how training data affects reliance, when AI-generated material is protected by copyright, injunctions, damages and criminal penalties, and steps you can take now.

Entering Japan as a Foreign Company: Representative Office, Branch or Subsidiary, and the Governing Law of Your Contracts

How a foreign company can enter Japan through a representative office, a branch or a subsidiary, explained against the Companies Act: the ban on continuous transactions before registration, the representative in Japan, KK versus GK, governing law and jurisdiction clauses, Foreign Exchange Act filings, and the October 2025 changes to the Business Manager status of residence.

Acquiring or Investing in a Japanese Company: Prior Notification and Post-Investment Reports under Japan's Foreign Exchange Act

How Japan's Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act applies when a foreign company buys shares in, or invests in, a Japanese company: who counts as a foreign investor, the one-share rule for unlisted companies and the 1% threshold for listed ones, designated sectors and prior notification, the 30-day waiting period and its extension, the prior-notification exemption and core sectors, 45-day post-investment reports, and the reform taking effect on 4 January 2027.

Setting Up and Running a Company in Japan as a Foreign National: The New Business Manager Visa Criteria (from 16 October 2025) and Company Formation

A guide for foreign founders who want to incorporate a company in Japan and run it under the Business Manager status of residence, based on the new criteria in force from 16 October 2025 (JPY 30 million in capital, at least one full-time employee, B2-level Japanese, three years of experience or a master's degree, review by a business expert) and the incorporation procedure under the Companies Act. Also covers the transitional rule for current holders and what is checked on renewal.

Buying a Japanese Company: Share Transfer vs Business Transfer, and What Due Diligence Covers

For companies, including overseas buyers, acquiring a small or mid-sized Japanese company: how a share transfer differs from a business transfer under the Companies Act, the Civil Code and the Antimonopoly Act, and MHLW guidelines. Approval of transfers of restricted shares (Companies Act, Articles 136-139 and 145), delivery of share certificates (Article 128), the special shareholder resolution for a business transfer (Articles 467 and 309(2)(xi)) and dissenting shareholders' appraisal rights (Article 469), the seller's non-compete (Article 21), liability where the trade name is continued (Article 22), individual employee consent (Civil Code, Article 625(1)), JFTC prior notification and the usual scope of legal due diligence.

Japan APPI Data Breach Reporting for Foreign Companies: Extraterritorial Reach, Deadlines and Notifying Individuals

Foreign companies that supply goods or services to people in Japan can be bound by Japan's data breach reporting duty even without a Japanese office. This guide covers extraterritorial reach, the four reportable situations, the preliminary report (roughly 3–5 days) and final report (30 days, or 60 days for wrongful-purpose incidents), notifying individuals, penalties and the amending act promulgated in July 2026.

Related Q&A

Related reading

Corporate Law

Can You Commercially Use Generative AI Output in Japan? Copyright Article 30-4 and Output-Stage Risk

A guide for businesses on whether generative AI output can be used commercially in Japan: Article 30-4 of the Copyright Act and its proviso, the similarity and reliance test at the output stage, how training data affects reliance, when AI-generated material is protected by copyright, injunctions, damages and criminal penalties, and steps you can take now.

Corporate Law

Entering Japan as a Foreign Company: Representative Office, Branch or Subsidiary, and the Governing Law of Your Contracts

How a foreign company can enter Japan through a representative office, a branch or a subsidiary, explained against the Companies Act: the ban on continuous transactions before registration, the representative in Japan, KK versus GK, governing law and jurisdiction clauses, Foreign Exchange Act filings, and the October 2025 changes to the Business Manager status of residence.

Corporate Law

Acquiring or Investing in a Japanese Company: Prior Notification and Post-Investment Reports under Japan's Foreign Exchange Act

How Japan's Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act applies when a foreign company buys shares in, or invests in, a Japanese company: who counts as a foreign investor, the one-share rule for unlisted companies and the 1% threshold for listed ones, designated sectors and prior notification, the 30-day waiting period and its extension, the prior-notification exemption and core sectors, 45-day post-investment reports, and the reform taking effect on 4 January 2027.

Corporate Law

Setting Up and Running a Company in Japan as a Foreign National: The New Business Manager Visa Criteria (from 16 October 2025) and Company Formation

A guide for foreign founders who want to incorporate a company in Japan and run it under the Business Manager status of residence, based on the new criteria in force from 16 October 2025 (JPY 30 million in capital, at least one full-time employee, B2-level Japanese, three years of experience or a master's degree, review by a business expert) and the incorporation procedure under the Companies Act. Also covers the transitional rule for current holders and what is checked on renewal.

Corporate Law

Buying a Japanese Company: Share Transfer vs Business Transfer, and What Due Diligence Covers

For companies, including overseas buyers, acquiring a small or mid-sized Japanese company: how a share transfer differs from a business transfer under the Companies Act, the Civil Code and the Antimonopoly Act, and MHLW guidelines. Approval of transfers of restricted shares (Companies Act, Articles 136-139 and 145), delivery of share certificates (Article 128), the special shareholder resolution for a business transfer (Articles 467 and 309(2)(xi)) and dissenting shareholders' appraisal rights (Article 469), the seller's non-compete (Article 21), liability where the trade name is continued (Article 22), individual employee consent (Civil Code, Article 625(1)), JFTC prior notification and the usual scope of legal due diligence.

Corporate Law

Japan APPI Data Breach Reporting for Foreign Companies: Extraterritorial Reach, Deadlines and Notifying Individuals

Foreign companies that supply goods or services to people in Japan can be bound by Japan's data breach reporting duty even without a Japanese office. This guide covers extraterritorial reach, the four reportable situations, the preliminary report (roughly 3–5 days) and final report (30 days, or 60 days for wrongful-purpose incidents), notifying individuals, penalties and the amending act promulgated in July 2026.

Attorney Yusuke Abe

Free 30-min consultation

Talk to a lawyer about the issues in this article

Yusuke Abe, admitted in Japan and New York, will handle your matter — in Japanese or English, online or in person.

Book a free consultation