Yuki Takeuchi Copyright (3) Notarization of "The Creation Principle of Circular Point Capital Economy

The Point Organization, Inc. (Representative: Yuki Takeuchi, Location: Kita-Kyushu City, Fukuoka Prefecture) has completed the acquisition of the "Principle of Creation of Circulating Point Capital Economy" (347 pages in total), which was created on April 22, 2025, and the certification of existence (No. 208, 2025) at the notary public's office on August 12, 2025. The notarization was completed on August 20, 2025 at the notary public's office. (See p.1-6 of the main body and p.2-8 of the commentary.) As a result, this work has established the following threefold legal evidence

Date of creation: Basis for copyright creation / Proof of existence: Determination by third-party proof / Notarization: Immovable evidence in court and international negotiations

This work is a structural work that integrates diverse assets such as points, stocks, cryptocurrencies, and insurance, and describes a "result-oriented" circular economic system, and is positioned as an economic OS beyond mere theory.

2.(1) Scope of rights as a copyright (see: Main body p.78-83, p.327 / Commentary p.9-10, p.47-73, p.137)

Pseudo-Code/Algorithm (p.78-83, p.69-76) →Issuance processing/liquidation processing/self-promotion exception/compensation distribution/investment dividends

UI/UX (p.59-66) → Screen transitions, notification syntax, and UX flow operated by users, merchants, and agents.

System configuration (main body, p.327) → "Point sales promotion circulation system" consisting of an issuing section, a clearing section, a reward circulation section, and an exception handling section, and linkage between user DB, history DB, and clearing DB.

Language, Symbols, and Order (p.6 of the main body / p.49-73 of the explanatory note) → Defined as "infringement if the result is the same" beyond name, translation, and symbolic difference.

Target assets (Commentary, p.137) → In addition to points, stocks, crypto assets, bonds, insurance, and electronic money are also protected.

Conclusion: If the end result (circulation, distribution, and liquidation effect) is the same, not the difference in appearance or code, it is included in the scope of copyright. 3.

3.(2) Term of right as copyright (See: Commentary, p.129-136, p.137-139) → Accrual: April 22, 2025 (date of creation) / Duration: 70 years after the author's death (Article 51 of Copyright Act) / Evidentiary value: Proof of existence plus notarial deed can prove internationally.

The work is created at the time of creation and continues to exist for 70 years after the author's death, without having to wait for registration with the Agency for Cultural Affairs. Notarization allows the work to remain as "unfalsifiable evidence" and provides protection that transcends generations.

4.(3) Copyright Infringement (Reference: Commentary p.12-17, p.47-73 / Main body p.78-83, p.327)

Typical examples of infringement → Reproduction: Unauthorized copying of pseudo code or UI screen (p.12 of the commentary) / Adaptation: Renaming, translation, or reordering infringes if the same effects are derived (p.69-76 of the commentary, p.78-83 of the body) / Public transmission: Internet application release (p.13 of the commentary) / Derivation: Derivative products by partial modification But if the result matches, it is infringement (p.6, p.327 of the main body)

Partial match = infringement even if "one line match" → e.g., infringement is found even if the same distribution effect is obtained by diverting the ownership ratio calculation (amount held ÷ total amount).

Liability of merchants, developers, and agents → Infringement by "result matching" even if a merchant creates its own system / Infringement even if a developer implements the same liquidation/reward cycle / Infringement even if an agent deploys the same structure horizontally.

Legal responsibility → Criminal: imprisonment for up to 10 years or a fine of up to 10 million yen (Article 119 of the Copyright Act) / Civil: damages, injunction, additional damages based on defamation of reputation

Since "infringement is judged by 'structure' and 'result'", you cannot get away with a difference on the surface.

5.(4) Explanation of prior user's right (See: Commentary, p.120-122, p.137-139)

There is no prior right of use in copyright. The "system under the Patent Law that allows a person who has been using in good faith prior to the filing of an application to continue to use the work" does not apply to copyrights. Therefore, even if another company has been using a similar system internally for a long time, if it is modified, published, or distributed after the copyright is established, an infringement will be established. This clearly shows that copyrights are immediate and unavoidable, and have a stronger effect than patents.

Social impact and future development (Reference: Chapter 11, p.340 and after, p.129-139 of the main body of the book) → Impact on companies: License agreements are essential when adopting a circular structure for distribution, finance, applications, insurance, etc. / Administrative systems: Social security points, tax credit systems, and integration with medical and public services are also affected. /International expansion: Based on the Berne Convention, overseas use is automatically subject to infringement.

7. Conclusion → "The Principle of the Creation of a Circular Point Capital Economy" is: (1) Scope of rights: comprehensive protection of algorithms, UI/UX, DBs, and assets; (2) Term of rights: accrues upon creation and lasts until 70 years after death; (3) Infringement: extends to reproduction, adaptation, public transmission, derivation, and even "one-line match"; (4) Prior Use Rights: This is a work with a fourfold defense structure: it is not applicable, and even prior use does not exempt infringement. This work is not merely an academic achievement, but an intellectual infrastructure originating in Japan that protects the system of economic circulation in society as a whole, and will continue to be effective for more than 70 years to come.

I. Basic Prohibited Acts (Typical under Copyright Law)/Prohibited Acts of Copyright (All Types + Reverse Patterns + Case Studies)

1. reproduction → content: unauthorized copying (code, UI, DB structure, diagrams, charts, wording) / example: A company implemented the pseudo-code of this work, issuePoints, in its own application without modification. Reverse pattern denial: Even if a company "only saves screenshots" or "only quotes in internal documents," it is infringement if it uses the code as it is and moves the issue, liquidation, and allocation process. Explanation: Reproduction is the most obvious type of infringement, since it is easy to prove consistency of results in the issuance loop of points and stock dividends. 2.

(2) Adaptation→Contents: If the result is the same even if the names of variables, order, colors, and expressions are changed, infringement has occurred. /Example: distributeReward() is rewritten as payoutBonus(), but the proportional distribution is the same. / Reverse pattern denial: If the result of liquidation → allocation is the same even if "variable name is changed" or "order is replaced", it is out. /Explanation: Adaptation blocks the escape route of "the expression is different. The same loop appears in investment funds and cryptocurrencies.

3. public transmission → content: unauthorized publication in apps and web services. /Example: Merchant apps carry the clearing logic of this work and notify users. / Reverse pattern denial: "It's okay because it's an internal release" → Employees and agents are also included in the "public. /Explanation: Cloud apps are likely to be found to be public transmission because of the large number of users. 4.

4. distribution → content: distribution of PDFs, books, and materials without permission. /Example: An industry association distributed the entire UI illustration of this book in a workshop. / Reverse pattern denial: "It's OK because it's a free distribution. Explanation: Unauthorized use in educational training and seminars is also a typical infringement.

II. Structurally Prohibited Acts (Specific to this work) 5.

5. creation of derivative works → content: construction of services with partial modification. /Example: Point issuance is renamed "mileage" and redemption is renamed "cash-back" and introduced. / Reverse pattern denial: "changed the name" or "partially modified" → infringement if the same liquidation structure is used for allocation. / Explanation: Derivative products = contain the most easily targeted imitation pattern. 6.

6. modification of UI/design→Contents: use the same calculation formula even if screen design is changed. /Example: Even if the liquidation screen is modified to look like a graph, the ownership ratio = amount held/total amount. / Reverse pattern denial: "Only the appearance was changed" → infringement by matching the logic behind the change. Explanation: Triple defense by patent (function) + copyright (expression) + design (screen). 7.

7. mutual use system → Contents: mutual use of points/assets among multiple companies. Example: Company A's coupon can be used at Company B's store, and the settlement is made up to the issuer. / Reverse pattern denial: "It's okay because we are in different industries" → If the result is the same (use → liquidation → allocation), then infringement. Explanation: Common ID and common point network are particularly applicable. 8.

8. investment/reimbursement structure → content: unused amount is funded and redistributed as dividends. /Example: Unused amount of insurance is invested in a fund, and points are returned in the following year. / Reverse pattern denial: "Different assets (stocks and insurance)" → This document does not limit the target assets, but infringes if the results are consistent. /Explanation: Financial and insurance-linked schemes are blocked.

9. result matching type derivation → content: infringement if the same economic result is obtained even if the name and intention are different. Example: Even if it is called "eco-bonus," it is consistent if the payment is reduced or reduced to the user. Reverse pattern denial: "not intended" → no question of intent. /Explanation: "Act-Consequence Consistency Theory" which completely denies any escape route.

III. Prohibited acts in applied fields

10. imitation of institutional connection → Contents: reduction structure connected to tax, medical care, electricity rates, etc. /Example: use of municipal points as tax credits→Same mechanism for liquidation and distribution. Reverse pattern denial: "It is legal because it is in the public interest" → No infringement is exempted. Explanation: The public sector is not an exception and is within the scope. 11.

11. linkage of financial instruments → contents: circular structure of stock dividends, crypto asset compensation, and bond interest. Example: Conversion of stock dividends into points → redistribution to users. / Reverse pattern denial: "different types of assets" → infringement if same issuance, liquidation and allocation. /Explanation: Mutual funds and crypto asset management are also covered.

12. diversion of DB/API → Contents: diversion of user DB/clearing API connection structure. /Example: Customer ID, issuer ID, and balance are operated with the same DB design. / Reverse pattern denial: "Item names were changed" → If the function is the same, it is an infringement. Explanation: Blind spot for implementers. 13.

13. diversion of UX scenario → content: imitation of usage experience (issue → use → notification → return). /Example: The app UX is identical and the notification wording is the same. / Reverse pattern denial: "Another industry UX" → If the experience structure is the same, it is infringement. Explanation: UX is also covered by copyright.

IV. special pattern (denial of escape route by reverse pattern)

14. partial match (one line match) →Contents: established by matching core operations such as ownership ratio calculation. / Case: The amount of possession/total amount is the same. / Reverse pattern negation: "only partial match" → infringement established. /Explanation: Even partial match is strong in court.

15. invalidation of denial of intent → contents: "no reference" claim is invalid. /Explanation: The same liquidation formula was used by chance. / Reverse pattern denial: existence or non-existence of intention is irrelevant. /Explanation: Judged by objective results.

16. invalidity of translation and multilingual escape→Contents: translation into English and Chinese is infringement. /Example: Same structure by translating "Point" to "Credit". / Reverse pattern negation: "different language" → infringement. /Explanation: Multilingual is also blocked.

17. educational and practical use→Contents: Copying is not allowed even for educational purposes. /Example: Distributed at a university lecture. / Reverse pattern denial: "Because it is for educational purposes" → Infringement if outside the scope of the exception. /Explanation: Unauthorized use is subject to restrictions even in educational settings.

Summary → Types of prohibited acts: 17 types / Pattern: All invalidated / Explanation of examples: Applied to various assets (points, coupons, stocks, cryptocurrency, insurance, electronic money, real estate, etc.)

In other words, the system is such that copyright-prohibited acts are protected in multiple layers, including "expression," "structure," "institutional connection," and "result," and all escape routes such as partial agreement, no question of intent, difference in assets, and difference in translation are blocked.

Scope of Copyright Rights (A-configuration alone) / Scope of Copyright Rights of Pattern A (A-configuration alone: A) (one specific case is disclosed)

(1) Issuance processing (core of A composition)

Relevant pages → Main body p.78-79: IssuePoints() function definition (issue processing) / Explanatory notes p.69-70: Functions and processing structure

● Contents of rights → The process itself to issue new "points," "coupons," or "asset units" in response to user actions (e.g., purchase, labor, use). Even if the / variable name, display method, or designation changes, the structure of "issuance = creation of new value units" is subject to protection.

(2) Issuance UI/UX

Relevant pages → Explanatory notes p.59-61: User screen transition and notification syntax

Rights content → UI/notification flow of "Issued" and "00 points granted". / UI changes and wording changes also infringe if there is a "function to notify issuance".

(3) Database record

Relevant page → Main body, p. 327: User DB (record of issuing ID, balance, and issue date/time) / Explanatory notes, p. 41-43: DB configuration

Rights content → A system for recording and managing issued points and coupons in DB. / The same if replaced with "e-money", "credit", etc.

2. examples

A point is issued for shopping at a supermarket / Example: 1 point is issued for every 100 yen purchased → This is "A configuration". / Coupon issued for online game / Example: Coupon is automatically issued as a login bonus → This is also "A composition". Issuance of redemption credits for payment of electricity bills/e.g.: Issuance of 10 yen worth of credits for every 1,000 yen spent on electricity bills→This also falls under "Component A".

Since both of them coincide with the part of "issuing new credits based on an act," they are included in the scope of copyright rights regardless of the expression or type of business. 3.

3. Explanation (copyright evaluation) → How to protect as copyright: The process of "issuing" is not an abstract concept, but is protected by concretely defined pseudo-code, DB design, and UI structure. Even if the variables, language, and order are changed, infringement is established if the result reaches "issue a new asset unit. / Difference from patent: Patent protects "functional causation (A→B→C...). Copyright protects "expression (code, UI, DB structure). When both overlap, the issuing process is completely blocked.

The scope of copyright for Pattern A (A configuration alone = publishing process) is: 1,

Pseudo Code (Main body p.78-79, Description p.69-70) 2.

UI/notification flow (p.59-61 of this document) 3.

DB design (Main body p.327, Description p.41-43)

The concept of "publish" only includes the point/coupon. The concept of "issuance" includes not only points and coupons, but also stocks, cryptographic assets, insurance, electronic money, etc. As shown in the examples (points issued by supermarkets, game coupons, and electricity bill credits), it is possible to determine infringement in a way that anyone can intuitively understand.

1. manufacturer (issuer/system provider) Specific explanation of copyright infringement

Assumed act → Incorporate the point issuance/clearing algorithm of this copyrighted work into the company's product/service. The algorithm is replaced with "cash back," "mileage," "redemption program," or the like.

Structure of infringement→If the pseudo-code (issuance, liquidation, and distribution) in p.78-83 of the main body is imitated, it is constitutive infringement. Infringement is established when the distribution logic of p. 69-76 of the Commentary is used.

Specific example: A home appliance manufacturer implements "issue coupon for each purchase, liquidate, and give back" without permission. An automobile manufacturer operates as "unused service fees are returned in points for the following year. 2.

2) Member stores (distribution, retail, restaurants, etc.) Specific explanation of copyright infringement

Assumed action → Introduce the same liquidation and reward distribution flow as the method set by the issuer at its own stores. For example, "10% reward coupon at the time of purchase → liquidation → compensation to the merchant store → redistribution".

Infringement structure→If issuance, liquidation, and distribution are caused by the same cause and effect, the "act-result match" is infringement; changing the UI button or notification text is invalid.

Concrete example: A convenience store has established the same flow of "use points → liquidation at headquarters → sales promotion rewards". Imitate "reduction rate display" and "usage notification" on the application. 3.

3. distributors (sales agents and system installers) Specific explanation of copyright infringement

Assumed act → Horizontal deployment of the publisher's system to another client company. The same operation formula is used while calling it a "modified version of the original.

Structure of infringement→Reproduction and adaptation infringement occurs when a system of another company is copied and introduced. Clear infringement if the DB design on p. 327 of the main body is used as is.

Specific examples → An advertising agency appropriates "common point management system" for another industry; a SIer delivers "investment return logic" to an insurance company. 4.

4. concrete explanation of copyright infringement by users (general consumers and corporate users)

Assumed act → Downloading and using an application that is a copy of the copyrighted work. Unauthorized modification and manipulation of the reduction rate by oneself.

Structure of infringement→Monopolistic use may not be criminally liable, but modification, distribution, and public transmission are infringement. The statement "not guilty because it is for personal use" does not apply.

Specific example: A user modifies and distributes an unauthorized application. A corporate user distributes it to employees for "educational purposes. 5.

5. developer (engineer, designer, subcontractor)

Assumed act → Developing an application by referring to the pseudo-code of this work. Even if it is "just a reference," the same algorithm is incorporated.

Infringement Structure → Stated clearly in the main body p.168 "List of Infringement and Imitation Acts": "Change of name", "Change of order", and "Change of UI" all result in the same result = infringement. Infringement is established even if it is unintentional based on the "theory of unintentional act result agreement" on p.85-93 of the manual.

Concrete example: A freelance developer creates an application with the same structure at the request of a client, and a SI company implements the same operation flow by placing an order overseas.

Criminal penalties (Article 119 of the Copyright Act, etc.)→Basic provisions: imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not more than 10 million yen, or both. In case of infringement by a juridical person: a fine of up to 300 million yen.

The content of this article is a part of the scope of rights as copyrights of works. Documents will be attached separately.

Comment by inventor, copyright holder, and creator (Yuki Takeuchi)

Copyright infringement is a clear criminal act. We are committed to protecting intellectual property rights holders and eradicating infringement of intellectual property rights. Mr. Yuki Takeuchi is currently developing the "A-GEL Gift Point" and "A-GEL Gift Card" services that utilize intellectual property rights such as patent rights and copyrights at Point Organization Co. We are also planning to offer "A-GEL Point" service.

Point Organization Co.

Room 301, HOUSE 2717, 2-7-9 Sendagaya, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo, Japan

Representative Director Yuki Takeuchi

Date of creation : April 22, 2025

Existence fact confirmed : August 12, 2025

Notarization : August 20, 2025