The Personal Information Protection Law has been the topic of articles and discussion in every form of media on almost a daily basis. There is not only tremendous concern among those who come into direct contact with the personal information covered by this new Law, such as this company and its official dealers, but also heightened concern among the customers, whose personal information is the subject of this Law, as well as all employees with regard to the protection of privacy and fears of information being leaked.

This Law has been set up to provide protection on two fronts. To ensure the safe and secure management of personal information (information security) as well as the protection of the privacy of personal information, this Law places restrictions on such activities as the collection of personal information, its usage, and the providing of this information to third parties. To put it another way, this Law is similar to traffic rules, where responsibility is placed on each of the concerned parties to endeavor to prevent accidents from occurring.

1. This is the wrong form of this phrase. It should be either “people have concerns about…” or “people are concerned about..”
2. Are you saying that people = entities? This sounds a bit strange to me.
3. I can’t see how this connects with the rest of the sentence. I think you need to put a comma in here to separate some of the clauses.
4. What do you mean by a “bifunctional legal system”? I don’t think I have ever seen this phrase.
5. Are you implying that PIPA also helps avoid traffic accidents?

1. It’s a bit hard to tell how much is covered by the word “both.” Does it include only Qi Zhong and its authorized dealers, or does it refer to Qi Zhong and its authorized dealers AND general consumers? It’s a bit difficult to see what the groupings are.
2. Does this really refer to end users or does it actually refer to employees?
3. Is “private data” the term that is generally used to express this material?
4. I kind of wonder about this. Does the company pledge to protect privacy and the Law makes sure the company lives up to its promise, or is it the Law that mandates that companies must observe protection of personal information?

1. Do you mean to limit this to only the printed media? What about other types of mass media, such as TV or radio or the Internet?
2. Are you saying that the main business of Qi Zhong is handling information? This is what this sentence is saying
3. This sentence implies that third parties are the only parties that will be allowed to obtain and use information. Is this true??
4. What do you mean by “double-sided legal system”? Are you implying that there is a second or secret usage for the law?

1. Do you mean to say that only newspapers and magazines are part of mass media? It may be better to say that there are articles and discussions in every form of mass media; you want to avoid limiting the meaning of mass media
2. The choice of words sounds odd here. Is “high” normally used to describe “attentions”? I think we generally say something like “a great deal of attention.” Also, does the verb “raised” include to “attention” or is it connected to “concerned”?
3. What do you mean by “own their private information”? The link between a customer or an employee and “owning their information” is a bit difficult to follow.
4. Two things about this phrase are not clear: “double-sided” is usually used to describe something bad; rather than “law system” I think “legal system” is better.
5. Are you implying that there is only one traffic law? You are also implying that PIPA is somehow connected with traffic law. Is this true?

1. Does the law protect personal privacy or personal information?
2. Is this word strong enough? Is there only awareness or is there worry or concern, too?
3. I think you will find that this word is used with eyeglasses. I don’t think I’ve seen it used in any other connection.

○ 個人情報保護法

日本政府の定訳はないが、Personal Information Protection Act を用いている民間企業がある。しかし、特にPIPAというアクロニムを用いると読者はそれが公式名称だと受け取るかもしれない。そこで、hereinafter referred to as… とことわる。

⇒ 各国での呼称

Google hits
Privacy Protection Act : 658,000
Personal Information Protection Act : 32,000
Privacy Protection Law : 8,800
Personal Information Protection Law : 700

●「国内法の英訳統一・政府、来年度から」

⇒ NIKKEI NET
⇒ 対訳辞書プロジェクト

○ 記事

テキストは「各種マスメディア」であり、活字メディアに限定せず articles and discussion とした。なお、news storiesには「三面記事」のイメージがある。

○ プライバシー保護

privacy protection には特殊な意味もあるから、気をつけたほうがよい。protection of privacy ならよい。厳密にいえば security protection も論理的におかしい。personal information protection なら問題ない。また、たとえば child protection も私のルールにない。

○ 二面性

意味を考えると個人情報の保全（secure management）と保護（protection）、つまり漏洩防止。一般に「二面性」はtwo fronts（aspects）などがわかりやすく、double-sidedはネガティブな表現になる。

○ obligation と responsibility

「努力を課す」の部分にはobligation（be obliged to）よりresponsibilityがよい。

You are obliged to tip in the States, while in England you tip only if you feel it’s deserved.
アメリカでもチップを払わないからといって処罰されることはない。

For the Qi Zhong Group, customers who purchase DigiView DVR are as valuable an asset as the Qi Zhong brand. As such, a system worthy of this premium brand image that is capable of securely managing the personal information and protecting the privacy of the customers must be provided. Since last year, in accordance with a policy that encompasses the entire Qi Zhong Group, including all dealers, a project has been carried out to respond to the requirements of this Law.

Information security forms the foundation of this project. The protection of information is positioned as a key factor that allows us to continue with our work and will contribute to the success of DigiView. Information security is the responsibility of each individual Qi Zhong Group employee; therefore, it is the mission of each employee to make every possible effort to secure absolute information security.

1. There are two points of concern here: since you need to set up an “as…as” structure, the verb “are” should be replaced with “as”; the word “particular” should be in the adverb form.
2. This is not clear what deserves labels, protection or information or security?
3. I think “survivable” is too weak of a word. The protection of personal information is the key element that will allow Qi Zhong to continue with its work and lead to the overall success of the Group. Just “surviving” isn’t good enough.
4. This phrase sounds a bit awkward. What does “important accountability” mean? I think you could just say that information security is an important responsibility (or obligation) of each employee.

1. I wonder if this word is a bit too weak. To say that something will eventually happen sounds like “at some time in the future.” Qi Zhong is stating with confidence that the protection of personal information will contribute to the success of the company, so the concept of "そのうち" that is expressed by the word “eventually” feels a bit wishy-washy.
2. I have a question about the use of the word “devote” together with “constant efforts.” I think we “make constant efforts” or “devote time and energy” to realize something. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen the phrase “devote constant efforts.”

1. Basically, whenever you want to refer to a company group, you need to use the definite article in front of the name, such as the Toyota Group or the Hitachi Group.
2. I’m not quite sure what this sentence is trying to say. What are we trying to address and how is this the same as what the whole group including dealers is trying to address?
3. What does “it” refer to.
4. Be careful of subject/verb agreement. If you use “We” here, the verb needs to be the plural form “define” not “defines.”

1. Generally, we don’t use “consider” together with “that.” This would be better if you said, “The Qi Zhong Group considers the DigiView DVR brand and is customers to be…”
2. I think this is the wrong choice of words. This should probably be “promoted.”
3. Whenever you refer to a company in terms of a Group, you should use “the” in front of the name. Not just for Qi Zhong, but any company. For example, when you write about the Toyota Group or the Exxon Group, you need to use the definite article.

1. This sentence makes DigiView sound like a company. Companies can have customer; products do not have customers.
2. I think this should be “security” and not “safety.” They are not the same thing.
3. Is privacy protection really “a task”? The logic here sounds a bit strange. Either the word “task” needs to be changed or the subject “privacy protection” needs to be reconsidered.

○ DigiView DVR のお客様

customers of DigiView DVR で意味はわかるが、そもそも商品が顧客を持つことはないので好ましくない。たとえば、BMW customers、customers of BMW などという表現はロジカルでない。

○ プレミアム

valuable asset という意味を伝え、このカタカナを直接使わない。

premium (adj.): having or reflecting superior quality or value; “premium gasoline at a premium price”

○ its （代名詞所有格）

this company and its official dealersやour company and its authorized dealers は問題ないが、センテンスやパラグラフが改まってから information security is its base とするとitsが何を指しているのか不明確となるので避け、the base of …　とする。

In light of these circumstances, an e-learning program for information security / protection of personal information was developed as a part of the company’s Personal Information Protection Law Project. This e-learning program was designed to familiarize employees at every level of the company regarding information security. The average employee may question the need for taking this program, as he or she may have no involvement with personal information. However, there is the possibility that employees may indirectly come into contact with personal information in the process of performing their duties. Moreover, because all in-house information is treated confidentially, it makes little sense to try to differentiate personal information from company-related information.

1. This is a simple error. Since you are saying “one of…,” this needs to be in the plural form: “one of the projects.”
2. This isn’t clear what information you are referring to. Do the employees have indirect access to information about the training or the personal information about the customers? This isn’t clear.

1. What is the focus here; customer protection or information security?
2. This segment is a bit unclear. What does “it” refer to? The accessibility of information? The information itself? And the use of “happen to be” here is a bit unclear. I had a bit of difficulty following the flow of thought of this sentence.
3. Are you implying that there are some company trade secrets that don’t have to be kept confidential? The use of the word “that” in this sentence gives this impression.

1. This sounds a bit odd to me. Does Qi Zhong want to teach a method to publicize information security? I don’t really thing Qi Zhong wants to teach any methods. Qi Zhong wants its employees to be more aware or more knowledgeable about information security.

1. This word is usually used in the singular form; like the words “equipment” and “information,” this word is not usually used in the plural form.
2. This is a bit too strong of a phrase. The idea here is not that e-learning means nothing, but that e-learning may not apply to them.

The program is offered in Japanese, and all employees and temporary staff members who have sufficient proficiency in the language are required to complete the course. A version of the course for non-Japanese employees can be accessed at “Information Protection Video” on the AG Intranet. As this Law is scheduled to become effective on April 5, all employees are requested to complete this e-learning program within the limited time available. Furthermore, attendance shall be recorded and a test given. The beginner’s course of the program, which is, in principle, mandatory for all employees, can be completed in about an hour and a half. Employees may take the course in several segments during short breaks in the work routine, thereby avoiding major negative impact on normal duties.

1. This should be “all employees” because “the entire employee” means one employee has been divided into many smaller pieces.

1. The position of “which” could be confusing. It’s not clear whether “which” refers to Japanese or to the course. The meaning of this sentence would be helped if the “which….” clause were moved closer to the subject it describes.

1. Check a reference book on what kind of words should have a hyphen.

1. It might be a good idea to mention that employees who are fluent in Japanese should take this program; not just “people who speak Japanese.” What you have written could be taken to mean that a person who speaks only limited Japanese should also participate in the Japanese version of the program.
2. “Idle” is probably not a good choice of words here. Idle is usually used when you want to express a negative meaning

1. This sounds a bit odd. “Across-the-board” means that it concerns a broad range of people or groups, for example, an across-the-board pay raise means that all the employees are given a pay raise. But a law concerns everyone, not just a range of certain people.
2. This implies that employees only have to complete a part of the course, and not the entire course. The idea here is that employees can study the course by dividing the course into shorter segments and take the course a little at a time.

○ 短期集中

intense を用いた場合、「短期間」に加えて「一生懸命」という意味が出てくる。

○ 受講管理とテスト

約1時間半のコースだから、管理の対象は progress より attendance のほうではないか。

● 三交替勤務

自動車や鉄鋼産業の工場などで、午前零時から８時までの勤務は一般には賃金が３割り増しとなり、これを graveyard shift というが、医者が夜中に墓から遺体を掘り出して研究に用いたことがその由来らしい。

● 就業時間の合間

就業時間中にbreakはあっても idle time や spare time はない。しかし、いずれにせよこのように具体的な指図はいかにも日本人らしい。

law school を出たばかりの青年を law firm が雇うにあたり一週間につき 60 時間以上の労働を求める。１日に12時間（土曜も出れば10時間）以上働かされることになるが、間近に控えている bar exam に備えた試験勉強は ”on your own time” にしたらよいと言うに止める。
（The Rainmaker, John Grisham）

● staff

この名詞を可算で用いたければa staff member、staff members が便利。