企业公开数据法律保护范式选择——从赋权论的证成到否定

The Optimal Choice of Legal Protection Paradigm of Enterprise Open Data——From Justification to Denial of Empowerment Theory

在数据驱动经济发展中,企业公开数据成为数字经济的关键,也是各利益相关方争夺的重要运营资源。企业公开数据交织着企业利益、用户利益以及社会公共利益,其可直接获取性决定企业负担着容忍他人合法获取与使用的义务。统筹协调企业公开数据的保护与利用,是数字经济顶层战略设计和底层资源配置的重要课题,学界由此展开赋权保护路径与行为规制路径两类学理争锋。赋权论者从知识产权、数据库特殊权、商业秘密以及合同等传统权利体系的适用困境出发,试图借助产权理论明确数据权属、激励数据生产、降低交易成本等优势创设一种稳定的新型数据财产权利。但数据权利化本身存在结构性障碍,静态的权利结构与数字经济时代数据自由流通的运行逻辑相悖,无法解决实践中复杂多样的数据纠纷难题。现有法律框架不能直接推导出数据权利化的可行性,应将企业公开数据定位为竞争性财产权益,以反不正当竞争法的行为规制为进路。在司法实践中,裁判者应恪守反不正当竞争法一般条款适用的谦抑性,留给数据要素市场更多模仿自由、商业创新的空间。同时,在能动司法中构建企业公开数据竞争行为不正当性的双阶审查标准,合理适当体现和区分阶段形态,在获取阶段与使用阶段进一步明晰竞争行为的违法性边界。

In the development of a data-driven economy,corporate disclosure of data has become the key to the digital economy,and it is also an important operational resource that various stakeholders compete for.Enterprise public data is intertwined with enterprise interests,user interests and social public interests,and its direct availability determines the obligation of enterprises to tolerate legal acquisition and use by others.Coordinating the protection and utilization of enterprise public data is an important topic in the top-level strategic design and bottom-level resource allocation of the digital economy,and academic circles have thus launched two types of academic competitions,the empowerment protection path and the behavior regulation path.Empowerment theorists start from the dilemma of the application of traditional rights systems such as intellectual property rights,database special rights,trade secrets,and contracts,and try to create a stable new type of data with the help of property rights theory to clarify data ownership,stimulate data production,and reduce transaction costs.property rights.However,there are structural obstacles in the data rightsization itself.The static rights structure is contrary to the operation logic of the free flow of data in the digital economy era,and cannot solve the complex and diverse data disputes in practice.Under the existing legal framework,the feasibility of data rightsization cannot be directly deduced.The company’s public data should be positioned as a competitive property rights and interests,and the behavior regulation of the anti-unfair competition law should be taken as an approach.In judicial practice,adjudicators should abide by the modesty in the application of the general provisions of the AntiUnfair Competition Law,leaving more room for freedom of imitation and commercial innovation in the data element market.At the same time,establish a two-stage review standard for the unfairness of enterprise public data competition behavior in active justice,reasonably and appropriately reflect and distinguish the stage type,and further clarify the illegality boundary of competition behavior in the acquisition stage and the use stage.