数据抓取行为的正当性判断——反思实质性替代规则

Legitimacy of Data Scraping Behavior——Reflecting on the Substantive Substitution Rule

实质性替代规则经过十余年的发展,已经成为判断数据抓取行为是否正当的基本规则之一。但是,这一从司法审判经验中发展出来的规则具有误导性,特别是该规则经过抽象而进入到各种规范性文件中时,这一问题尤其显著。实质性替代规则本质上是对同业竞争、直接竞争关系的强调,这不仅和反不正当竞争法弱化竞争关系的趋势相悖,也没有对行为的正当性有充分说明。实际上,数据抓取行为的本质是对他人成果的利用,在肯定可以适当抓取的前提下,正当性的基础应当以是否超越合理限度为标准;这需要在个案中进行判断,充分考虑抓取数据的数量、数据类型以及抓取行为造成的运维成本等因素。

After more than ten years of development,substantive substitution rule has become one of the basic rules for judging whether data scraping behavior is legitimate.However,this rule,which has been developed from the experience of judicial,is highly misleading,especially when the rule is abstracted by various stipulations.The substantive substitution rule is essentially an emphasis on intra-industry competition and direct competition,which not only runs counter to the trend of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law weakening the competitive relationship,but also does not fully explain the legitimacy.In fact,the essence of data scraping behavior is the use of other people's achievements,and on the premise that it can be appropriately captured,the legitimacy should be based on whether it exceeds the reasonable scope,which needs to be judged on a case-by-case basis,fully considering factors such as the amount of data captured,the type of data,and the operation and maintenance costs caused by the scraping behavior.