数字弱势群体权利的双重面向及其概念重释

The Dual Aspects and Conceptual Reinterpretation of Rights for Digitally Disadvantaged Groups

关于数字弱势群体权利概念的界定,学界至今仍聚讼不已。已有定义主要基于经验性判断,通常采用“例举式+兜底式”的界定方法。在既有界定思路下,数字弱势群体权利概念外延容易泛化,进而面临有效性与独立性缺失的理论困境。廓清数字弱势群体权利的概念,是数字弱势群体权利保障的理论前提。基于事实与价值二分的哲学视角,揭示数字弱势群体权利所包含的实在权利面向与价值理性面向,将数字弱势群体权利界定为包含法定权利系统与价值系统的概念体系,可以有效纾解此类困境。

In the digital age,significant advancements in digital technology have propelled society into a new era characterized by“totally digitalized and computerized.”While digital technology offers opportunities,it also harbors risks.The urgency of redefining digital rights for the protection of digitally disadvantaged groups is underscored by the fact that the convenience of digital technology may inadvertently trap these groups in difficult living situations,such as being limited by lack of internet access or the skills to purchase essential goods online.Ensuring the healthy development of the digital society necessitates this protection,which has become a must of governance.Clarifying the concept of rights for digitally disadvantaged groups is a theoretical prerequisite for their protection.Current regulations and theories provide only preliminary answers to the question of“what constitutes the rights of digitally disadvantaged groups,”leaving room for further discussion.Besides,the research employs an“enumerative and saving all”approach to defining these rights,often describing them by using terms like“bundle of rights”or“rights cluster.”While the definition of“saving all”strengthens the comprehensiveness of the concept,it also risks generalizing the definition of rights for digitally disadvantaged groups.The need for a systematic structure within these rights also demonstrates a theoretical dilemma.The theoretical dilemma about the rights of digitally disadvantaged groups arises primarily from challenges in defining the concept,which includes two aspects:the dilemma of the effectiveness and independence of these rights.The dichotomy of facts and values in the legal world provides insight into the theoretical challenges.To address the dilemma,the rights of digitally disadvantaged groups can be reinterpreted from two perspectives:first,at the factual level,these rights have a substantial aspect,limited only by current norms;second,at the value level,these rights embody a value rationality that incorporates emerging legal interests and moral rights which lack sufficient legal basis into the framework of rights for digitally disadvantaged groups.This aims to create a broader and more quick discourse on protecting these rights,emphasizing the human-centered values of the digital age.The dual aspects of these rights not only validate the necessity of the concept but also reveal the underlying essence that has been obscured.However,the discussion of the dual aspects does not provide a comprehensive framework for analyzing the concept of rights for digitally disadvantaged groups.This paper,in its pursuit of thoroughness and rigor,attempts to reinterpret the internal operational logic and external theoretical positioning of this concept as a comprehensive system,for its“multidimensional existence.”Based on the distinction of the dual aspects of rights,the rights of digitally disadvantaged groups should be viewed as a conceptual system rather than a specific right,which can guide the practice of protection.For inherent rights within the statutory rights system,such as the right to accessible communication for individuals with disabilities,these rights have clear legal foundations and can be protected through complaints to relevant authorities or litigation.In contrast,emerging legal interests and expectations within the value system,such as the right to disconnect,may require alternative protection methods,such as public opinion supervision and legislative proposals,as evidenced by the proposal to incorporate the“right to disconnect and rest”into law during the meeting of NPC and CPPCC.The gradient construction of the conceptual system for the rights of digitally disadvantaged groups supports the continuous evolution of this concept.The statutory rights system provides a legal basis for the conceptual system and nourishes the value system with practical resources,while the value system continually fosters the emergence of new inherent rights.