The Dynamic System Theory of Legal Protection for Personal Information Rights Infringement

The advent of the big data era has presented unprecedented challenges to remedies for personal information infringement in areas such as damage assessment,proof of causation,determination of illegality,fault assessment,and liability.Traditional tort law is unable to provide a robust response for these challenges,which severely hinders human rights protection in the digital society.The dynamic system theory represents a third path between fixed constitutive elements and general clauses.It both overcomes the rigidity of the“allor-nothing”legal effect evaluation mechanism of the“element-effect”model and avoids the uncertainty of the general clause model.It can effectively enhance the flexibility of the legal system in responding to social changes.In light of this,it is necessary to construct a dynamic foundational evaluation framework for personal information infringement under the guidance of the dynamic system theory.By relying on the dynamic interplay effect of various foundational evaluation elements,this framework can achieve a flexible evaluation of the constitutive elements of liability and the legal effects of liability for personal information infringement.Through this approach,the crisis of personal information infringement in the era of big data can be mitigated,and the realization of personal information rights as digital human rights can be promoted.

Constitutional Nature of Personality Rights and Its Manifestation in Civil Law

The formation of personality comes from people’s choices and pursuit of self-realization,which is influenced by objective factors but not determined by them,so personality does not belong to the domain of objectivity.The concept of general personality rights in the German Constitution was initially premised on the objective determinability in the field of personality,but in constitutional jurisprudence,it gradually shifted to something with individual autonomy as the core and personal self-realization as the goal,and the scope of relevant rights expanded accordingly,so that they could not be clearly distinguished from general freedom of action and thus became the general principle of constitutional rights.The protection of constitutional personality rights in the United States and Japan can also confirm this process,providing evidence for the constitutional nature of personality rights.Deeper research shows that constitutional personality rights actually manifest the highest value of modern constitutions—human dignity.In contrast,the theoretical justification of personality rights in civil law just lies in the objectivity and defensive nature of personality elements.

On the Construction and Application Scenarios of——Analysis of Environmental Personality Interests Based on Human Rights

Environmental personality interests based on human rights reflect the multiple values of ecological order,ecological justice,and ecological freedom,and are closely linked to the protection of the right to life and the right to health.They are also related to human dignity and the personal freedom of civil subjects and conform to formal and essential standards of personality rights,which should be included in the scope of personality rights for protection.The construction and application of environmental personality rights faces bottlenecks such as the partiality of subjects,limitation of objects,and hysteresis of responsibilities in the protection of environmental personality rights.Environmental personality rights are supposed to reflect the needs of the development of modern human rights.We should expand the scope of its connotative power and function based on the Green Principle of the Civil Code,and follow a networked,typified,and systematic path of protection,so as to manifest the people-centered philosophy of the Civil Code and the Environmental Protection Law.

The Development of Human Rights Protection in Cross-border Personality Rights and Tort Conflict Laws

Personality rights are basic rights related to human dignity in the concept of human rights protection,and respect for personality rights is the basic prerequisite for safeguarding other human rights.Human rights protection exerts a profound impact on the value of legislation and enforcement practices of private international laws in the field of cross-border personality rights infringement in various countries,which is mainly manifested in the integration of substantive justice and the humanistic care concept of protecting the rights of vulnerable groups into formal justice,and expands the development space of human rights protection ideas in cross-border personality rights and tort conflict laws.the diversity of human rights protection values determines that cross-border personality rights infringement may lead to conflicts between personality rights and other basic rights,such as freedom of speech.to reconcile such conflicts,a workable method is to prioritize personality rights protection in accordance with the hierarchy of rights theory in the value judgment of public order reservation or to clarify the limits of the right holder’s tolerance obligation through the limited application of the principle of proportionality.China’s current cross-border personality rights and tort conflict law can optimize the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups by diversifying the options of available legal methods,and establish a balancing mechanism between personality rights and freedom of speech,so as to improve China’s legal protection system for human rights in the field of foreign-related civil and commercial affairs.

Twenty Years of the Implementation of the Human Rights Clause in the Constitution:Achievements,Implications,and Research Topics

On March 14,2004,the Second Session of the 10th National People’s Congress of China adopted the fourth amendment to the Chinese Constitution,the most noticeable highlight of which is the addition of the paragraph“the state respects and protects human rights”as the third clause in Article 33 of Chapter II“Basic Rights and Obligations of Citizens”in the Constitution.The inclusion of the clause of human rights in the Constitution is considered an important milestone in the history of human rights development in the People’s Republic of China.The implementation of the human rights clause not only showcases the values of the Party and the state in respecting and protecting human rights,but also promotes the development of human rights,shapes the culture of human rights,and endows the rule of law with a rich humanistic spirit.Over the past 20 years,the publicity,research and practice of the human rights clause have made the Chi-nese people realize that human rights are not only a“great term”,but also a common value shared by mankind.Amid the once-in-a-century changes of the world,although the development of human rights is facing various challenges,the humanistic spirit contained in the hu-man rights clause has become the internal driving force for building consensus in the whole of society.Reinterpreting the significance and value of the human rights clause can help us conscientiously draw on the experience in the implementation of the clause over the past 20 years and contribute Chinese wisdom and experience to global human rights governance with a more open mind and inclusive attitude.

The Way to Optimize the Right to Personal Data Portability in Chinese Practice——Based on Empirical Analysis of the Privacy Policies of 66 Mobile Apps

Although the existing legal norms and judicial practic-es can provide basic guidance for the right to personal data portabili-ty, it can be concluded that there are obstacles to the realization of this right through empirical research of the privacy policies of 66 mobile apps, such as whether they have stipulations on the right to personal data portability, whether they are able to derive copies of personal in-formation automatically, whether there are textual examples, whether ID verification is required, whether the copied documents are encrypt-ed, and whether the scope of personal information involved is consis-tent. This gap in practice, on the one hand, reflects the misunderstand-ing of the right to personal data portability, and on the other hand, is a result of the negative externalities, practical costs and technical lim-itations of the right to personal data portability. Based on rethinking the right to data portability, we can somehow solve practical problems concerning the right to personal data portability through multiple measures such as promoting the fulfillment of this right by legislation, optimizing technology-oriented operations, refining response process mechanisms, and enhancing system interoperability.

The Concept of Digital Human Rights and Its Reshaping of Basic Rights

Whether a new generation of human rights emerges in the digital age has sparked widespread debate.Academic understanding of digital technology remains confined to thinking about network technology and products,often overlooking the revolutionary nature of digital media.Digital media has the sweeping potential to unify all forms of media and reshape social life,giving rise to new demands for a new generation of human rights.The concept of digital human rights can be defined as the legitimate rights of human's infinitely extended personalities through digital media.Its core characteristic is its transcendency,where every person lives in a networked space that surpasses physical boundaries,nations,and individual personalities.Human rights are generally considered the foundation for basic constitutional rights,which,in turn,form the basis for legislative acts across various sectors.In recent years,China has enacted numerous laws in the digital domain to keep pace with the times,but due to the lack of guidance on digital human rights,these laws tend to be fragmented and disjointed.It is urgent to unify digital legislation at all levels on the basis of reshaping basic constitutional rights.Thus,it is essential to reshape the basic rights based on the concept and characteristics of digital human rights and streamline legislation at all levels under the unified guidance of basic rights.This can help establish a comprehensive digital human rights protection system that meets the demands of the modern era.

Why The Constitution Should Protect Personal Credit Information?——An Approach of Right Argumentation

Protecting personal credit information through constitutional rights is not only essemtial for individuals to defend against infringements on their personal credit information rights and interests by public power in the social credit system,but also a requirement for unified legislation on social credit to explore the basis for constitutional norms.In the era of the credit economy,personal credit information has become a vital resource for realizing personal autonomy.Along with the increase in the state’s supervision and control of personal credit,the realization of the autonomous value in the interests related to personal credit information has also set more obligations for the state.Therefore,interests related to personal credit information should be regarded as a constitutional right.Because of its significant economic interest and value,the right to personal credit information should be classified as a constitutional property right.As a constitutional property right,the right to personal credit information can not only help protect people’s economic interests,but also achieve the goal of safeguarding their personality interests.

企业数据权益论

企业对其生产和处理的数据享有的利益应受法律保护,然而现行的物权法、合同法、知识产权法和反不正当竞争法等民事法律制度都不足以实现对企业数据的全面保护,故应当确立企业对其数据享有一种独立的、新型的财产权,即企业数据权益。企业数据权益的确权应当采取单一路径,不应区分数据、数据资源和数据产品或数据的生产与流通而分别确权。企业对其数据享有的权益具有排他效力,但是该排他性受制于数据上其他参与方的权益,即个人信息权益及数据来源者权利。数据资源持有权、数据加工使用权和数据产品经营权并非是企业数据权益的内容,企业对其数据享有的权益的内容仍应从占有、使用、收益和处分等方面加以界定。

论声音权益的法律保护模式

声音具有独特性,是自然人身份识别与社会交往的媒介。比较法上主要通过公开权、一般人格权、独立人格权或人格利益等模式对声音权益予以保护。公开权模式仅保护声音的经济价值、弱化其人格权属性。声音虽然与知识产权存在密切关联,但其主要不是知识产权的客体。一般人格权在具体化过程中也面临保护对象与边界不清晰的问题。我国《民法典》并没有承认声音为独立的具体人格权类型,而对声音权益采取了法定的独立人格利益保护模式,是更为简明、清晰的制度安排。声音权益虽不属于具体人格权,但作为一项人格利益可参照适用肖像权保护的规定。

论个人信息保护民事公益诉讼起诉主体的范围与顺位

自个人信息保护民事公益诉讼在我国开展以来,理论界与实务界就对该类诉讼的起诉主体存在较大争议,分歧主要集中在范围界定与诉权顺位两个方面。《个人信息保护法》第70条虽然对该类诉讼的起诉主体作了规定,但主体范围不明以及诉权顺位不清的问题仍未得到彻底解决。要正确实施该制度,应否定“履行个人信息保护职责的部门”的起诉资格,扩张“法律规定的消费者组织”的范围,明确“由国家网信部门确定的组织”的条件,并以《民事诉讼法》第58条及不同类型民事公益诉讼之间的关系为依据,厘清不同起诉主体的诉权顺位。当受侵害对象为普通公民时,应尊重检察机关民事公益诉权的补充性,将“国家网信部门确定的组织”的起诉顺位置于检察机关之前;当受侵害对象为众多消费者时,应考虑到受侵害对象的特殊身份,依次由“法律规定的消费者组织”“由网信部门确定的组织”和检察机关行使起诉权。

民事在线诉讼当事人权益保障的检视与路径探索

当事人权益保障体现了以当事人为中心的诉讼理念,确保了实现诉讼效益与程序公正的统一。在线诉讼中单一的程序选择权类型难以满足双方当事人需求、证人远程作证提高了质证难度、异步审理稀释了直接言词原则、个人信息保护与庭审公开之间存在张力。应当根据被选择事项性质合理确定选择权类型、加强证人远程作证技术保障、肯定异步审理的价值并明确边界、具体衡量审判公开与个人信息保护价值利益。

《民法典》背景下个人信息保护的司法考察与制度完善

大数据时代,为充分保障个人的信息安全,我国相继施行的《民法典》《个人信息保护法》对此作出了较为全面的规定。考察相关规则的司法适用,发现我国个人信息保护存在个人信息与隐私权界定不清、损害赔偿威慑作用不足、公益诉讼制度效用未充分发挥、“知情—同意”标准不一且流于形式等问题。为解决上述问题,可通过构建可识别的场景化模式界定个人信息,引入情境脉络完整性理论判定隐私,审慎引入惩罚性赔偿,明晰个人信息保护公益诉讼的适用条件,构建“国家—行业—平台”三层规则体系实现实质同意,全面保护个人信息。

个人信息数据财产化及其确权授权模式构建

个人信息数据确权授权若适用传统人格标识财产化模式,要么导致基础权益错配,要么造成流转效用受阻。通过对财产价值溯源可以发现,个人信息存在原始数据、数据集合、衍生数据三种形态。原始数据非对人“有用的财物”,不构成财产权客体,但因其是个人信息的比特化表达,所以在数字空间中,个人信息权需以其为行权媒介;而数据集合与衍生数据则是数据财产权客体。数据三形态厘清了个人信息权、个人信息数据使用权及数据财产权的差序格局。个人信息数据的商业利用以个人信息权为基础,基于人格自决形成以信息主体同意为路径的许可机制。同意为准法律行为,许可生成低自由度的个人信息数据使用权,该权区别于处理者的数据财产权,需引入告知允诺之债和法定信义义务,以保护信息主体在同意许可中的信赖。

康德与人的尊严

为人的尊严提供严肃的哲学辩护,是康德思想的核心关切。当代学者对康德的尊严观主要有两种解读:一是尊严作为某种绝对价值,体现为人类作为理性存在者所具有的自由能力,并构成了尊重人的权利的根据;二是尊严是一个关系性的概念,可理解为优越性或某物高于另一物的地位,但并不构成现代社会中平等人权的根据。这两类解读各有其利弊。解答争议的关键在于澄清何谓尊严的主体。通过对康德核心文本的分析,可以得出两大类道德意义上的尊严主体:一是理性存在者本身或道德人格本身,二是理性存在者的道德活动所展现的不同德性。两类尊严主体的根据在于自律这种纯粹实践理性能力。康德式双重尊严主体涵盖了两种尊严范式的基本特点:与道德人格相应的同等尊严,对应着绝对价值;与德性实现程度相应的不同尊严,体现了关系性的规定。基于道德人格的同等尊严,确立了不可剥夺的生而具有的自由法权,表明了基本尊严和法权的绝对性。当代少数学者消解尊严绝对性的尝试,实际上源于混淆了不同的尊严主体。康德的尊严观确立了平等尊重的底线,凸显了尊重权利与改善德性的价值,还能兼容诸多社会性价值要素,具有丰富的理论与实践意义。

个人信息保护禁令建构研究

时下个人信息权益保护链条有断裂现象,事后诉讼救济正在司法摸索中,然而事前救济路径呈现闭塞状态,个人信息侵害具有区别于传统人格权损害的特性,亟须构建一种崭新有效的事前救济制度,即“个人信息保护禁令”。其可行性体现在“个人信息保护禁令”可以比照人身安全保护令定性和构建,并且可以依据个人信息敏感度分层动态适用。在此基础上对个人信息保护禁令之申请条件、请求内容、效力期限进行逐一建构。

刑事诉讼领域个人信息权的限制与规范

个人信息保护兹事体大,重视对个人信息权的保护已成共识,即便在刑事诉讼领域亦不例外。但刑事诉讼中个人信息权的行使可能与犯罪控制的利益和公众知情权、信息开放利益、科学和艺术研究利益等发生冲突,因此有必要遵循目的限制、必要性、区分对待等原则对刑事诉讼领域的个人信息权予以适当限制。在此基础上,可以提出刑事诉讼中个人信息权行使的四方面考量因素,并由此确立个人信息权行使的方式及其救济途径,以实现个人信息权在刑事诉讼领域的良性发展。

个人数据主体收益权的理论迷思与制度选择

是否应以法定形式明确个人数据主体收益权,当前在理论界存在较大分歧。个人数据在数据价值链中的价值倍增,主要得益于数据处理者而非个人的投入,其体量上的规模性和分布上的碎片化决定了向个人分配收益存在经济性缺失,即设置个人数据主体收益权缺乏正当性和合理性基础。立法应对个人数据主体收益权采取“原则否定,约定例外”的态度,在个人数据价值的初次分配中放弃个人的法定收益权,但允许其以约定方式取得经济利益。同时,在保障个人数据主体在先权益的前提下,探索数据服务税、数据基金等集体利益实现机制,以体现个人在数据价值分配中的应有地位。

代建工程项目管理冲突及化解对策研究——以高校实验楼代建项目为例

长期以来代建制在实验楼等复杂个性项目上施行时,存在“冲突频发并需政府干预”的突出问题,代建制要求和现有流程之间的矛盾,使得项目建设中的工作冲突容易演变为利益冲突,妨碍了代建项目有效推进。文章在解析管理冲突及其原因的基础上,尝试对相关工作流程进行合理修正,从而摆脱“冲突解决依赖政府干预”的境况,以期为代建制的深入推广提供参考。

自然人破产程序中的居住权问题审视与规范建议

居住权作为《民法典》中新出现的用益物权类型,现有相关配套规定尚不够具体和明晰,而且由于自身用益物权之特性,在破产程序中对债权的公平清偿和价值实现有一定影响。随着自然人破产制度的逐步推行,居住权与各类破产债权的冲突问题将更加凸显,妥善平衡债务人、债权人以及居住权人的利益是解决问题的关键。首先要明确居住权在破产程序中的存在形式和冲突类型,明确债权人、债务人和居住权人的诉求,通过完善居住权主体、客体的相关规定,丰富居住权概念,将社会性居住权和投资性居住权区分规定,多方充分协商,灵活处理不同类型居住权,力求最终实现居住权基本生活保障功能与破产法公平清偿目标的平衡。