本文選題：隱私權(quán) + 網(wǎng)絡(luò)��； 參考：《中央民族大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著網(wǎng)絡(luò)技術(shù)的發(fā)展,隱私權(quán)侵權(quán)行為受到越來(lái)越多的重視,《中華人民共和國(guó)民法總則》明確將隱私權(quán)列為基本人權(quán),從國(guó)家層面加強(qiáng)了對(duì)隱私權(quán)的保護(hù)力度。隱私權(quán)在網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境下產(chǎn)生了三個(gè)特征,即:侵權(quán)主體多元化、侵權(quán)客體數(shù)據(jù)化和損害后果嚴(yán)重化。根據(jù)隱私權(quán)的特征,結(jié)合目前隱私權(quán)保護(hù)的相關(guān)立法,通過(guò)分析發(fā)現(xiàn)隱私權(quán)保護(hù)目前存在的兩個(gè)問(wèn)題。首先,信息時(shí)代的隱私權(quán)已經(jīng)不再是消極的"獨(dú)處的權(quán)利",而應(yīng)該是一種積極主動(dòng)并可受控制的權(quán)力,個(gè)人應(yīng)當(dāng)能夠主動(dòng)支配自己的隱私是否暴露于網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境中。這種情況下,對(duì)隱私權(quán)進(jìn)行保護(hù),也不能僅僅針對(duì)隱私權(quán)侵權(quán)行為發(fā)生之后進(jìn)行,應(yīng)當(dāng)將法律的保護(hù)提前到侵權(quán)行為發(fā)生前。這就需要制定一種侵權(quán)防御性機(jī)制,規(guī)范網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者的行為,要求他們將保護(hù)隱私信息作為日常的行為規(guī)范,防止隱私信息泄露。我國(guó)目前對(duì)于隱私權(quán)侵權(quán)并沒(méi)有防御性規(guī)定,而在隱私權(quán)保護(hù)較為發(fā)達(dá)的英、美等國(guó),已經(jīng)在法律中出現(xiàn)了防御性保護(hù)的相關(guān)規(guī)定。本文在研究歐盟以及美國(guó)的法律規(guī)定基礎(chǔ)上,提出了將隱私權(quán)侵權(quán)防御性機(jī)制本土化的設(shè)想。其次,在隱私權(quán)侵權(quán)行為發(fā)生之后,精神損害賠償是補(bǔ)償被侵權(quán)人的重要方式。目前我國(guó)的法律規(guī)定對(duì)精神損害賠償?shù)钠瘘c(diǎn)規(guī)定得較高、考慮因素不完善,同時(shí)精神損害賠償?shù)臄?shù)額也無(wú)法適應(yīng)當(dāng)下的發(fā)展。本文針對(duì)以上三個(gè)問(wèn)題,建議擴(kuò)大隱私權(quán)精神損害賠償?shù)姆秶?將達(dá)到輕微精神損害標(biāo)準(zhǔn)以上的精神損害納入賠償范圍。此外,我國(guó)目前對(duì)精神損害賠償范圍的考量因素與域外相比并不是特別全面,本文對(duì)日本和德國(guó)的相關(guān)規(guī)定進(jìn)行了整理、分析,找到我國(guó)考量因素的不足,提出完善建議。最后,對(duì)精神損害賠償具體數(shù)額的判定,本文首先對(duì)域外相關(guān)規(guī)定進(jìn)行了整理,分析其他國(guó)家和地區(qū)精神損害的賠償方式,提出我國(guó)在針對(duì)精神損害賠償制度的完善中,尤其是對(duì)于侵犯隱私權(quán)這類(lèi)人格權(quán)的精神損害賠償制度設(shè)計(jì)中,應(yīng)當(dāng)考慮制定較為寬泛的賠償范圍。對(duì)精神損害的賠償數(shù)額進(jìn)行計(jì)算,主要可以考慮三個(gè)原則:適當(dāng)經(jīng)濟(jì)補(bǔ)償原則、合理限制原則和自由裁量原則。在這三項(xiàng)原則的指導(dǎo)下,確定侵犯隱私權(quán)的精神損害賠償?shù)木唧w數(shù)額。
[Abstract]:With the development of network technology, more and more attention has been paid to the infringement of the right to privacy. The General principles of Civil Law of the people's Republic of China explicitly regard the right of privacy as a basic human right and strengthen the protection of the right of privacy at the national level. The privacy right has three characteristics in the network environment, that is, the subject of infringement is diversified, the object of infringement is digitalized and the consequence of damage is serious. According to the characteristics of the right of privacy and the relevant legislation of the protection of the right of privacy at present, this paper finds out two problems existing in the protection of the right of privacy. First of all, the privacy right in the information age is no longer a passive "right of solitude", but a kind of active and controllable power. The individual should be able to control whether his privacy is exposed to the network environment or not. In this case, the protection of the right of privacy can not only be carried out after the infringement of the right to privacy, the protection of the law should be advanced to the occurrence of the infringement. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a defensive mechanism for infringement, to regulate the behavior of network service providers, to require them to take the protection of privacy information as a daily behavior norm, and to prevent the disclosure of privacy information. At present, there are no defensive provisions for the infringement of the right of privacy in China, but in Britain and the United States, where the protection of the right of privacy is more developed, there are some relevant provisions of defensive protection in the law. Based on the study of the European Union and the United States, this paper puts forward the idea of localization of the defense mechanism of privacy infringement. Secondly, after the infringement of privacy, compensation for mental damage is an important way to compensate the infringee. At present, the legal provisions of our country stipulate the starting point of mental damage compensation is high, the consideration factor is not perfect, at the same time, the amount of mental damage compensation can not adapt to the current development. In view of the above three problems, this paper suggests that the scope of the compensation for mental damage in the right to privacy should be expanded, and the mental damage above the standard of minor mental damage should be included in the scope of compensation. In addition, the scope of compensation for mental damage in our country is not particularly comprehensive compared with the foreign countries. This paper collates and analyzes the relevant provisions of Japan and Germany, finds out the deficiencies of the factors considered in our country, and puts forward some suggestions for perfection. Finally, for the determination of the specific amount of compensation for mental damage, this paper first arranges the relevant provisions of foreign countries, analyzes the compensation methods of other countries and regions, and points out that our country is in the process of perfecting the system of compensation for mental damage. In particular, in the design of compensation system for mental damage, which infringes the right to privacy, a broad range of compensation should be considered. To calculate the amount of compensation for moral damage, three principles can be considered: the principle of appropriate economic compensation, the principle of reasonable limitation and the principle of discretion. Under the guidance of these three principles, the specific amount of compensation for moral damages violating the right to privacy is determined.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中央民族大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 徐明;;大數(shù)據(jù)時(shí)代的隱私危機(jī)及其侵權(quán)法應(yīng)對(duì)[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2017年01期

2 李婕;;刑法如何保護(hù)隱私——兼評(píng)《刑法修正案(九)》個(gè)人信息保護(hù)條款[J];暨南學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2016年12期

3 梁清;石磊;;《朱紅蔚申請(qǐng)無(wú)罪逮捕賠償案》的理解與參照——侵犯公民人身權(quán)造成嚴(yán)重精神損害后果的,應(yīng)當(dāng)給予精神損害賠償[J];人民司法(案例);2016年20期

4 王毅純;;論隱私權(quán)保護(hù)范圍的界定[J];蘇州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(法學(xué)版);2016年02期

5 張新寶;;從隱私到個(gè)人信息:利益再衡量的理論與制度安排[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2015年03期

6 劉德良;;個(gè)人信息保護(hù)立法應(yīng)明確人格權(quán)和財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)屬性[J];中國(guó)信息安全;2015年05期

7 王利明;;論個(gè)人信息權(quán)在人格權(quán)法中的地位[J];蘇州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2012年06期

8 王利明;;隱私權(quán)概念的再界定[J];法學(xué)家;2012年01期

9 葉金強(qiáng);;精神損害賠償制度的解釋論框架[J];法學(xué)家;2011年05期

10 王澤鑒;;人格權(quán)的具體化及其保護(hù)范圍·隱私權(quán)篇(下)[J];比較法研究;2009年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 焦q;精神損害賠償?shù)姆ɡ硪罁?jù)研究[D];中共中央黨校;2015年

2 王黎黎;隱私權(quán)民法保護(hù)的局限性及其克服[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

3 楊金丹;網(wǎng)絡(luò)隱私權(quán)的私法保護(hù)[D];吉林大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：1806366