本文選題：數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利 + 財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)��； 參考：《復(fù)旦大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文所談的數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利是指在財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)視野下對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)的控制權(quán)和使用權(quán)。就財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)視角而言,數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利并非是一種不言自明、與生俱來(lái)的權(quán)利。在信息社會(huì),由于有價(jià)值的數(shù)據(jù)與主體和載體分離,獨(dú)立存在且無(wú)須通過(guò)有形的載體即可傳輸；數(shù)據(jù)本身直接成為了交易的標(biāo)的物進(jìn)行單獨(dú)交換,這些特性使得數(shù)據(jù)區(qū)別于信息、數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)等凸現(xiàn)出獨(dú)立的使用價(jià)值和交換價(jià)值。但受到勞動(dòng)價(jià)值論等傳統(tǒng)觀念的束縛,現(xiàn)有法律中無(wú)形物的權(quán)利保護(hù)以創(chuàng)新性為首要判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),以投資和勞動(dòng)投入作為輔助判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),這使得數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利無(wú)法得到應(yīng)有的保護(hù)。立法機(jī)關(guān)變通的做法：一是通過(guò)人為擴(kuò)大專利法保護(hù)范圍的方式,把數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利升格為知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán),強(qiáng)行賦予其創(chuàng)新性。二是通過(guò)確認(rèn)信息權(quán)利或數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)權(quán)利代替數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利。三是作為個(gè)案通過(guò)合同法、侵權(quán)法等進(jìn)行個(gè)別調(diào)整。以上模式均不利于獨(dú)立的數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利保護(hù)。隨著大數(shù)據(jù)、云計(jì)算、物聯(lián)網(wǎng)等新技術(shù)運(yùn)用,法律在數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利保護(hù)上的滯后現(xiàn)象表現(xiàn)為3個(gè)方面：一是對(duì)大數(shù)據(jù)收集行業(yè)擁有的數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利(特別是金融交易數(shù)據(jù)、物聯(lián)網(wǎng)零售數(shù)據(jù)、網(wǎng)絡(luò)用戶使用痕跡數(shù)據(jù)等的控制權(quán)和使用權(quán))沒(méi)有界定。二是對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)應(yīng)用業(yè)的數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利(特別是代表創(chuàng)新方向的創(chuàng)客企業(yè)或個(gè)人開(kāi)展產(chǎn)品設(shè)計(jì)時(shí)使用數(shù)據(jù)的權(quán)利)沒(méi)有界定。三是對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)的專屬權(quán)利和非專屬權(quán)利沒(méi)有界定。建立數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利保護(hù)制度已成為了一種社會(huì)需求。 建立適應(yīng)信息社會(huì)特點(diǎn)的數(shù)據(jù)控制權(quán)和使用權(quán)制度的目標(biāo),是兼顧實(shí)現(xiàn)整體經(jīng)濟(jì)社會(huì)的公平和高效。產(chǎn)權(quán)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)認(rèn)為,數(shù)據(jù)同時(shí)具有非排他性和非強(qiáng)制性,應(yīng)當(dāng)屬于公共資源。但“開(kāi)放數(shù)據(jù)運(yùn)動(dòng)”的實(shí)踐證明,將數(shù)據(jù)置于公共領(lǐng)域帶來(lái)了不公平和低效率,出現(xiàn)了侵犯隱私權(quán)、剝削勞動(dòng)力、數(shù)據(jù)質(zhì)量下降、封閉使用造成浪費(fèi)等情況。對(duì)此,筆者在分析現(xiàn)有的物權(quán)、債權(quán)、權(quán)利憑證、知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)和新型權(quán)利模式對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利借鑒意義的基礎(chǔ)上,探討建立一種以有限壟斷(優(yōu)先使用)為前提,推動(dòng)數(shù)據(jù)公開(kāi)的激勵(lì)機(jī)制和權(quán)利模式,達(dá)到避免數(shù)據(jù)被壟斷、數(shù)據(jù)被閑置、數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利主張侵犯其他專屬權(quán)的目的,實(shí)現(xiàn)數(shù)據(jù)控制權(quán)與使用權(quán)的平衡。
[Abstract]:The data right in this paper refers to the right to control and use the data under the view of property right.From the perspective of property rights, data rights are not a self-evident, inherent right.In the information society, because valuable data is separated from the subject and carrier, it exists independently and can be transmitted without physical carrier; the data itself becomes the subject matter of the transaction and is exchanged separately.These characteristics make data distinct from information, database and so on, showing independent use value and exchange value.However, under the restraint of traditional concepts such as labor value theory, the right protection of intangible things in the existing law takes innovation as the primary criterion, and investment and labor input as auxiliary criteria, which makes the data rights unable to be protected properly.The legislative organ's alternative approach: first, by artificially expanding the scope of patent law protection, the data rights are upgraded to intellectual property rights, and they are endowed with innovation by force.The second is to confirm the right to information or database rights instead of data rights.Third, as a case through contract law, tort law and other individual adjustments.The above model is not conducive to independent data rights protection.With the use of new technologies such as big data, cloud computing and the Internet of things, the lag in the protection of data rights by law is manifested in three aspects: the first is the data rights (especially financial transaction data) held by big data in the collection industry.Internet of things retail data, network users use trace data and other rights of control and use) is not defined.Second, the data rights of data application industry (especially the right of creative enterprises or individuals to use data in product design) are not defined.Third, there is no definition of exclusive right and non-exclusive right of data.The establishment of data rights protection system has become a social demand.The goal of establishing the system of data control and right to use in accordance with the characteristics of the information society is to realize the fairness and efficiency of the whole economy and society.According to the economics of property rights, data is both non-exclusive and non-mandatory and should belong to public resources.But the practice of the "Open data Movement" has proved that putting data in the public domain has brought about inequity and inefficiency, such as violation of privacy, exploitation of labor force, deterioration of data quality, waste caused by closed use and so on.On the basis of analyzing the significance of the existing real right, creditor's rights, documents of rights, intellectual property rights and new right models to the data rights, the author discusses the establishment of a limited monopoly (preferential use) as the premise.In order to avoid the monopoly of data, the idle data and the infringement of other exclusive rights, the data right can be balanced between the right of control and the right of use.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：復(fù)旦大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D923.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 歐陽(yáng)萍萍;;許可合同中知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用的反壟斷法規(guī)制問(wèn)題[J];成都大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(教育科學(xué)版);2007年01期

2 韓元牧;吳莉娟;;SaaS法律問(wèn)題研究[J];網(wǎng)絡(luò)法律評(píng)論;2009年00期

3 沈偉偉;;P2P技術(shù)下網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)許可模式初探[J];網(wǎng)絡(luò)法律評(píng)論;2009年00期

，

本文編號(hào)：1760275