本文選題：被遺忘權(quán) + 個人信息權(quán)　； 參考：《華中師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：在大數(shù)據(jù)時代,數(shù)據(jù)產(chǎn)業(yè)的蓬勃發(fā)展全方面的影響著我們的生活。數(shù)據(jù)技術(shù)的迅速革新和互聯(lián)網(wǎng)領(lǐng)域的快速全球化使得網(wǎng)絡(luò)數(shù)據(jù)從“默認(rèn)的遺忘”步入“默認(rèn)的記憶”,記憶與以往之間的格局已然被顛覆。隨著媒體將北京一中院審結(jié)的一起侵權(quán)案件冠之以“中國首例被遺忘權(quán)案”正式將被遺忘權(quán)制度帶進(jìn)了公眾的視野后,引導(dǎo)更多人在遺忘與記憶倒置的今天,重新審視這個歷史的亦是新生的、政策的亦是商業(yè)的、讓人愛恨交纏而又欲罷不能的法律制度。被遺忘權(quán)制度作為互聯(lián)網(wǎng)浪潮之中的一項(xiàng)新的議題而誕生,雖是通過歐洲法院的一項(xiàng)判例而進(jìn)行了司法確認(rèn),但是在2016年11月我國頒布的《網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全法》當(dāng)中也能夠窺見其立法精神,由此可見被遺忘權(quán)制度的構(gòu)建與我國信息社會的發(fā)展有著密不可分的關(guān)系。就法律層面而言,我們究竟是通過擴(kuò)大既有法律概念定義的方式然后用既有法律概念確定的權(quán)利義務(wù)關(guān)系來解決這項(xiàng)新的議題,還是通過建構(gòu)新的法律概念,以此來重新界定現(xiàn)今大數(shù)據(jù)時代之中人們間的權(quán)利義務(wù)關(guān)系,并制定新的法律制度?如要重新構(gòu)建權(quán)利義務(wù)關(guān)系,又當(dāng)如何調(diào)配方能合理,這些都是需要思索的問題。全球化和網(wǎng)絡(luò)虛擬空間的擴(kuò)大加重了傳統(tǒng)法律制度的負(fù)擔(dān),使之有“難以承受之重”,經(jīng)過人類千百年磨合而新生的相對穩(wěn)定的法律制度受到了前所未有的沖擊。文章從我國首例被遺忘權(quán)案件所引發(fā)的百家爭議入手,再對比歐盟和美國在對待被遺忘權(quán)制度的不同態(tài)度以及背后的立法邏輯,從而循序漸進(jìn)的剖析被遺忘權(quán)的法律屬性,通過文字分析和圖例表示的方式為被遺忘權(quán)制度在人格權(quán)譜系中找到準(zhǔn)確定位,進(jìn)而文章整體落腳于我國被遺忘權(quán)制度的具體設(shè)計(jì),在被遺忘權(quán)制度本土化的過程中,對被遺忘權(quán)具體內(nèi)容和侵權(quán)法保護(hù)的構(gòu)成要件和免責(zé)事由進(jìn)行詳細(xì)闡述。
[Abstract]:In the big data age, the full development of the data industry has affected our life. The rapid innovation of data technology and the rapid globalization of the Internet have made the network data "default" into the "default memory", and the pattern between memory and the past has been overturned. With the media review of the Beijing central court In the case of "the first case of forgetting in China", the case of "the first case of forgetting" formally brought the system of forgetting right into the public view, guiding more people to be forgotten and memorizing today, and reexamine this history is new, and the policy is also commercial. As a new topic in the wave of the Internet, the system is born. Although it has been confirmed by a case of the European Court of justice, it can also see its legislative spirit in the "network security law" promulgated by China in November 2016, so it can be seen that the construction of the system of the right to be forgotten is closely related to the development of the information society of our country. On the legal level, whether we can solve the new issue by expanding the definition of the concept of legal concept and using the rights and obligations determined by the existing legal concepts, or by constructing new legal concepts to redefine the rights and obligations among people in the present big data age, and To establish a new legal system, such as reconstructing the rights and obligations relationship and how to adjust the formula to be reasonable, these are questions that need to be pondered. The expansion of globalization and network virtual space aggravates the burden of the traditional legal system, making it "unbearable", and the new and relatively stable law after a thousand years of human race. The system has been impacted unprecedented. The article starts with the hundreds of disputes arising from the first case of the right to be forgotten in our country, and then compares the different attitudes of the EU and the United States in the treatment of the right to be forgotten and the legislative logic behind it, thereby gradually analyzing the legal attributes of the right to be forgotten, and by means of a word analysis and illustrations. In order to locate the right of the right to the right to be forgotten in the personality system, the article completely falls on the specific design of the system of the right to be forgotten in our country. In the process of the localization of the system of the right to be forgotten, the details of the specific content of the right to be forgotten and the protection of the tort law are elaborated in detail.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D922.16

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張建文;;被遺忘權(quán)的場域思考及與隱私權(quán)、個人信息權(quán)的關(guān)系[J];重慶郵電大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2017年01期

2 張藝馳;;淺析大數(shù)據(jù)背景下的“被遺忘權(quán)”[J];中國報(bào)業(yè);2016年18期

3 冉克平;丁超俊;;隱私權(quán)與個人信息權(quán)的界分——以司法判決為中心的分析[J];天津法學(xué);2016年03期

4 趙銳;;被遺忘權(quán):理性評判與法律構(gòu)造[J];北京理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2016年05期

5 張建文;高完成;;被遺忘權(quán)的本體論及本土化研究[J];吉首大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2016年03期

6 段衛(wèi)利;;論被遺忘權(quán)的法律保護(hù)——兼談被遺忘權(quán)在人格權(quán)譜系中的地位[J];學(xué)習(xí)與探索;2016年04期

7 劉召成;;論具體人格權(quán)的生成[J];法學(xué);2016年03期

8 鄭志峰;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)社會的被遺忘權(quán)研究[J];法商研究;2015年06期

9 方金華;;一般人格權(quán)理論分析及我國的立法選擇[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2015年04期

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

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前5條

1 高完成;陳毅清;;“被遺忘權(quán)”究竟是怎樣的權(quán)利[N];檢察日報(bào);2016年

2 江中帆;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)，，能否把我的糗事“遺忘”[N];檢察日報(bào);2016年

3 周

本文編號：1829874