检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:沈贵明[1] 刘源 SHEN Gui-ming;LIU Yuan(School of Economics and Law,East China University of Political Science and Law,Shanghai 200000,China)
出 处:《中国流通经济》2021年第1期89-96,共8页China Business and Market
基 金:国家社会科学基金一般项目“预算法视野下政府产业投资基金法律规制研究”(19BFX170)。
摘 要:数字经济背景下,企业间因实施数据抓取行为而引发的纠纷屡见不鲜。在网络用户数据权利属性不明确的情况下,实践中多采用对私法规范进行扩张解释的规制路径。随着对数据抓取行为违法性认识的日益深入,司法机关逐渐转向适用反不正当竞争法一般条款对数据抓取纠纷进行裁决。分析当前比较典型的数据抓取不正当竞争案件的判决可以发现,现有数据抓取不正当竞争纠纷案件裁判中存在过度依赖一般条款、诚实信用与商业道德原则判断标准模糊、互联网条款适用空间受限等问题。因此,为更好地实现对数据抓取行为的反不正当竞争法规制,一要确立一般条款的谦抑原则,遵循市场优先理念,以防止司法阻碍市场创新;二要改变司法机关以三重授权为标准判断数据抓取行为是否违反商业道德的裁判思路,尊重企业对获得用户基本授权的数据进行加工所享有的正当权益;三要细化一般条款的判断标准,按照比例原则构建网络用户授权、成本投入、社会公益等多层次商业道德判断标准;四要协调一般条款与互联网条款的适用关系,通过个案平衡或构建新型互联网专项条款规制数据抓取行为。Under the background of digital economy,disputes caused by data capture behavior between enterprises are common.In the context of unclear right attribute of network user data,the regulation path of expanding interpretation of general private law norms is mostly adopted in practice.With the deepening understanding of the illegality of data capture,judicial organs gradually turn to apply the general provisions of anti-unfair competition law to judge disputes over data capture behavior.There are some problems in the judgment of data capture cases of unfair competition,such as excessive reliance on general provision,vague judgment standards of"good faith"and"business ethics",and limited space for the application of Internet provision.In order to realize the regulation of anti-unfair competition law against data capture,first,we should,establish the principle of modesty of general clauses and follow the idea of market superiority to prevent the hindering of market innovation;second,the judicial organ should change the judgment thinking of"triple authorization"as the standard to judge whether data capture behavior violates business ethics,and respect enterprises’legitimate right in data capture and process;third,we should detail the judgement standard of general provisions,and construct the multi-level judgment standards of network user authorization,cost input,social public welfare and so on according to the proportion of them;and fourth,coordinate the application relationship between general terms and Internet terms,and regulate data capture behavior by means of case balancing or constructing new Internet special provision,which are the basic paths to solve the regulatory dilemma of data capture behavior against unfair competition law.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15