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:贺嘉航 方燕[1] He Jiahang;Fang Yan
机构地区:[1]中国社会科学院大学
出 处:《价格理论与实践》2022年第12期44-48,共5页Price:Theory & Practice
摘 要:本文通过梳理探究欧美国家当前在反垄断政策和隐私保护之间关系的研究进展,揭示出制止和预防大数据带来的竞争缺乏和隐私安全方面的风险同等重要。反垄断政策强调充分有序竞争,或许对补救隐私侵害无效,不适宜简单将隐私安全问题纳入反垄断范畴进行分析。基于市场机制在隐私保护中存在的不足,应寻求反垄断政策和隐私政策各司其职的基础上适当合作。采取有针对性的立法途径,以清晰界定出互联网公司在数据收集、运用、管理等方面的权利义务。It combed and explored the current research progress in the relationship between anti-monopoly policies and privacy protection in Europe and the United States, and revealed that it is equally important to prevent and stop the lack of competition brought about by big data and risks in privacy security. The anti-monopoly policy emphasizes full and orderly competition, which may be ineffective in remedying privacy violations. It is not appropriate to simply include privacy security issues into the anti-monopoly category for analysis. Based on the shortcomings of market mechanism in privacy protection, we should seek appropriate cooperation on the basis of anti-monopoly policy and privacy policy. Take targeted legislative approaches to clearly define the rights and obligations of Internet companies in terms of data collection, application, management, etc.
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:216.73.216.227