从死后即焚到数字永生?——关于个人数字遗产的探讨  

From Immediate Cremation After Death to Digital Immortality?-An Analysis of Personal Digital Heritage

作　　者：张富利 Zhang Fuli(Law School,Guangxi Normal University,Guilin 541006,P.R.China)

机构地区：[1]广西师范大学法学院,桂林541006

出　　处：《山东大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2024年第2期166-179,共14页Journal of Shandong University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

基　　金：福建省高校以马克思主义为指导的哲学社会科学学科基础理论研究重点项目“数字法治政府建设研究”(FJ2023MGCA041)。

摘　　要：数字时代,不具有财产性的个人数字信息以其承载的无法量化的情感价值,依然能够成为数字遗产。超人类主义在此类问题上始终抱着乐观的态度,这种进路试图创设继承了个人所有数字记忆、数字信息的“虚拟人”或社交机器人,将个人数字遗产的留存转换为“数字永生”。这一进路并不足取,面临着诸多疑难:“数字自我”能否作为“人”的权利尚未统一,且有悖于数字平等,成为现实世界不平等图景的投射。而人们追求的“数字永生”应通过个人数字遗产的合理保护与传承来实现。实践中,甄别适格数字遗产管理人、探索个人数字墓地的管理规则更为迫切。在数字遗产理想继承人的选择上,数字平台虽然与数字遗产被继承人有着直接关系,却并非个人数字遗产的适格继承主体,推出“数字账号管理员”照管个人“数字墓地”是解决个人数字遗产问题较为可行的进路。The definition of digital heritage in the era of the internet is facing new challenges.In the digital age,personal digital information without property value can still become digital heritage due to its unquantifiable emotional value.Digital heritage not only includes digital assets such as online banking accounts and virtual currencies in people’s traditional beliefs,but also includes all digital assets that can constitute“individuals themselves.”The digital self and its unquantifiable emotional value can both become digital heritage.The characteristic of digital heritage is“virtual”,which determines its high degree of dependence and must rely on online platforms to exist.Digital heritage is generated by platforms,and the user’s usufruct and the dominance right is incomplete and limited.The virtual degree of digital heritage is directly proportional to the degree of dependence to online platforms: the higher the virtual degree of property, the higher the dependence to online platforms, and the stronger the platform’s discourse power;On the contrary, the lower the virtual degree of property, the weaker the dependence on online platforms, and the stronger the legal protection for digital heritage inheritance. Super-humanism always holds an optimistic attitude towards such issues, attempting to create “virtual humans” or social robots that inherit all personal digital memories and information, transforming the preservation of personal digital heritage into “digital immortality”. This approach is not feasible and faces many challenges: whether the “digital self” can serve as a “human” right has not yet been unified, and it goes against digital equality, becoming a projection of the unequal landscape in the real world. The super-humanistic approach of reshaping the “digital self” and achieving “digital immortality” through digital heritage is not advisable, as it is only the wishful thinking of some technology workers. From the value level to the institutional level, the only way

关 键 词：数字遗产 数字自我 继承主体 数字墓地 数字永生 

分 类 号：F49[经济管理—产业经济] D922.16[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学] D923[政治法律—法学]