脑机接口技术应用背景下神经权利的证立与穿透式保护  

Establishment and Penetrating Protection of Neural Rights against the Background of Brain-computer Interfaces

作　　者：童云峰[1] TONG Yunfeng

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学中国法治战略研究院

出　　处：《暨南学报（哲学社会科学版）》2024年第8期65-78,共14页Jinan Journal(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

基　　金：上海市哲学社会科学规划课题青年项目“数字时代个人信息权益的全生命周期刑法保护研究”(2023EFX010)。

摘　　要：神经技术使以认知自由权、精神隐私权、精神完整性权利和心理连续性权利为内容的神经权利得以彰显,作为数字人权的神经权利包含公法权利和私法权利的双重内容。然而,传统权利均无法充分涵摄神经权利,凸显规范与新兴技术之间的代际鸿沟。对此,应穿透数字社会与物理社会、不同法律部门之间的壁垒,塑造保护神经权利的领域法。在私法层面,通过合理解释一般人格权和类推适用具体人格权来保护神经权利,未来可以将神经权利纳入民法典中的人格权体系。在公法层面,政府应充分履行保护神经权利的国家义务,督促企业履行合规义务,规范公民合理使用神经技术产品。在刑法层面,串联数据犯罪、信息犯罪和人身犯罪,塑造保护神经权利的罪名体系。In recent years,digital technologies have been constantly updated and iterated,and neural technology products represented by brain-computer interfaces are moving from the laboratory to people s daily life.While improving people s life and enhancing human body function,neurotechnology products bring many legal risks and ethical crises.It is necessary to find reasonable legal regulation methods to avoid the risks while exploring the value of neural technology.However,most of the existing studies only focus on a single risk and do not put forward a systematic legal regulation scheme,do not find a balance between technological innovation and risk aversion,and cannot get out of the Collingridge dilemma faced by neural technologies.Only by finding the legal solution to solve the dilemma can we promote the healthy development of neural technologies.We search and read relevant literature from the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI)database,Duxiu database Wanfang database,and HeinOnline database,and relevant written judgments from the China Judgements Online and PKULAW database.We also carry out surveys in Internet companies and emerging neurotech companies,aiming to find the merits and demerits of the existing theoretical research results,understand the judgment principles of cases of judicial practice,and gain insight into the actual situation of technological development and legal needs.A comprehensive approach of comparative study,empirical study,and case study is adopted to find a Chinese solution to balance technological innovation and risk avoidance.Citizens should be granted neural rights,including the rights to cognitive freedom,spiritual privacy,spiritual integrity and psychological continuity.As digital human rights,neural rights should contain the content of both public law rights and private law rights.However,traditional rights cannot fully include neural rights,highlighting the intergenerational gap between norms and emerging technologies.In this regard,the barriers between the digital society,p

关 键 词：神经权利 数字人权 公法权利 私法权利 脑机接口 

分 类 号：D9[政治法律—法学]