隐私权民法保护的制度设计

隐私权是自然人所应具有的一项基本人权,应当构建完整法律体系实现对隐私权有效、合理保护。司法实践中对隐私权保护存在人格利益非权利化、利益维护间接化和具体侵权行为界定不明确等缺憾。对隐私权的保护应使隐私利益具体权利化;科学界定隐私权;厘清隐私权与其他人格权利界限;以列举方式明确规定具体侵权行为形态。     

Cookie跟踪中的隐私权保护——美国经验与中国选择

Cookie跟踪侵犯用户隐私已是不争的事实。以"双击诉讼"(Double Click Inc.Privacy Litig.)为代表的美国经验表明,否认Cookie跟踪隐私权侵权责任的成立,在主观要件、损害后果等裁判理由的背后,是隐私权保护让位于互联网行业发展的侵权法理念与价值选择。在我国《侵权责任法》的立法与司法现状之下,Cookie跟踪隐私权侵权责任的成立亦面临制度困境。但网络隐私安全的情感需求日益强烈、技术进步逐渐抵消互联网商业成本的发展趋势表明,应明确网络服务商对用户隐私的注意义务,在一般过错责任原则的框架下重新解释隐私权侵权责任的构成要件。因应社会发展,隐私权的内涵也由此获得了丰富和扩展。     

公民网络隐私权的国际私法保护制度研究——以国际民事管辖权为视角

公民网络隐私权是传统隐私权在网络传播领域内的延伸,网络传播媒介快速发展的同时,使得侵犯公民网络隐私权案件具有空间上的随意性。公民网络隐私权的跨国界流通,各主权国家的重视,表明在国际私法层面来研究对网络隐私权的保护具有必要性,特别是以国际民事管辖权这样一个新的视角,以期提供一种更好的方式来保护公民网络隐私权。对协调国际民事管辖权冲突的一般原则和管辖权理论作了探析,随之进行管辖权的分类,在比较国际私法上考察,提出了对中国有益的启示问题。     

非物质文化遗产的法律保护

法律对非物质文化遗产的保护极其重要。非物质文化遗产的文化属性的内在要求、保持非物质文化遗产原真性及传承非物质文化遗产的要求需要公法强力介入,以加强非物质文化遗产的保护;非物质文化遗产财产属性的内在要求、非物质文化遗产传承的要求和利益平衡的要求需要私法的适度调节,以利于非物质文化遗产的保护。因此,公法、私法互补共存的保护模式是非物质文化遗产的法律保护模式。     

论网络环境下的隐私权保护

网络时代对隐私权的保护有技术保护和立法保护两种。而法律规范调整着社会个体的行为,违反法律将受到法律的惩戒,法律以其权威性和平衡性维护着社会秩序,网络应理所当然地纳入法律的调控中。但在当前,网络法律的制定远远落后于网络的发展,特别是在我国,至今没有一部系统全面保护隐私权的立法,至于针对网络时代个人数据的保护更是没有法律依据。综合考虑我国的立法状况和网络时代侵犯隐私权的特征,我国的立法可以从以下几个方面来弥补这一空白。     

论患者隐私权保护中的权利冲突与平衡

医疗活动的特殊性,决定了在诊疗实践中患者隐私权与其他权利发生矛盾冲突的现象时有发生,并成为社会大众关注的焦点.尽管《侵权责任法》在法律的层面确立了患者的隐私权,但是对患者隐私权保护中的权利冲突问题未作规定,司法实践中也尚未形成统一的解决对策.现实中,患者隐私权保护冲突表现为患者隐私权与医疗机构的教学权、公众知情权、他人知情权以及与医方的医疗知情权的冲突,权利冲突的实质是利益的冲突、价值的冲突、认知的冲突以及文化的冲突.基于此,应坚持权利冲突的平衡原则,包括权利位阶原则、社会公共利益优先原则、权利协调原则以及必要限度的原则.     

数据库法律保护方式论争分析

数据库的保护模式问题在国际层面依然处于争论阶段,针对独创性的选择或者编排在数据库的开发、维护中的作用和地位越来越淡化,投资越来越起决定性作用的现实情况,双重保护模式由于其采用独创性和投资两个不同的保护标准而造成对权利人保护的过度或不足而不宜采用,多重保护模式除具备双重模式的不足外,任意模式的融入又对问题的解决增加了难度和复杂性。单一的特殊权利保护模式则可以弥补其他保护模式的缺陷,一方面对电子数据库和非电子数据库规定同等水平的保护,规定判断的大致标准,并将自由裁量的权力交由司法机关;另一方面规定特殊权利例外和限制,同时规定特殊权利的保护期限,有利于对数据库进行统一的保护,方便数据库制作者行使权力。     

美国隐私权刑法保护之评析

隐私权是现代社会最为重要的新兴基本人权之一,而美国是世界上最早对隐私权进行系统研究并且予以立法保护的国家,从美国隐私权保护的法律法规及其条文数量来看,世界上任何一个国家都难以望其项背.在隐私权刑法保护方面,美国也积累了丰富的理论经验,但由于美国通常在隐私权保护的单行立法中,分散性设置隐私犯罪及其刑事责任,因而其在隐私权刑法保护方面缺乏整体规划,具有就事论事的片面性,导致隐私刑法保护体系上的不协调.故此尽管美国隐私权刑法保护规范条文众多,但其效果却难尽人意.而中国在隐私权刑法保护立法方面,应当汲取美国隐私权刑法保护分散式立法模式所带来的教训,采取整体性隐私权刑事立法模式以切实满足打击隐私犯罪的需要.     

互联网金融的风险及其治理

近几年,互联网金融迅速发展,引起社会广泛关注。互联网金融的重要特点之一是风险性。互联网金融风险有五种类型：网络技术风险;业务管理风险;货币政策风险;法律法规风险;各种犯罪风险。互联网金融风险有五个特点：并存性;多样性;虚拟性;超越性;速发性。互联网金融风险治理应遵循的原则：支持鼓励与规范管理相结合;行业行政监管与企业市场自律相结合;技术措施和管理措施相结合;保护用户利益与保护企业利益相结合;行政手段与宣传教育相结合;国内治理与国际治理相结合。互联网金融风险治理对策建议：构建互联网金融安全体系;加强对互联网金融风险的监督管理;堵塞技术漏洞,降低技术风险;加强行业企业的市场自律,自觉防范风险;加强信息披露,减少信息不对称引发的风险;完善法律法规,防范法律风险;打击互联网金融犯罪行为;借鉴国外经验,加强国际合作。     

中国电子商务领域隐私数据保护研究

随着中国电子商务行业的迅速发展,企业管理的用户个人隐私数据也开始面临新的风险,不慎泄漏、不当使用和恶意侵害用户隐私信息的情况时有发生。由于我国相关法律制度缺失、行业管理失范以及监督认证机制缺位,导致这一领域用户个人信息和隐私数据的保护长期处于较低水平,这不仅不利于个人信息权利和隐私权利的保护,也直接影响到电子商务企业在国际市场的信用度和竞争力。为此,应尽快从国家层面制定统一的个人信息保护法典,改变现有的低效力和分散管理的立法模式;整合政府互联网管理职能部门,组建统一的监管执行机构;逐步实现行业协会事实上的独立,完善行业自律规范,消除行业协会组织与其成员之间的利益鸿沟。同时,设置隐私保护的第三方认证机构,加强对电子商务企业的监督,并推动行业内部形成符合国际标准的隐私政策范例。     

Consumer Privacy: Balancing Economic and Justice Considerations

Consumer privacy is at the center of an ongoing debate among business leaders, privacy activists, and government officials. Although corporations face competitive pressures to collect and use personal information about their customers, many consumers find some methods of collection and use of their personal information unfair. We present a justice theory framework that illustrates how consumer privacy concerns are shaped by the perceived fairness of corporate information practices. We describe a set of global principles, fair information practices, which were developed to balance consumer privacy concerns with an organization's need to use personal information. We conclude by discussing three alternatives for implementing fair information practices with particular attention to the Internet: government regulation, industry self-regulation, and technological solutions .     

Changing the default setting for information privacy protection: What and whose personal information can be better protected?

With Internet service providers (ISPs) increasingly demanding personal information to develop personalized services, people have become more vulnerable to privacy infringement. As a way to protect individuals’ privacy, industrialized countries have implemented a “notice-and-consent” requirement, meaning an ISP must obtain users’ consent to collect personal information in the course of the ISP's business. Drawing on prospect theory and earlier work on information privacy and behavioral science, in this study, we administered an online survey experiment to test whether the giving of consent differs between ‘opt-in’ and ‘opt-out’ frames. The framing effect was found to be moderated by personal information type, people's attitudes toward privacy, and people's privacy infringement experience. The results indicate that the opt-in frame better protects users’ information privacy, and the framing effect is magnified when the targeted information concerns online activities, when users have weakly held privacy attitudes, and when users have less experience of privacy infringement.     

作为基本权的劳动权国家保护义务

劳动权国家保护义务存在不同的审查基准，在审查“国家如何尽其保护义务”时，应以“过度禁止”作为侵害的界限，以“不足禁止”作为保护的底线；在审查“国家应保护到什么程度”时，应以自由权为上限，以人性尊严为下限；劳动权国家保护义务还需以以法治国、比例原则为基准。劳动权国家保护义务涉及“加害者－受害者－国家”三方关系，容易使一方受益而另一方受损，因此保护义务亦存在一定的界限。     

Sharing personal information in the child protection context: Impediments in the Australian legal framework

Professionals, including social workers, in the child protection context are frequently required to make decisions on whether to share sensitive personal information about children, their families, and others with colleagues and across institutional and jurisdictional boundaries. Sharing information across agencies and organisations is essential to allow joined‐up service provision and to effectively protect and support children and their families. A legal framework that supports this decision making is a necessary, although not sufficient, condition for effective information sharing. This article examines the complex legal framework that governs information sharing across the Australian states and territories. It identifies a number of structural and regulatory elements that unnecessarily limit information sharing or have a tendency to create a culture that is risk averse, rather than proactive, in sharing information. The article suggests structural and regulatory reforms that would improve the legal framework for sharing information, while at the same time giving due recognition to the human rights that come into tension in this policy context: the right to privacy and the rights of the child.     

有关我国隐私权问题的探讨

隐私权是世界法学领域中出现很晚的一门研究课题。直至二十世纪六十年后 ,它才被国际社会和多国确认为予以保护的民事权利。享有人身权利的中国公民的隐私权不仅应受天气预报他人尊重 ,而且应以专门立法来实现宪法赋予公民的民主权利     

The importance of type, amount, and timing of internet use for understanding psychological distress

Objective. Few social scientists have examined how Internet usage, including using the Internet for health purposes, may affect mental health. This study assesses whether the type or amount of online health activities and the timing of Internet use are associated with psychological distress.Methods. We use data from the National Cancer Institute's 2005 Health Information National Trends Survey.Results. When we compare Internet users to non-Internet users, using the Internet and using the Internet for health purposes are negatively associated with distress. However, among Internet users, the number of online health activities is positively associated with distress. Greater distress is also associated with using the Internet on weekdays and looking online for information on sun protection.Conclusions. Internet usage is not necessarily positively associated with psychological distress. The effects depend on the type, amount, and timing of Internet usage.     

社会工作实务中保密原则的伦理困境解决——基于隐私权和知情权的分析

在社会工作实务过程中要求案主透露大量信息,而且随着工作关系不断深入,这些信息的广度和深度也将不断增加。很自然地,案主会非常关心社会工作者会怎样对待和使用这些信息,因此对案主有关资料的保密,既是社会工作专业伦理的要求,也是社会工作者的道德要求,同时这也会影响到案主对社会工作者的信任,进而影响到干预的效果。但是这种保密也不是绝对的,在有些情况下,社会工作者又不得不打破保密原则,这就使得保密原则陷入了伦理困境。怎样才能处理好这一困境？笔者从隐私权和知情权的角度进行了分析,以期得到一个较好的解决方案。     

个人征信中私人权益与社会整体利益的协调

市场经济是信用经济,征信制度由来已久。我国的个人征信还处于起步阶段,需要不断完善和发展。在个人征信中,信息个人享有充分的权益,如知情权、隐私权等。对此,应采取法律措施给予充分保护,并注意处理好私人权益与社会整体利益的矛盾,在尊重、维护私人权益的前提下,促进社会整体利益的持续稳定发展。     

Social and Political Dimensions of Privacy

This article provides a framework for analyzing privacy in modern societies, defining information privacy and describing three levels that structure the values assigned to privacy. After describing a contemporary privacy baseline (1945–1960), these concepts are applied to social and political privacy developments in three contemporary eras of steadily growing privacy concerns and societal responses across citizen-government, employee-employer, and consumer-business relationships in 1961–1979, 1980–1989, and 1990–2002. Each period is described in terms of new technology applications, changing social climates, and organizational and legal developments. Effects of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on privacy balances are analyzed and predictions for future privacy developments are presented. The relationship of articles in this issue to the author's framework is noted throughout.     

Safe Harbors or Free Frontiers? Privacy and Transborder Data Flows

This article explores the issues surrounding the harmonization of privacy or data protection during the last 30 years. It begins with a history of the conflict over transborder data flows and then proceeds to analyze current national and regional policy debates about the feasibility of policy solutions to address problems that are integral to global communications and economic networks. Ongoing discussions between the European Union and the United States over Safe Harbor Principles provide data for exploring these issues. The article concludes with an analysis of whether harmonization of privacy and data protection policies is likely to evolve through existing processes and institutions .