摘要
在数字经济快速发展的时代背景下,数据主体能否基于个人数据享有收益权是个充满争议的问题。从基本事实而言,个人数据无价值论的论据难以成立。作为数字时代的产消者,个人既是生产者,也是生产资料,同时还是消费者。数据获取和利用的全过程充分彰显了数据的附身性以及赖由其决定的数据经济价值。伴随劳动创造价值与按劳分配理念在不同时代条件下的不断演变,“数据即劳动”为数据主体拥有数据收益权奠定了正当性基础。“数据即劳动”强调数据主体在数据价值创造中的实质贡献,进而主张数据主体获得应得的经济回报,以纠正目前完全不对等的利益分配格局,但是其并不否定和排斥企业的数据收益权。个人数据收益权可以经由数据交易模式、双向付费模式为代表的个人数据货币化方式以及数字服务税、数据信托为代表的集体转移支付方式实现。相较而言,由于我国存在集体转移支付的制度传统和相对成熟的工会体制,集体转移支付比个人数据货币化具有更大的制度优势。此外,在数字化时代,一味强调数据主体对数据的绝对所有权和绝对的自主控制并不现实,数据产权结构设计应注重个人利益、行业和企业利益以及公共利益的平衡。因此个人数据收益权尚需接受个人数据敏感性的内在限制与源于公共利益目的、契约履行目的等特定利用目的的外在限制。
Under the background of the rapid development of digital economy,whether data subjects can enjoy the right to benefit based on personal data is still a controversial issue.In basic facts,the argument that personal data is worthless is unconfirmed.As“prosumers”in the digital age,data subjects are both producers and means of production,as well as consumers.The whole process of data acquisition and utilization fully demonstrates the data adhesiveness and the economic value of data determined by data adhesiveness.With the continuous evolution of labor distribution concept under different times,“data as labor”has laid a legitimate foundation for data subjects to have the right of data income.“Data as labor”emphasizes the substantive contribution of data subjects in the creation of data value,and then advocates that data subjects receive the economic returns they deserve,so as to correct the current pattern of completely unequal distribution of interests,but it does not deny the right of enterprises to data revenue.The right of personal data income can be realized through the monetization of personal data represented by the data transaction mode and the two-way payment mode as well as the collective transfer payment method represented by digital service tax and data trust.In contrast,due to the existence of the system tradition of collective transfer payments and the relatively mature trade union system in China,collective transfer payments have greater advantages than personal data monetization.In addition,it is unrealistic to blindly emphasize the absolute ownership and absolute autonomy of data subjects in the digital era,and the design of data property rights structure should pay attention to the balance of personal interests,industry interests and public interests.The income right from personal data is subject to inherent limitations in the sensitivity of personal data and external restrictions derived from specific use purposes,such as public interest purposes and contract performance purposes.
出处
《深圳社会科学》
2023年第3期120-132,共13页
Social Sciences in Shenzhen
基金
国家社会科学基金重大项目“数字网络空间的知识产权治理体系研究”(19ZDA164)。
