|
|
|
| Cultivating Data Factor Market: Legal Dilemmas, Foreign Experiences and Chinese Countermeasures |
| Zhao Xin1,2 |
| (1.Civil, Commercial and Economic Law School, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing 100091, China;2.School of Law, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 999014,Belgium) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract With the development of algorithms and computing power, the mass available data continues to play a role in improving productivity. This paper gives answers to question of how data become the new factor of production and analyze the theoretical and practical basis of data as a new factor of production, and then explores the legal issues related to data ownership, data trading rules and data market supervision. These three aspects are closely related to the cultivation of data market. The purpose of this paper is to analyze these legal problems and their solutions in Europe and the United States, and finally put forward the strategies and methods to deal with the failure of data market and cultivate China′s data market. To be specific, data market cultivation is faced with three problems. The first is the problem of property right system of data. The uncertainty of the ownership of personal and non-personal data hinders the development and utilization of data, making the data trading inefficient. The second is the problem of data market trading rules, which is manifested as the single function of data trading platform and the homogeneity of data products, making trading outside the platform a prevalence. In addition, there are various classification standards of data products, and unified data product pricing standards are missing, which makes it impossible to form a unified data market. The third is the problem of data market regulation. Data unfair competition and data monopoly damage the legitimate rights and interests of data consumers and data enterprises, and disturb the order of the data market.#br#To solve these problems, this paper adopts the comparative research method. Through the analysis of the European Union and the United States' solutions and methods,it tries to find the experience that can be used for reference for the cultivation of China′s data market. As for the problem of property right system of data, there are debates on if data belongs to property, and some ideas such as individuals can own property right, quasi-property right or the right control over data can be strengthened. As for the problem of data market trading rules, whether personal data can be traded as property right involves the contradiction between personal privacy protection and data collection and use. It should be from the perspective of balancing privacy security and economic efficiency to answer and analyze whether personal data can be traded as property right. Making data a property right does not mean an absolute freedom of contract in data transaction. Personal data transaction should still be restricted by general contract rules and court discretion, and how to strengthen personal data control in enterprise data transfer and sharing should be explored based on sound technical infrastructure and regulatory framework. As for the problem of data market regulation, the United States adopts the methods of data antitrust and consumer data privacy protection. On the basis of strengthening personal data rights, the EU gives the digital gatekeeper prior obligations related to antitrust, consumer protection and privacy protection and other basic rights.#br#It is concluded that in order to cultivate China′s data market, it is necessary to innovate the regulatory rules of China′s data market based on absorbing foreign experience.As for the regulatory rules, the first is to establish a data property right system of integrating "data producer (extended rights) and data processor (limited property rights)", i.e., to establish the basic principle of "who produces, who owns" in data property rights. On this basis, the corresponding property rights are allocated to the data processor, taking into account the non property rights and property rights of the original data producer. The second is to improve the trading rules of data factor market with the idea of "reducing institutional cost—reducing transaction cost", which means to guide the comprehensive pilot by industrial policy so as to optimize the structure of data trading platforms, reduce transaction cost by scientific and reasonable standard of data product classification, clarify data pricing rules and pricing elements, and strengthen the price management and supervision of data elements. The third is to improve the legal system of data factor market′s supervision by combining pre-prevention and post-regulation. In order to prevent possible data anti-competitive and monopolistic behaviors, the main content of pre-prevention is classified management, subdivision of actors′ responsibilities and prior declaration. Post-regulation mainly includes the penalties for abuse of market dominance, unfair competition and other administrative or criminal penalties, and it should be specified only after the revision and improvement of relevant laws, so as to jointly promote the healthy and orderly development of data market by combining with the pre-prevention.#br#
|
|
Received: 28 February 2022
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] 陈兵,赵秉元.数据要素市场高质量发展的竞争法治推进[J].上海财经大学学报,2021，23(2):3-16.[2] 薛克鹏.经济法基本范畴研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2013:91.[3] PRINS C.When personal data, behavior and virtual identities become a community:would a property rights approach matter[J].SCRIPT-ed,2002,3(4):270-303.[4] ROSNER GILAD.Who owns your data[C].ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing,2014.[5] 崔淑洁.数据权属界定及“卡一梅框架”下数据保护利用规则体系构建[J].广东财经大学学报,2020，35(6)：80-90.[6] PETER K YU.Data producer′s right and the protection of machine-generated data[J].Tulane Law Review,2019,93(4)：859-930.[7] 邱子迅,周亚虹.数字经济发展与地区全要素生产率——基于国家级大数据综合试验区的分析[J].财经研究,2021，67(7)：4-17.[8] 杨东,臧俊恒.数字平台的反垄断规制[J].武汉大学学报（哲学社会科学版）,2021，16(2):160-171.[9] 戚聿东,刘欢欢.数字经济下数据的生产要素属性及其市场化配置机制研究[J].经济纵横,2020，36(11):63-76.[10] 中国青年报.我国计算力水平位居全球第二[EB/OL].(2022-03-28)[2022-04-07].https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1728530772007971492&wfr=spider&for=pc.[11] 田杰棠,刘露瑶.交易模式、权利界定与数据要素市场培育[J].改革,2020，33(7):17-26.[12] 王佳佳.掠夺性创新的反垄断规制[J].电子知识产权,2020，30(6):71-84.[13] 薛克鹏,赵鑫.民法典时代我国消费者权表达体系的冗余困境与化解路径[J].法治社会，2021，6(3):21-33.[14] MURPHY R S.Property rights in personal information:an economic defense of privacy[J].Geo.LJ,1995,84(5):2381.[15] POSNER R A.The economics of justice[M].Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1983:235-253.[16] SAMUELSON P.Privacy as intellectual property[J].Stan.L.Rev.,1999,52(5):1125-1151.[17] BERGELSON V.It′s personal but is it mine-toward property rights in personal information[J].UC Davis L.Rev.,2003,37(5):379.[18] PRAINSACK B.Logged out:ownership,exclusion and public value in the digital data and information commons[J].Big Data & Society,2019,6(1):2-21.[19] 孙远钊.论数据相关的权利保护和问题——美国与欧盟相关规制的梳理与比较[J].知识产权研究，2021,28(1):3-90,285.[20] GRAEF I,TOMBAL T,DE STREEL A.Limits and enablers of data sharing:an analytical framework for EU competition,data protection and consumer law[J].Hastings Sci.& Tech.LJ,2019,20(5):78-92.[21] Congress Enacts the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data (CLOUD) Act.Reshaping US law governing cross-border access to data[J].The American Journal of International Law,2018,112(3):487-493.[22] SECCHIAROLI M.Antitrust in the digital economy:big tech as an impetus for a renewal in American antitrust[J].The American Journal of International Law,2020,114(5):56-71.[23] PALMIERI III N F.Who should regulate data:an analysis of the California consumer privacy act and its effects on nationwide data protection laws[J].Hastings Sci.& Tech.LJ,2020,11(5):37-51.[24] CAMHI R,LYON S.What is the California consumer privacy act[J].Risk Management,2018,65(9):12-14.[25] ALBRECHT J P.How the GDPR will change the world[J].Eur.Data Prot.L.Rev.,2016,2(2):287-300.[26] IBANEZ COLOMO P.The draft digital markets act:a legal and institutional analysis[J].Journal of European Competition Law & Practice,2021,12(7):561-575.[27] PEREIRA M.Taming Europe′s digital landscape:brief notes on the proposal for a Digital Services Act[J].UNIO-EU Law Journal,2021,7(2):77-99.[28] 童楠楠,窦悦,刘钊因.中国特色数据要素产权制度体系构建研究[J].电子政务,2022,19(2):12-20.[29] 朱虎.人格权何以成为民事权利[J].法学评论，2021,42(5):59-69.[30] 杨东.区块链让众筹和共票成为中国原创的制度理论[J].金融博览，2018,23(10):36-37.[31] 曾铮,王磊.数据要素市场基础性制度：突出问题与构建思路[J].宏观经济研究,2021,43(3):85-101.[32] 周林彬,马恩斯.大数据确权的法律经济学分析[J].东北师大学报（哲学社会科学版）,2018,68(2):36-45.[33] 于立,王建林.生产要素理论新论——兼论数据要素的共性和特性[J].经济与管理研究,2020,41(4):62-73.[34] 李爱君.数据要素市场培育法律制度建构[J].法学杂志,2021,25(9):17-28.[35] 王卫,张梦君,王晶.国内外大数据交易平台调研分析[J].情报杂志,2019，26(2):181-186.[36] 杨东,周鑫.数字经济反垄断国际最新发展与理论重构[J].中国应用法学,2021，5(3):97-111. |
|
|
|
