論數據財產權與在先權利的關係

數據財產權與在先權利是兩個獨立的權利。數據財產權來源於合法的數據收集行為，而非來源於在先權利人的授權，相關在先權利會對數據財產權的權能造成限制，但是對數據不具有直接的支配關係。出於權利的價值位階與保護次序等因素，在先權利應當獲得優先保護，在先權利係數據財產權的限制而非無效事由，數據權利人對於在先權利的實現負有容忍義務。數據權利人違反容忍義務，將導致數據財產權的過度擴張，在先權利無法實現。在先權利亦有邊界，應當根據信息的公開程度、數據的匿名化程度以及在先權利的行使是否正當等因素綜合判斷。由於人格權較財產權有更高的價值位階，在先人格權利人可以任意撤回“同意”，儘管數據權利人的信賴利益會因允諾的違背而受損，但是在先人格權利人不需支付補償。前進損失可通過市場機制調節，未來數據產業商業模式將由“免費”轉向“付費”，數據財產權與在先權利將實現再平衡。

Data property right and the prior right are two separate kinds of right. Data property right originates from the legitimate act of data collection, not from the authorization of the prior right holder. The relevant prior right may limit the function of data property right, but it does not have a direct dominant relationship to the data. Due to the value of the right and the order of protection, the prior right should be given priority protection, the prior right is a limitation of data property right rather than a cause of invalidity. Data right holders have an obligation to tolerate the realization of the prior right. Violation of such obligation by the data right holder will lead to excessive expansion of the data property right and the prior right cannot be realized. The prior right also has boundaries, which should be judged according to the degree of information disclosure, the degree of data anonymization, and whether the exercise of the prior right is justified. Since personality rights have a higher value than property rights, prior personality rights holders can withdraw their consent. Although the trust interests of data rights holders will be damaged because of the violation of promise, the prior personality rights holders are not required to pay compensation. The aforementioned damages can be adjusted through the market mechanism, the business model of the data industry will shift from“free”to“paid,”and a rebalancing between data property right and prior rights will be realized in the future.