| 英文摘要 |
In cyberspace, default rules， which serve as a “presumed consent” option, reduce the cost of consumers choice and improve the efficiency of actions. While it may also cause problems like willful collection of consumers personal information and further infringement on consumers rights to equality and to know. Under the very situation, different regulatory ideas are being discussed from both paternalism and liberalism. Paternalism protects the rights of consumers in a coercive way, but it causes the dilemma that the right of free choice of merchants and consumers (or users) is cut away. Liberalism respects the wishes of businesses and consumers (or users), but decision fatigue and blind optimism make the good wishes of both sides of the transaction impossible to realize. To break through the problems of these two ideas, soft paternalism might be a beneficial choice. Rooted in the individual independent value, it measures the interests of default rules with the balanced concept of protection and utilization, determines the neutral status of “consent”, establishes the auxiliary rule of “opt-out” to restrict the arbitrary collection of personal information, and gives full play to the complementary and alternative role of information disclosure in the protection of personal information to solve the inequality existing in default rules. |
