浙江工商大学学报

我国《民法总则》(第110条及第111条)明显地是将隐私与信息分别加以保护的,但理论和实践中的问题是:在这种二元保护模式中,隐私与信息能否明确地加以区分?从国外的立法例看,多采取信息与隐私的"一元制"保护模式,即不区分信息与隐私,原因就是信息与隐私难以区分。文章赞成我国民法总则的"二元制"保护模式,并且认为,隐私与信息是可以区分的,应用"三分法"来区分隐私与信息,即分为纯粹的个人隐私、隐私性信息、纯粹的个人信息。从对隐私和信息保护的请求权基础上看,受到损害的主体之请求权基础在于《民法总则》的第八章"民事责任"、《侵权责任法》及《网络安全法》等特别法。《民法总则》第109-111条虽然规定了对隐私权和信息权的保护,但却没有

The General Principles of Civil Law of our country( article 110 and article 111) protects the privacy and information separately. The problem in theory and practice is that,in this two dimensional protection mode,is it possible to distinguish privacy and information? Reviewing the foreign legislation literature and practice,most legislations maintain the"one-dimensional"protection mode,which does not distinguish between information and privacy,for it is too difficult to distinguish thetwo elements. This paper agrees with the dual mode in The General Principles of Civil Law of China and argues that privacy and information are distinguishable. This paper proposes the "Three-dimensional Method"to distinguish purely personal privacy,privacy information,and purely personal information. Regarding the basis of the claim for the protection of privacy and information,the claim basis of the privacy and information infringed subject is listed in the eighth chapter of The General Principles of Civil Law,the Tort Liability Law and the Network Security Act. Although Articles 109-111 in The General Principles of Civil Law stipulated the provisions for the protection of right of privacy and information,there is no function of independent norms,because in these three articles,there are no protective measures to the civil juristic consequences when the privacy and information are violated.