China court ruling conveys right of user-generated data to internet firms – analysis

文章摘要 杭州铁路运输法院对腾讯诉快译科技爬取微信数据案发布禁令,认定互联网企业对用户生成数据享有合法权利。该司法裁定创新性地将数据权利基础归于平台的维护投入与安全保障,同时指出违反robots协议、未创造公共利益的商业爬取行为难以正当化。律师预计,大数据与人工智能发展将推动数据类不正当竞争诉讼和禁令申请不断增加。然而,互联网巨头若采取严格数据封锁策略,可能导致互联网分裂并损害公众获取信息的利益,未来需要通过立法与司法在数据权益保护与数据开放流通之间寻找平衡,为数字经济健康发展提供规则指引。

  • Internet companies’ data right based on investment in maintenance, data security

  • Lawyer warns data protectionism may lead to a divided internet, harming public interests

A March 8 injunction issued against web-crawling firm Kuaiyi Technology by China’s Hangzhou Railway Transport Court has defined internet companies’ right to user-generated data, several competition lawyers told PaRR.

The injunction, sought by Tencent, ordered Kuaiyi Technology to immediately stop providing four products that were based on WeChat data and obtained via the web-crawling technique, including 'Official WeChat account article information application programming interface (API)'; ‘WeChat subscription accounts and latest articles API'; 'Tencent rolling news API'; and 'Official WeChat accounts and corporate identication information within the administrative region', as reported.

Data crawling refers to the collection of data from websites using bots, or autonomous systems on the internet. Focused web crawling refers to information gathering on a specific topic or from a specific website, and a general-purpose web crawler does not have specific targets. A search engine is a typical example of general-purpose web crawler.

The injunction in effect protected Tencent’s right to content published by users on WeChat’s public accounts, Bowen Jing, partner at Guo Biao Law Firm, told PaRR. Jing added that the court’s recognition of internet service providers’ right to usergenerated data is an “innovative judicial decision”.

With the development of big data and articial intelligence, the number of data-related internet-focused unfair competition lawsuits are going to increase, Jing said. And as the range of legal protection over data rights has expanded and become more diverse, requests for injunctions are going to become more prevalent, he added.

Data crawling bots often create a large volume of traffic and block normal user visits, Gang Fu, senior partner at Co-effort Law Firm, told PaRR. Fu added that it is a “positive shift” that the court has recognized the burden caused by data crawling on internet companies’ daily maintenance and data security.

In addition, focused web crawling used by Kuaiyi Technology in the instant case only beneted a small number of people – the data collector, buyers, and analysts – rather than the general public, Fu said.

As Kuaiyi Technology violated WeChat’s robots exclusion protocol and scrapped data for commercial purposes without generating common interests, it is hard to justify its legitimacy, Fu said. The robots exclusion protocol is a standard used by websites to inform web crawlers which areas of the website should not be accessed or scanned.

However, as many internet giants adopt an isolationist strategy in terms of data rights protection, which strictly bans web crawlers’access, it may result in a divided internet and endanger the public interest, Chambers Yang, senior partner at Dentons told PaRR.

Currently, mainstream search engines in China cannot access WeChat public accounts, which have become an important platform for “we-media”, as media published by individual citizens is known, and users have to switch among platforms to search for information, Yang added.

Legislative efforts are required to better regulate internet companies' data policy, Yang said. Before that comes, however, courts are expected to balance the interests of corporates and the public when dealing with data-related competition lawsuits, Yang said.

by Kimberly Jin in Shanghai

杨春宝一级律师简介

杨春宝一级律师,大成上海高级合伙人、资本市场部主任、国资基金研究中心主任,大成中国区私募基金专业带头人、科技与文化法律研究中心联合牵头人。执业30余年,长期从事私募基金、投融资、并购重组法律服务,尤其对对赌研究颇深且具有非常丰富的实战经验,并专注于金融机构股权投资业务。2004年起多次入选The Legal 500"私募基金"和"公司与商业"等境内外各类律师榜单,代理的中国法院首例适用外国法律审理外国公司的董事损害小股东权益纠纷案入选上海高院发布的《上海法院域外法查明典型案例》和威科先行"要案头条"。入选上海涉外法律人才库、上海市司法局鼎新法治人才库、上海国有企业改制法律顾问团,具有上市公司独立董事任职资格,系多家知名高校的兼职教授或兼职研究生导师及上海市商务委跨国经营人才培训班讲师。出版《私募股权投资基金风险防控操作实务》等16本投融资法律专著。了解更多

常见法律问题

用户生成数据的权利归谁?

用户生成数据是指用户通过互联网平台创作、发布并留存于平台系统的各类内容,如文字、图片、视频等。平台通过服务器存储、系统维护和安全管理持续投入资源,从而形成对数据的实际控制能力。法律上,这种基于投入而产生的数据权益,通常归平台享有,但平台行使权利时仍须尊重用户合法权益和公共数据流通需求。n在杭州铁路运输法院审理的腾讯与快译科技案中,快译科技通过爬虫抓取微信公众号文章及账号信息,制成四款商业API产品。法院应腾讯申请发布禁令,责令停止提供相关产品,实质上认可了腾讯对微信公众平台用户生成数据的权利。律师评价该裁定为司法创新,因数据爬取增加了平台的运行负担,威胁数据安全,且未为社会公共利益创造价值。n互联网企业应当完善用户协议和平台规则,明确数据使用边界,并对敏感数据设置技术防护。数据需求方在使用爬虫工具前,应审查目标网站的robots协议,未经授权的商业抓取可能被起诉不正当竞争。此外,平台在主张数据权利时不应过度封闭,否则可能引发反垄断或公共利益方面的质疑,法院会在个案中平衡各方利益。

数据爬取在什么情况下构成不正当竞争?

不正当竞争是指经营者违反自愿、平等、公平、诚信原则及商业道德,损害其他经营者或消费者合法权益的行为。数据爬取是否构成不正当竞争,关键在于是否违反网站访问规则、是否超出必要限度、是否损害平台正常运行与数据安全,以及是否仅服务于少数主体的商业利益而妨碍公共信息流通。n本案中,快译科技爬取微信数据时违反了robots协议,即网站站主对外告知禁止访问区域的标准。其行为形成海量流量,干扰普通用户正常访问,增加腾讯的日常维护成本。同时,爬取所得数据被制作成API产品出售,受益人仅为数据采集者、购买者和分析者,未给公众带来普遍便利,因此法院认定其具有不正当性并出具禁令。n企业开展数据业务前应进行合规评估,确认目标网站数据获取规则,避免直接抓取禁止访问的内容。对于已投入运营的平台,建立爬虫检测机制和流量监控有助于及时维权。纠纷中争议焦点常集中在数据是否属于公开信息、抓取行为是否违背商业道德、是否造成实质性损害,当事人应围绕这些要点组织证据。

数据保护主义会带来什么风险?

数据保护主义是指互联网企业利用技术和法律手段将其所掌握的数据封闭在自身生态内,拒绝与其他平台或搜索工具共享的现象。这种孤立策略虽有助于保护企业投入和竞争优势,但可能阻碍数据要素流通,造成信息孤岛,与互联网开放共享的基本精神相冲突,最终损害公众获取信息的公共利益。n文章提到,由于微信公众平台已成为重要的自媒体阵地,而主流搜索引擎无法检索其内容,用户需要在多个平台之间切换寻找信息,极大提升信息获取成本。律师警告,若互联网巨头普遍采取严格封锁爬虫的隔离策略,互联网可能走向分裂,公共利益面临威胁。本案中法院一方面承认平台数据权利,另一方面也需考虑数据流通的公共价值。n企业在制定数据政策时,应当在保护自身权益与促进信息流通之间寻找平衡,不宜一律禁止合理抓取。立法机关需要通过制度设计统一数据访问规则,引导行业形成有序共享机制。司法机关审理数据竞争纠纷时,应综合评估行为对市场竞争秩序、用户福利和公众信息利益的影响,避免简单偏袒平台而牺牲开放生态。

以上内容仅供参考,不构成法律意见。如需专业法律服务,请联系杨春宝一级律师:chambers.yang@dentons.cn

  • 本站声明:本站所载之法律论文、法律评论、案例、法律咨询等,除非另有注明,著作权人均为站长杨春宝高级律师本人。欢迎其他网站链接,但是,未经书面许可,不得擅自摘编、转载。引用及经许可转载时均应注明作者和出处"法律桥",并链接本站。本站网址:https://lawyerbridge.com/。
  •  
  •         本站所有内容(包括法律咨询、法律法规)仅供参考,不构成法律意见,本站不对资料的完整性和时效性负责。您在处理具体法律事务时,请洽询有资质的律师。本站将努力为广大网友提供更好的服务,但不对本站提供的任何免费服务作出正式的承诺。本站所载投稿文章,其言论不代表本站观点,如需使用,请与原作者联系,版权归原作者所有。

发表回复