论个人通话记录的法律性质及保护

发布时间：2018-04-14 17:21

本文选题：通话记录 + 法律性质　；参考：《南京大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：当今社会,电子通信成为人们信息交流时必不可少的媒介,个人通话记录与我们的生活息息相关,真实反映了个人通话活动的状态,具有私密性,体现了一定的人格利益,法律应该对其进行保护。但是我国目前相关的法律法规并未对个人通话记录的法律性质和法律保护作出明确的界定,国内理论界也尚未就此进行深入探讨,导致司法机关在行政执法或者司法方面的混乱。因此,本文首先从个人通话的记录的内涵出发,比较了与个人通话记录相关的通信秘密、除通信秘密以外的其他一般隐私、个人信息这三个概念的联系与区别,从而将通话记录的法律性质界定为隐私。其次讨论了个人通话记录的一般隐私权保护及豁免的情形,最后论证了电信企业在司法实践中涉及通话记录被违法披露这一情形中的义务和举证责任。本文的正文分为以下三个部分:第一部分是对个人通话记录的法律性质的界定。通过比较通信秘密、隐私、个人信息这三个概念的内涵、联系与区别,列举了理论界不同学者的观点和司法实践中的不同判决,将个人通话记录界定为隐私,并给出了相应的理由。第二部分主要论证了个人通话记录的隐私权保护以及豁免的情形。本部分首先分析了个人通话记录保护的必要性。其次进一步从隐私权侵权的四个构成要件方面分析论证了个人通话记录适用隐私权保护的情形。最后着重分析了个人通话记录隐私权保护的豁免情形,即与配偶知情权、监护权冲突时,应对隐私权的保护进行一定的限制。第三部分主要分析了电信企业的义务及举证责任。在这一部分主要分析了本文引言部分所引用的案例的法院判决,主要从三个问题进行分析,即移动公司对电信用户的通话记录(隐私)不应负有安全保障义务而是保密义务;通信公司的举证责任不应适用举证责任倒置的原则,而应该适用责任转移;关于电信企业举证标准的分析。
[Abstract]:In today's society, electronic communication has become an indispensable medium for people to communicate information. Personal call records are closely related to our daily life, which truly reflect the state of personal call activities, have privacy, and embody certain personal interests.The law should protect it.However, at present, the relevant laws and regulations of our country have not clearly defined the legal nature and legal protection of personal telephone records, and the domestic theoretical circle has not yet made a thorough discussion on this issue.Leading to the judicial organs in the administrative law enforcement or judicial confusion.Therefore, this paper begins with the connotation of personal call record, and compares the connection and difference of three concepts, namely, the communication secret related to the personal call record, the general privacy other than the communication secret, and the personal information.Thus, the legal nature of phone records is defined as privacy.Secondly, it discusses the general privacy protection and exemption of personal call record, and finally demonstrates the duty and burden of proof in the case that the telephone record is disclosed illegally in the judicial practice.The text of this paper is divided into the following three parts: the first part is the definition of the legal nature of personal call records.By comparing the connotation, connection and difference of the three concepts of communication secret, privacy and personal information, this paper enumerates the views of different scholars in theory and different judgments in judicial practice, and defines the personal call record as privacy.The corresponding reasons are given.The second part mainly demonstrates the privacy protection and immunity of personal call records.This part first analyzes the necessity of personal call record protection.Secondly, the author analyzes and demonstrates the application of privacy protection to personal phone records from the four constitutive elements of privacy infringement.In the end, the immunity from the privacy protection of personal call record is analyzed, that is, the protection of privacy should be restricted when the right to know and the right to custody conflicts with the spouse.The third part mainly analyzes the duty and burden of proof of telecom enterprises.In this part, the author mainly analyzes the court judgment of the case cited in the introduction of this paper, mainly from three aspects, namely, the mobile company should not have the obligation of security but the obligation of confidentiality to the telephone record (privacy) of the telecommunication user;The burden of proof of communication companies should not be applied to the principle of inversion of burden of proof, but should be applied to the transfer of burden of proof.
【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923

【相似文献】