云存储服务商的数据储存侵权责任研究

发布时间：2018-06-08 06:18

本文选题：云存储服务商 + 个人数据　；参考：《宁波大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：云存储是一种新的信息存储模式,是传统网络存储的综合体和升级版。实践中,云存储服务商侵权事件时有发生。但云存储服务商的侵权责任的认定却于法无据。虽然云服务商侵权可借鉴传统的网络服务商侵权责任进行认定,但传统网络服务商侵权责任的认定也处于非常模糊的状态。例如,对传统网络服务商“注意义务”的探讨在学术界和实践中就有很多不同的做法。因此,有必要对特殊法律地位下的云存储服务商侵权责任进行认定,以保障云存储服务使用者的信息权利。本文第一部分是对云存储服务商与一般的网络服务商,以及云存储服务商与传统的网盘服务商进行区分和界定。目的在于论证本文的论题存在的合理性。云存储服务商特有的运行机制使它和传统的网盘和网络服务商有所区别。由于云存储中个人信息的主体并没有实际上控制信息,因此个人信息遭受侵权的风险大大提升。本文第二部分是对云存储服务商侵权责任的认定。具体而言包括云存储服务商侵权归责原则的选择适用以及损害事实的认定标准。损害事实包括对个人信息本身的一种损害,主要体现为一种财产利益的损害。另一种是对个人信息所有权人的损害,主要体现为一种人格利益的损害。对因果关系进行选择适用,一个是相当因果关系,另一个是助成因果关系,但这两种因果关系并不是矛盾的,而是存在不同的侵权状态之中。另外,对云存储服务商侵权责任必须设定免责情形,但为了平衡各方利益必须对免责的情形再进行限制。本文第三部分主要论证云存储服务商侵权责任承担方式中的损害赔偿方式。赔偿数额的计算标准应该适用全额赔偿的原则,而且还应确立一个普遍适用的赔偿标准,但同时需要综合考量多方面因素。精神损害赔偿应当适用,才可弥补信息主体遭受的损害。要确定精神损害赔偿的标准需要综合考量信息主体个人受损害的情况和侵权的具体的客体类型。为了更能平衡各方利益,需要适用惩罚性赔偿标准。同时,为了能更好的得到法律救济,必须规定损害不需要一个非常精确的标准即可要求惩罚性赔偿。
[Abstract]:Cloud storage is a new information storage mode, which is a complex and upgrade version of traditional network storage. In practice, cloud storage service providers infringement incidents occur from time to time. However, the confirmation of tort liability of cloud storage service provider has no basis in law. Although cloud service providers can learn from the traditional network service provider tort liability to identify, but the traditional network service provider tort liability is also in a very vague state. For example, there are many different approaches to traditional network service providers'duty of care in academia and practice. Therefore, it is necessary to confirm the tort liability of cloud storage service providers under special legal status in order to protect the information rights of cloud storage service users. The first part of this paper is to distinguish and define cloud storage service provider and general network service provider, as well as cloud storage service provider and traditional network disk service provider. The purpose is to prove the rationality of the existence of this thesis. Cloud storage service provider's unique operation mechanism makes it different from the traditional network disk and network service provider. Because the subject of personal information in cloud storage does not actually control the information, the risk of infringement of personal information is greatly increased. The second part of this paper is the confirmation of tort liability of cloud storage service provider. Specifically, it includes the choice and application of tort imputation principle of cloud storage service provider and the criterion of confirming damage fact. The fact of damage includes a kind of damage to personal information itself, mainly reflected in the damage of property interests. The other is the damage to the owner of personal information, mainly reflected in the damage of personal interests. The choice of causality is applicable, one is equivalent causality, the other is auxiliary causality, but these two kinds of causality are not contradictory, but exist in different tort states. In addition, the tort liability of cloud storage service provider must be exempted from liability, but in order to balance the interests of all parties, the exemption must be restricted. The third part of this article mainly demonstrates the cloud storage service provider tort liability in the way of compensation for damages. The principle of full compensation should be applied to the calculation standard of compensation amount, and a universal standard of compensation should be established, but at the same time, many factors should be considered synthetically. Compensation for moral damage should be applied in order to make up for the damage suffered by the information subject. In order to determine the standard of compensation for moral damage, it is necessary to comprehensively consider the situation of individual damage to information subject and the specific object type of infringement. In order to balance the interests of all parties, punitive damages should be applied. At the same time, in order to get a better legal remedy, it is necessary to stipulate that the damage does not require a very precise standard to claim punitive damages.
【学位授予单位】：宁波大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】