数字私力救济——基于远程控制网联物的权利实现
王琦数字私力救济——基于远程控制网联物的权利实现
On Digital Private Relief
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：王琦
单位：
中文关键词：远程控制;网联物;私力救济;占有保护;共同占有;格式条款
英文关键词：remote control; connected objects; private relief; possession protection; joint tenure; standard terms
中文摘要：
数字经济社会中物的网联化，使权利人可以通过远程控制义务人占有的网联物来督促其履行或者直接实现权利，此即数字私力救济。我国司法实践中已经出现了大量数字私力救济案件，但学理研究尚不充分。数字私力救济作为非暴力且通常基于当事人合意的自力救济手段，不但具有合法性，而且具有法政策优势，法律应当肯定其正当性并予以积极规制。物权法的规制作用体现在，占有保护规则型塑了数字私力的合法性界限。不同数字私力形态与占有保护的关系不同。“闭锁或取走型”私力构成占有侵夺，需要义务人的有效事前同意才能排除占有保护，“软件锁定型”和“云服务停止型”私力则不构成占有妨害。合同法的规制作用体现在，一方面，质量瑕疵规则会对远程控制系统的效果起到限制作用；另一方面，合同关系存续使得当事人有义务避免远程控制，为解除这种义务，操控方要么需要法定依据即抗辩权，要么需要意定依据即“数字私力条款”，对该条款的内容应当按照正当程序理念加以严格规制。
英文摘要：
The Internet of Things enables right holders to urge obligors to perform or to realize the right directly by remotely controlling the connected objects occupied by the obligors, which constitutes the digital private relief. A lot of cases concerning to digital private relief have appeared in Chinese judicial practice, but the academic research that has been carried out on this issue is insufficient. Digital private relief, as a non-violent means of self-relief usually based on the consent of the parties, not only is legitimate but also has legal policy advantages and, therefore, should be recognized and regulated by law. In the property law, the possession protection constitutes the boundary of legality of digital private relief. Different types of digital private relief have different relationships with possession protection. The “locking or retrieval type” constitutes an encroachment, which requires the effective prior consent of the possessor to exclude the protection of possession. The “software locking type” and “cloud service interruption type” do not constitute nuisance of possession. In the contract law, on the one hand, the quality defect rule can limit the effect of remote-control systems, and on the other hand, because of the existence of the contract relationship, the parties have the obligation to avoid remote control. In order to remove this obligation, the controlling party needs to have either a legal basis, namely the right of defense, or a voluntary basis, namely the “digital private relief clause”, the content of which should be strictly regulated in accordance with the concept of due process.
全文阅读： 点击下载
