In China's current judicial practice,Article 2 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law is often used as the basis for judgments to order data crawler subjects to bear civil liability for cessation of illegal infringement and compensation for their unfair competition behaviors.There are limitations on this judgment mode in terms of the subject,and using principle clauses as the basis for adjudicative norms can easily lead to an expansion of the judge's discretion.The"right to hold"in the Twenty Articles on Data is homogeneous with the possession of property in traditional civil law,both including the dual important elements:the subjective factor of possession and the objective factor of possession.In Judicial practice,the provisions of data protection in crawler behavior can be deduced from the possession system in China's Civil Code.The possession of property implies the requirement of"public exclusivity",which needs to be restored in the possession of data and needs to be specificolly judged in judicial adjudication.The three elements of"subjective factor of possession,objective factor of possession,and public exclusivity"are the basis for constructing the legal boundary of crawler behavior,which is conducive to ensuring the balance between data protection and data circulation.The right to claim for possession protection includes the right to claim for the return of possession and the right to claim for obstruction of possession.The right to claim for possession protection has particularities in its application to data,providing a reasonable and comprehensive relief path for the protection of data rights and interests.
data crawlerobjective factor of possessionsubjective factor of possessionpublic exclusivityprotection of possession
万方数据
