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
相关法律服务
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
互联网公司对用户生成数据享有什么权利?
用户生成数据是互联网用户在使用平台过程中主动发布或产生的信息内容,例如微信公众号文章、评论、点赞等。这类数据虽源于用户行为,但平台通过提供技术支持、内容审核、数据存储与维护运营,投入大量资源,因而依法对数据整体享有合法的经营权益,并可排除他人未经许可的商业利用。在竞争法框架下,擅自抓取并利用他人平台数据可能构成不正当竞争。n在杭州铁路运输法院审理的腾讯诉快译科技案件中,法院对快译科技发出禁令,要求其停止提供基于微信数据开发的四款API产品,包括公众号文章信息、订阅号文章、腾讯滚动新闻及公众号主体信息等。法院认定腾讯对用户生成内容享有数据权利,这一裁决被称为创新性司法决定,首次明确认可了网络服务提供者对用户生成数据的权利主体地位。律师评价,这一判决顺应了大数据时代数据权利保护的需要。n实务中,互联网企业应当重视自身平台数据的权益维护,建立数据资产管理和维权机制;同时第三方数据使用者应事先取得数据权利人的授权,或确保抓取行为符合公开、正当、必要原则。一旦发生数据纠纷,可申请行为保全禁令及时止损。风险方面,由于数据权属规则仍在逐步完善,企业应密切关注司法尺度,避免因不当收集数据而承担法律责任。
数据爬取行为在什么情况下构成不正当竞争?
数据爬取是一种以自动化程序从网络获取信息技术,本身并不具有当然的违法性。司法认定爬取行为是否构成不正当竞争,通常考察爬取是否违反网站访问规则、是否超出必要限度获取未公开数据、是否造成被爬方服务器负担或数据安全风险,以及爬取方是否出于商业目的替换他人产品或服务。若爬取行为损害竞争秩序和消费者利益,则可能被认定为不正当竞争。n在腾讯诉快译科技案中,法院针对快译科技的聚焦爬取行为发出禁令。该公司专门抓取微信公众平台上的文章和账号信息,制作成API产品用于商业销售,且违反了微信的robots协议。律师指出,这种爬取行为会给互联网公司造成巨大访问流量,阻碍正常用户访问,增加日常维护和数据安全成本;而且爬取所获数据仅为少数购买者、分析师等群体服务,并未增进公共利益。因此,法院倾向认定其缺乏正当性。n从实务角度,规范的数据爬取应尊重目标网站的robots协议,善尽合理注意义务,确保抓取频率不威胁服务器稳定,不穿越技术保护措施获取非公开数据。企业在开展数据业务时,应当事先评估数据来源合法性,保留授权或合规记录。一旦被诉,法院将综合考量目的、方式、影响及是否惠及公众来裁判。风险提示:数据爬取纠纷频发,商业性抓取他人核心数据违反竞争规则的风险极高,建议预先进行竞争合规审查。
数据保护主义对互联网生态有何影响?司法如何平衡?
数据保护主义主要表现为大型互联网企业封闭自身数据生态,利用robots协议等技术手段禁止搜索引擎或其他平台抓取内容,从而巩固市场地位。从法律角度看,企业对其平台数据享有权益,但数据的开发利用也关乎公众获取信息的基本需求。数据权益并非绝对排他,权利行使应当遵循诚实信用原则和公共利益优先原则,避免妨碍信息自由流通。n文章引用大成律师事务所合伙人观点指出,目前国内主流搜索引擎无法抓取微信公众号上的内容,而微信公众号已成为个人媒体发布的重要阵地。如果各大互联网平台都奉行数据隔离策略,用户将不得不在不同平台间反复切换才能获取完整信息,形成信息孤岛;这不仅降低用户体验,也可能对整个互联网生态造成损害。该观点提示,数据保护如果过度,可能与本应保护的社会信息传播公共利益相冲突。n司法层面,法院在处理数据相关竞争纠纷时,需要平衡企业为数据维护所做的投入与公众合理接近信息的权利。在现阶段立法尚不完善的情况下,法院应在具体案件中审慎考量数据开放的必要性和比例原则。对企业而言,应当在主张自身数据权利的同时,建立适度的数据共享机制,避免因封闭行为引发反垄断质疑。风险提示:数据保护政策若明显排除竞争、妨碍创新,可能面临不正当竞争或垄断规制。
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



