口令码分享为何纠纷频发︱法经兵言

Core Viewpoint - The frequent disputes over password code sharing reflect a competition for user relationship data among platforms, highlighting the importance of data protection and utilization in the digital economy [1] Group 1: Password Code Sharing and User Relationship Data - Password codes serve as temporary, one-time strings used for identity verification and access, and can facilitate the transfer of user relationship data between platforms [2][3] - Platforms can induce users to share password codes, which contain special identification information, allowing them to map relationships between users and expand their user networks [3] Group 2: Definition of Personal Information - Personal information is defined as data that can identify a specific individual, including names, contact details, and relationship data [4] - User relationship chains, as a reflection of personal contacts, qualify as personal information under legal definitions [4] Group 3: User Consent and Data Sharing - User sharing of password codes does not equate to informed consent for personal data processing, especially when users are incentivized without clear disclosure of data collection practices [5][6] - The practice of "induced sharing" obscures the true nature of data sharing, leading users to believe they are only sharing activity information rather than personal relationship data [6] Group 4: Competitive Interests in User Relationship Data - Platforms invest significant resources in developing and maintaining user relationship data, which should be recognized as a competitive asset [7] - Induced sharing practices can undermine the economic interests of platforms by allowing competitors to access valuable user relationship data without consent [7] Group 5: Importance of User Relationship Data for New Apps - The necessity for new apps to rely on user relationship data from established platforms raises questions about competitive fairness and the obligation to share such data [8] - User relationship data is a competitive resource that platforms are not obligated to share without user consent [8] Group 6: Industry Practices and Business Ethics - Industry norms do not equate to established business ethics, particularly in emerging sectors where practices are still evolving [9] - The prevalence of password code sharing among platforms may reflect a chaotic phase rather than an accepted ethical standard [9] Group 7: Legal Boundaries of Data Acquisition - The legal framework for data acquisition emphasizes the need for compliance with ethical standards and the protection of proprietary data [10][11] - Unauthorized data scraping can constitute unfair competition, necessitating regulatory oversight to protect data rights [11] Group 8: Tolerance Obligations Among Platforms - While platforms may have a tolerance obligation for link-sharing, this does not permit unrestricted access to user relationship data [12] - Unauthorized sharing of user relationship data through incentivized password code sharing harms both the data-holding platform and user privacy, warranting regulatory intervention [12]