PDF(1567 KB)
PDF(1567 KB)
PDF(1567 KB)
脸上的权利：作为“非隐私个人敏感信息”的面部图像
Facial Rights: Facial Image as “Non-Private Personal Sensitive Information”
面部识别技术自2014年以来实现了准确度的大幅提升后，被应用于大量不同的场景。本文分析了面部识别技术对公民权利的影响及在传播语境中的风险。通过对面部信息法律属性的分析，本文认为，相比传统的肖像权，面部识别技术大大改变了面部信息的采集处理对人的权利的影响方式和程度。作为生物识别信息的面部信息不是传统的隐私，也不是一般的个人信息，而是“非隐私个人敏感信息”。本文在介绍国际社会对面部识别技术密集立法的基础上，提出了规制面部信息采集和处理的两项建议，一是公权力和“私权力”对面部信息的采集使用，应遵循不同的规则；二是权利人对面部信息的授权应建立“互动式授权”机制，保证权利人授权的真实性和有效性。
Facial recognition technology has been applied to different situations since the accuracy has been greatly improved since 2014. This article analyzes the impact of facial recognition technology on civil rights and the risks in the context of communication. Through the analysis of the legal nature of facial information, this paper believes that compared with traditional right to portrait, facial recognition technology has greatly changed the way and degree of the impact of facial information collection and processing on human rights. Facial image as biometric information is not traditional privacy or general personal information, but “non-private personal sensitive information”. Based on the introduction of global legislations on facial recognition technology, this article puts forward two suggestions for regulating the collection and processing of facial information. One is that different rules should be followed by public power and “private power” in collection and use of facial image. The other is “interactive authorization” mechanism should be adopted in processing facial image, so as to ensure the authenticity and validity of data owners’ authorization.
面部识别技术 / 面部图像 / 隐私 / 生物识别信息 / 个人敏感信息
facial recognition technology / facial image / privacy / biometric information / personal sensitive information
| [1] |
郭明瑞(2014). 肖像权三题. 《浙江工商大学学报》,(1),33-40.
|
| [2] |
王俊秀(2020). 数字社会中的隐私重塑——以“人脸识别”为例. 《探索与争鸣》,(2),86-90.
|
| [3] |
魏永征, 周丽娜(2019). 《新闻传播法教程(第六版)》. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.
|
| [4] |
五十岚清(2009). 《人格权法》(铃木贤,葛敏译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
EPIC (2020). Coalition oppose facial recognition at SeaTac airport. April, 9, 2020. Retrieved from https://epic.org/privacy/facerecognition.
|
| [7] |
FRA (2019). Facial recognition technology: Fundamental rights considerations in the context of law enforcement.November, 2019. Retrieved from https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2019/facial-recognition-technology-fundamental-rights-considerations-context-law.
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
Market and Markets(2019). Facial recognition market worth $7.0 billion by 2024. Retrieved from https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/facial-recognition.asp.
|
| [11] |
Pew Research Center (2019). More than half of U.S. adults trust law enforcement to use facial recognition responsibly. September, 2019. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/09/05/more-than-half-of-u-s-adults-trust-law-enforcement-to-use-facial-recognition-responsibly.
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
WEF(2020). A framework for responsible limits on facial recognition use case: Flow management.February, 2020. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/whitepapers/a-framework-for-responsible-limits-on-facial-recognition-use-case-flow-management.
|
1. 相关表述来源于莱布尼茨关于“什么是同一性和差异性”的论述，参见 [德]莱布尼茨《人类理智新论》（上册）第240页，商务印书馆2011年版。黑格尔将莱布尼茨的观点概况为“差异律”，参见[德]黑格尔《小逻辑》第251-252页，商务印书馆1980年第2版。
2. 北京青年报（2019年11月4日）。中国人脸识别第一案：杭州一动物园被起诉。检索于中国法院网
3. 《民法典》规定公民个人信息受法律保护，但并没有“个人信息权”的表述，因而关于个人信息究竟是一项权利还是法益，在法学界存在一定的争议。本文采纳杨立新教授的观点，认为个人信息是一项公民权利。
4. Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, Opinion 3/2012 on developments in biometric technologies, 00720/12/EN, WP193, Brussels, 27 April 2012. “生物特征模板”是指通过从生物特征数据中提取特征而获得的数学表示，该数据仅限于执行识别和验证所需的特征。参见 Art. 4 (12) of Regulation (EU) 2019/818 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 on establishing a framework for interoperability between EU information systems in the field of police and judicial cooperation, asylum and migration and amending Regulations (EU) 2018/1726, (EU) 2018/1862 and (EU) 2019/816, OJ L 135, 22.5.2019, pp. 85-135.
5. European Commission, Smart lie-detection system to tighten EU’s busy borders, 24 October 2018.
6. 如《出入口控制人脸识别系统技术要求》（GA/T1093-2013）、《安防人脸识别应用视频人脸图像提取技术要求》（GA/T1344-2016）等。
7. 美国公民自由联盟。机器人监控的黎明：人工智能、视频分析和隐私，检索于
8. ECtHR, Mouvement Raelien Suisse v. Switzerland, No. 16354/06, 13 July 2012, para. 48.
9. Human Rights Council, Surveillance and human rights. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, David Kaye, A/HRC/41/35, 2019.
10 新京报（2019年9月10日）。AI换脸不止是丢脸风险，隐私问题“ZAO”治早安全。检索于
11 阮银豪、薛秋卫、宋少军等侵犯公民个人信息罪一审刑事判决书，浙江省绍兴市越城区人民法院刑事判决书（2019）浙0602刑初151号。
12 周舟、金正（2019年9月7日）。你“ZAO” 换脸吗?新华社。检索于
13 UN, Human Rights Committee, draft General Comment No. 37 （Article 21: right of peaceful assembly), draft prepared by the Rapporteur, Christof Heyns, July 2019, para. 69.
14 GDPR, Art. 4 (14); Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, Art. 3 (18); Law Enforcement Directive, Art. 3 (13).
15 Article 29 Data Protection Working Party (2012), Opinion 3/2012 on developments in biometric technologies, 00720/12/EN, WP193, Brussels, 27 April 2012, p. 4; Misra, P. (2018), “Here’s how face recognition tech can be GDPR compliant”, thenextweb.com, 29 October 2018.
16 GDPR, Article 9 (1) and Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, Article 10 (1); Law Enforcement Directive, Article 10 (1).
17 GDPR，Article 9(2).
18 GDPR, recital (51); Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, recital (29).
19 ECtHR (2019). Guide on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights Right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence. Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 31 August 2019, para. 138.
20 Ada Lovelace Institute (2019). Beyond face value: public attitudes to facial recognition technology, 2019. 转引自FRA (
21 Der Hamburgische Beauftragte für Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit, Datenschutzrechtliche Prüfung des Einsatzes einer Gesichtserkennungssoftware zur Aufklärung von Straftaten im Zusammenhang mit dem G20-Gipfel durch die Polizei Hamburg, 2018. 转引自FRA(
22 New York Times, “San Francisco Bans Facial Recognition Technology”, 14 May 2019.
23 UK, High Court of Justice (Queens’ Bench Division - Divisional Court Cardiff), The Queen (OTAO) Bridges and Chief Constable of South Wales Police and others, [2019] EWCH 2341 (Admin), 4 September 2019, para. 159.转引自FRA(2019). Facial recognition technology: fundamental rights considerations in the context of law enforcement. November, 2019. Retrieved from
24 腾讯科技（2020年1月30日）。Facebook和解人脸识别侵权集体诉讼 赔偿5.5亿美元，检索于
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
