【摘要】 根据信息的敏感程度,个人信息可分为敏感信息与一般信息。我国在理论与立法上均未对一般信息做进一步区分。在司法实践中根据信息与主体的关联程度对其予以区分保护,反映了不同信息类型的本质区别,据此,可以将个人一般信息分为区分性信息、联络性信息与关联性信息,进而检视三者的裁判规则差异。关于信息性质、损害要件的裁判立场值得肯定,对保护范围、过错要件、知情同意的裁判认定不尽合宜。在保护信息的范围上,应纳入信息社会涌现的新型一般信息;对于信息处理主体的注意义务标准,区分性信息要求较高,联络性信息次之,关联性信息最低;对于受害人的同意方式,前两者应采取明示同意,后者应采取默示同意。我国民法典人格权编应整合上述裁判规则,完善个人信息保护规范。更多还原

【Abstract】 Personal information can be divided into sensitive information and general information according to the degree of sensitivity of information. There is no further distinction under the general personal information in theory or in legislation,but in judicial practice the general personal information is distinguished and respectively protected according to the degree of connection between the information and the subject,which shows the essential distinction among different information. Thus,general personal information is divided into identification information,contact information and related information,and their differences in adjudicating rules are hereby examined. The judicial view on the nature of information and elements of damage should be praised,while the judicial determinations on the information protection scope,constituents of fault,informed consent are not reasonable. The protection scope should cover general information newly emerging in information society; the standard of duty of care of the information processer is the highest for identification information,in the second place for contact information and the lowest for related information;in terms of the mode of the victim’s consent,the express consent should be adopted for the former two types of information and implied consent should be adopted for the last one type of information. Personality Right Section of the Civil Code should incorporate the aforesaid adjudicating rules so as to improve norms on personal information protection.更多还原