《个人信息保护法》的颁布，为我国个人信息保护制度搭建了基本的法律框架，确立了同意原则作为个人信息处理活动的核心和基础。但是对于同意的法律性质、方式和类型等问题，没有进行更详细的阐释。实践中，与传统线下合同作出的同意不同，数字情境下有效同意的作出尤为困难。基于此，本文着重回应三个问题：第一，同意的理论阐释。本文结合最新立法规定，对同意的法律性质、作出方式和类型进行了阐释。分析后得出同意的性质更接近于侵权法上的违法阻却事由的结论。同意可以通过言语、文字等积极的行为作出，例如以明确的肯定作为、口头形式、书面形式作出。第二，有效同意的标准及困境。本文在现有法律框架下，结合比较法视野对有效同意的标准进行了较为深入的研究，包括具备个人同意能力、在充分知情的前提下作出、自愿性和明确性。例举出每种有效标准在实践中的失灵场景，分析困境产生的原因，尤其对是线上个人信息处理活动的分析。包括同意能力不足、个人理性认识欠缺、个人与处理者之间的不平等关系三个关键因素。第三，有效同意困境的纾解。既然有效同意在数字情境下的个人信息处理活动中遭遇困境，本文从现有法律制度出发，从个三方面提出了自己的思考的建议：首先，可以通过增强个人自我防范意识对单个人同意能力进行补足，也可以扩大同意主体，以集体的同意能力来补足个人的同意能力。其次，可以嵌入同意管理工具，在不改变现有法律制度的情况下提高阅读的便利性。最后，可以在法律制度层面进行完善，引入第三方辅助人接受个人委托代为作出同意，并为其确立法律地位。本文希冀能够为现行立法与司法的完善寻求更加精细化的规则限定与规范解释，纾解数字情境下有效同意的困境。
The promulgation of the "Personal Information Protection Law" has built a basic legal framework for my country's personal information protection system, and established the principle of informed consent as the core and foundation of personal information processing. However, issues such as the legal nature, manner and type of consent were not explained in greater detail. In practice, unlike consent given in traditional offline contracts, valid consent is particularly difficult to obtain in a digital context.Based on this, this paper focuses on three questions：First, the theoretical interpretation of consent. This article explains the legal nature, manner and types of consent in conjunction with the latest legislative provisions. After the analysis, it is concluded that the nature of consent is closer to the cause of illegal deterrence in tort law. Consent can be given through positive actions such as words and writing, such as in a clear affirmative act, orally, or in writing.Second, the criteria and dilemmas of valid consent. Under the existing legal framework, this paper conducts a more in-depth study on the criteria of effective consent from the perspective of comparative law, including the ability of individuals to consent, given under the premise of full knowledge, voluntariness and clarity. Give examples of the failure scenarios of each valid standard in practice, and analyze the reasons for the dilemma, especially the analysis of online personal information processing activities. It includes three key factors: lack of consent, lack of personal rational understanding, and unequal relationship between individuals and processors.Third, effectively agree to the relief of the predicament. Since effective consent encounters difficulties in the processing of personal information in the digital context, this paper, starting from the existing legal system, puts forward its own thinking and suggestions from three aspects: First, by enhancing personal self-awareness of self-prevention, the ability to consent to a single individual can be improved. Complementation can also expand the subject of consent, and the collective consent ability can complement the individual consent ability. Secondly, on the basis of not changing the existing legal system, the consent management tool is embedded to improve the convenience of reading. Finally, it can be improved at the level of the legal system, introducing third-party assistants to accept personal entrustment to give consent and establish legal status for them.This paper hopes to seek more refined rule definitions and normative interpretations for the improvement of current legislation and judiciary, so as to alleviate the dilemma of effective consent in the digital context.
