1、Privacy and Property on the Net网络隐私与知识产权（1）1 To a sociologist, perhaps the most interesting quality of Internet and other data transmission networks is their potential to alter power relationships with respect to personal privacy and intellectual property. Both are restrictions on the free flow of i
2、nformation. Government is implicated in both, on the one hand by providing legal support for them and, on the other hand, by potentially violating them in the pursuit of its own goals, such as national security. Social scientists have only just begun framing research projects to learn how the Intern
3、et is liberating information from traditional restraints or to understand the likely human consequences. 1 对于社会学家来说，或许因特网和其他数据传输网络最有趣的特性是，它们具有改变涉及个人隐私和知识产权的权势关系的潜质。个人隐私和知识产权两者都限制信息的自由流动。政府与它们均有关联，一方面为它们提供法律支持，另一方面又为了追求自身的目标，例如国家安全，而极可能违背二者。社会科学家们只是刚刚开始构思研究项目，学习因特网如何将信息从传统的局限中解放出来，或者了解它可能为人类带来的后果。2 A
4、lthough both privacy and property are rooted deep in humanitys evolutionary past, they are variables, and societal norms change. For example, until a century and a half ago, U.S. census takers would post their completed enumeration forms in the town square for anyone to read, but from 1850 until 195
5、4 when Title 13 of the U.S. Code forbade publication of an individuals records, a complex series of steps gradually increased confidentiality protections (1). Today, the Census Bureau keeps the data confidential for 72 years. This change has largely been driven by the increasing government collectio
6、n of data about its citizens, to facilitate social services, taxation, and management of the economy (2). By offering confidentiality, government hopes the public will relinquish some of its traditional privacy. Whether citizens benefit from government collection of data about them is another matter
7、. In Maryland, every prospective juror is asked what his or her religion is, even though this information is not used in the jury selection process. The religion data are kept confidential, but all information about prospective jurors that is used in the selection is made public. Thus, we have the b
8、izarre situation of costly information being kept confidential precisely because it is useless. 2 虽然隐私和产权由来已久，但是它们不是一层不变的，而且社会规范也在不断变化。比如说，一直到 150 年前，美国的统计人员把完整的统计表张贴在各城镇的广场供公众阅读，然而从 1850 年到 1954 年，自美国第十三号法令禁止公布个人纪录颁布开始，一系列繁复的措施逐步加强了对隐秘的保护。现在，统计局将统计数据保密 72 年。这种改变很大程度上是由政府为了提升社会服务、税收以及经济管理，变本加厉地收集公民的
9、资料而引发的。政府为公民保密，同时希望民众放弃部分传统的隐私权。公民是否从中获益是另外一码事。在马里兰州，所有陪审团成员候选人都被问及宗教信仰，尽管这一信息在陪审团选取过程中并无用处。关于宗教信仰的数据是被保密的，而选取中用到的候选人的信息全部公诸于众。因而就产生了这种奇怪的状况正是因为没用处信息才被保密。3 The idea that government should regulate intellectual property through copyrights and patents is relatively recent in human history, and the pre
10、cise details of what intellectual property is protected for how long vary across nations and occasionally change. There are two standard sociological justifications for patents or copyrights: They reward creators for their labor, and they encourage greater creativity. Both of these are empirical cla
11、ims that can be tested scientifically and could be false in some realms (3, 4). 3 政府应当通过版权与专利调控知识产权的观念出现在相对近期的人类历史上，就哪些知识产权受多长时间的保护的精确的细节问题，各国之间存在差异，偶尔还会变化。不论版权或专利都可以满足社会学的两个标准：一来它们是对创造者付出的辛劳的回报，二来鼓励更多创新。这两个标准为经验之谈，可以被科学检验，但在某些领域也可能是不适用的。4 Consider music (5). Star performers existed before the 20th
12、century, such as Franz Liszt and Niccolo Paganini, but mass media produced a celebrity system promoting a few stars whose music was not necessarily the best or most diverse. Copyright provides protection for distribution companies and for a few celebrities, thereby helping to support the industry as
13、 currently defined, but it may actually harm the majority of performers. This is comparable to Anatole Frances famous irony, “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges.“ In theory, copyright covers the creations of celebrities and obscurities equa
14、lly, but only major distribution companies have the resources to defend their property rights in court. In a sense, this is quite fair, because nobody wants to steal unpopular music, but by supporting the property rights of celebrities, copyright strengthens them as a class in contrast to anonymous
15、musicians. 4 想一想音乐领域。在 20 世纪前有超级大师，譬如弗朗斯利兹特和尼克罗帕格尼尼，而大众传媒造就了明星机制，吹捧音乐不是最好的又不最富有变幻的少数几个明星。版权为发行公司和少数名人提供保护，从而有助于扶持当今意义下的这一行业，事实上却可能损坏了大多数音乐人的利益。这与阿纳托法朗士著名的讽喻很相似：“法律，在其最崇高的平等名义下，禁止富人以及穷人在桥下睡觉。 ”理论上，很公平地，版权包涵了名人和无名之辈的创作，但实际上，只有大的发行公司才有经济能力在法庭上为它们的知识产权辩护。从某种意义来讲，这很公平，因为没人愿意窃取没名气的音乐，但关键的是，版权维护名人的知识产权使得名人
16、和默默无闻的音乐人被划入两个不同的阶层。5 Internet music file sharing has become a significant factor in the social lives of children, who download bootleg music tracks for their own use and to give as gifts to friends. If we are to believe one recent poll done by a marketing firm rather than social scientists, 48% of
17、American Internet users aged 12 to 17 had downloaded music files in the past month (6). In so doing, they violate copyright laws, and criminologists would hypothesize they thereby learn contempt for laws in general. A poll by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that two-thirds of an est
18、imated 35 million Americans who download music files do not care whether they are copyrighted (7). Thus, on the level of families, ending copyright could be morally as well as economically advantageous. On a much higher level, however, the culture- exporting nations (notably the United States) could
19、 stand to lose, although we cannot really predict the net balance of costs and benefits in the absence of proper research. We do not presently have good cross-national data on file sharing or a well-developed theoretical framework to guide research on whether copyright protection supports cultural i
20、mperialism versus enhancing the positions of diverse cultures in the global marketplace. 因特网的共享音乐文件已成为孩子们社会生活中重要的因素之一，他们非法下载音乐供自己使用，也作为礼物送与朋友。如果去看一项最近由营销公司而不是社会科学家所作的民意调查，我们就会发现 48%的年龄在 12-17 岁之间的美国网民在过去的一个月中下载过音乐文件。这样，他们违反了版权法，犯罪学家将因此假设他们普遍轻视法律。一项由 Pew 网和美国生活项目做出的调查表明，据估计，35,000,000 下载过音乐文件的美国人中有三分
21、之二并不关心那些音乐是否有版权。因此，就家庭这个层面，停止版权从道德和经济两方面来讲，可能都是有好处的。可是，就更高的层面来说，文化输出国（尤其是美国）可能不得不忍受失却之痛，尽管没有恰当的研究我们无法真正预测损失与收益的净差额。当前，我们没有好的跨国界共享文档的数据，也没有成熟的理论框架能用来指导研究版权保护究竟有助于文化帝国主义还是提高不同文化在国际市场中的地位。6 It will not be easy to test such hypotheses, and extensive economic research has not conclusively answered the qu
22、estion of whether the patent system really promotes innovation. We will need many careful, sharp-focus studies of well-formed hypotheses in specific industries and sectors of life. For example, observational and interview research can uncover the factors that really promote cultural innovation among
23、 artists of various kinds and determine the actual consequences for children of Internet peer-to-peer file sharing.6 要检测这些假想不是件容易的事，而且广泛的经济研究也没有为专利制度是否真正促进创新这样的问题得出结论。对于生活中特定的行业与方面组织得当的假设，我们仍需要许多细致，深入的研究。例如，观察与采访性研究能够揭示真正促进各类艺术家的文化创新的因素，决定因特网点对点文档共享对于孩子们的切实影响。7 The classic sociological theory of pri
24、vacy asserts two main principles that are relevant to current information debates (8, 9). First, private relations between individuals are not merely a personal luxury but the very basis of all societies. Thus, surveillance of citizens in the name of national security undermines the very society it
25、was intended to protect. Second, privacy and its violation are inescapably issues of power, with power defined as the ability to defend ones own privacy while being able to invade the privacy of others. Thus, citizens privacy is violated by government surveillance, even if the information is kept co
26、nfidential afterward by the agencies. 7 古典的社会学隐私理论中有两条原则与当下的信息辩论相关。第一，人与人之间的私人关系不仅仅是个人的乐事更是所有社会的基础。因而，以国家安全的名义监测公民削弱了政府本来要保护的社会的基础。第二，隐私与违反隐私不可避免地与权势有关联，权势意味着能够维护自己的隐私同时能够侵犯别人的隐私。这样一来，即使过后信息由情报部门保密，公民的隐私还是受到政府监控的侵犯。8 Computer scientists have begun to develop systems that would defend peoples informa
27、tion privacy (10). For example, the World Wide Web consortium, which is the chief forum for development of Web standards, has launched the Platform for Privacy Preferences, which automatically manages personal information when interacting with Web sites, following the explicit wishes of the user (11
28、).8 计算机科学家们已经开始开发保护人们的信息隐私的系统。比如说，全球网络协会，作为发展网络标准的先锋，已经启动了隐私选择平台，这一平台按照使用者明确的愿望，与网址互动时自动管理个人信息。9 Ethically informed research can be valuable for design and implementation of information systems. Data mining, for example, can be used in noncontroversial situations like intrusion detection, when you n
29、eed to defend your own data against attack from outside. But it can also be used aggressively to sift through vast troves of data, pulled together via the Net in a process called data fusion, in a way that violates the privacy of law-abiding citizens while hunting for a few criminals or terrorists.
30、In its recent report, Information Technology for Counterterrorism, the National Research Council blithely suggests that all airport security baggage x-ray machines could send their pictures to a unified computer network that would monitor the collective movements of terrorists boarding different air
31、planes in different cities, incidentally spying on everybody else who flies (12). Proper sociotechnical design could limit the harm. For example, an automatic data-mining system could seek patterns of suspicious behavior, without allowing any human being to see the data. Then, specially sworn court
32、officials could carefully examine the suspicious cases, before reporting to law enforcement only those few that met statutory definitions of probable cause. 9 有道德意识的研究对于信息系统的设计与实施颇有价值。数据挖掘，比方说，能被用在入侵探测之类毫无争议的情况中，这时你需要防止你的数据受到外来的攻击。但是数据挖掘也可能极具侵略性地被用来筛选大量的数据，这些数据经由网络在被称为数据整合的过程中堆积到一起，这种方式在寻求几个犯罪分子或恐怖分
33、子的同时违反了守法公民的隐私。在近期的报告反恐信息技术中，国家研究理事会轻率地建议，飞机场所有的行李安检 x 射线仪器能够将照片传送到一个统一的电脑网络系统中，它将会监视从不同城市登机的恐怖分子的集体行动，顺便窥探飞机上的其它乘客。适当的社会技术设计可以减少此类伤害。例如，自动数据挖掘系统能够在无人看到数据的情况下搜寻可疑行为模式。之后，特别宣誓过的法官仔细检查可疑案例，并只将触犯法律的少数几个人上报执法部门。10 What is the optimal design for such a multitiered confidentiality system? Would there be u
34、nintended consequences? Would it be acceptable to the public? Without good answers to such questions, information technology could fall under the same cloud of public suspicion that hangs over nuclear power and genetic engineering. Already, aggressive telemarketing has made people very reluctant to
35、answer scientific surveys administered by telephone (13). Internet-based surveys have promise, but they typically lack the reliability of traditional random-sample polling. Another challenge is that impartial research on the real consequences of government security-motivated data fusion and mining m
36、ay not be possible within the government security regime itself, because impartiality in science requires the research to be made public. 10 这样一个多层次保密系统的最佳设计是怎样的？是否会出现未曾想到的后果？公众可以接受它吗？如果没有合理的答案，信息技术就会像核能和基因工程一样被笼罩在公众疑云当中。侵略性的电话营销已经让人们不再乐意回答通过电话进行的科学调查。基于因特网的调查很有前途，然而一般来说，却缺乏传统的随机抽样民意调查的那种可信度。另外一个挑战是
37、，对于政府以安全为出发点的数据整合与挖掘的真正影响的公正性研究在政府安全机制内可能无法开展，因为科学的公正性要求研究必须公开。11 Like other buzzwords, “data mining“ is difficult to define precisely, and it is practically indistinguishable from a wide range of statistical and pattern recognition techniques used throughout the sciences. Thus, if it is brought int
38、o disrepute by privacy violations, science could be harmed. Similarly, many scientists use data that belong to other people, such as the social survey data archived at the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (14), so they would be affected by any change in the intellectual
39、property regime. Internet arose as a medium of scientific communication and is an indispensable tool for scientists today. Thus, research on Internet privacy and property issues could benefit science itself, as well as society.11 同其它流行词汇一样， “数据挖掘”很难被准确定义，实际上无法将它与贯穿各科学领域的许多数据和模式辨别技术区分开来。倘若它因违反隐私权而遭非议
40、，那么科学也将由此受损。同样地，因为很多科学家利用属于别人的数据，如存档于政治与社会研究校际协会的社会调查资料，所以他们会受到知识产权制度任何一丝变化的影响。因特网作为科学交流的媒介而出现，如今它是科学家们或不可缺的工具。因此，关于因特网隐私和知识产权问题的研究有益于科学本身，以及整个社会。12 Only an anarchist would argue for complete government deregulation of information, but any social scientist would find it interesting to contemplate th
41、e implications of major changes in government enforcement of intellectual property rights and government collection of data about its citizens. This essay has briefly sketched theoretical issues that would underlie research on information privacy and property in the age of Internet, and policy-maker
42、s should be aware that current practices may reflect cultural lag, the conflict-ridden situation when technological development has rendered traditional norms obsolete (15). 12 只有无政府主义者同意政府完全放弃对信息的调控，而令任何社会科学家感兴趣的是思索政府在推行知识产权和收集公民资料方面做出重大策略变动时带来的启示。本文简要地描述了在网络时代构成信息隐私和产权研究基础的理论问题，政策制定者应该意识到现行的政策可能反映出文化的滞后当技术革新使得传统准则过时的时候，就会出现这种冲突重重的状况。
