电子商务视阈下的数据治理与平台责任的法理学规制研究

Jurisprudential Regulation of Digital Sovereignty and Platform Responsibility in E-Commerce

摘要: 在数字经济快速发展的背景下，电子商务平台作为数据流通的核心枢纽，兼具“私主体”与“准公共治理者”双重角色，其数据治理与平台责任问题日益凸显。本文从法理学视角出发，探讨了数据治理的法理基础与电子商务实践中的挑战，分析了平台责任的法律属性与边界重构路径，并提出了优化电子商务治理的多元共治框架。数据治理的法理渊源源于传统国家治理理论与数字时代权利博弈的结合，但电子商务的全球化与数据流动性加剧了治理的复杂性，表现为跨境数据流动的合规困境、算法黑箱化引发的权利侵害，以及数据权属界定的模糊性。在平台责任方面，需突破传统侵权法范式，引入“权力制衡”理念，借鉴欧盟“守门人”制度等经验，以平衡私法自治与公共规制。司法实践中的“数据分层确权”和“算法透明性”要求为责任界定提供了参考，但需警惕技术中立原则的滥用。为优化治理路径，本文提出构建“国家–平台–用户”三维动态平衡框架：国家需完善数据分类分级制度并与国际规则衔接；平台应建立内部合规机制，强化算法公平性审查；用户需提升数据权利意识。此外，司法与监管应创新实践，推广“监管沙盒”模式，探索弹性治理。未来研究可以关注全球数字治理规则协调(如WTO电子商务谈判)及元宇宙电商中的国家对数据的治理与责任新挑战，以推动数字经济健康有序发展。

Abstract: Against the backdrop of the rapid development of the digital economy, e-commerce platforms, as the core hubs of data circulation, assume the dual roles of “private entities” and “quasi-public regulators”, making issues of data governance and platform accountability increasingly prominent. From a jurisprudential perspective, this paper explores the legal foundations of data governance and the challenges in e-commerce practices, analyzes the legal attributes of platform accountability and pathways for redefining its boundaries, and proposes a multi-stakeholder co-governance framework to optimize e-commerce governance. The jurisprudential basis of data governance stems from the interplay between traditional sovereignty theories and the rights dynamics of the digital era. However, the globalization of e-commerce and the fluidity of data have intensified governance complexities, manifesting in compliance dilemmas in cross-border data flows, rights violations caused by algorithmic black-boxing, and ambiguities in data ownership delineation. Regarding platform accountability, there is a need to transcend traditional tort law paradigms by introducing the concept of “power checks and balances” and drawing lessons from systems like the EU’s “gatekeeper” regime to balance private autonomy and public regulation. Judicial practices such as “tiered data rights confirmation” and “algorithmic transparency” requirements provide references for defining accountability, though the misuse of the principle of technological neutrality must be cautioned against. To optimize governance pathways, this paper proposes a tripartite “state-platform-user” dynamic equilibrium framework: the state should refine data classification and tiered systems while aligning with international rules; platforms must establish internal compliance mechanisms and strengthen algorithmic fairness reviews; and users need to enhance their awareness of data rights. Additionally, judicial and regulatory bodies should innovate practices, such as promoting “regulatory sandbox” models and exploring flexible governance approaches. Future research should focus on the coordination of global digital governance rules (e.g., WTO e-commerce negotiations) and emerging challenges related to sovereignty and accountability in metaverse-based e-commerce, thereby fostering the healthy and orderly development of the digital economy.