Abstract: Data processing activities are usually of long-time range, multiple stakeholders related, obligations and contents of which are constantly changing due to technological improvements; economic law scholars use relational contract to describe aforementioned extraordinary nexus.In recent years, emerging technologies such as multi-party computation and Federated Learning are expecting to alleviate the tension amongst data utilization and privacy protection in a decentralized data processing stance, but they in turn induced problems of low-efficient negotiations, balancing measures out-of-order, non-calculable earnings and chargeable failure, breaking the status quo of information protection laws serving as the overall failsafe for the relational contract.Facing the above fundamental changes, various traditional legal mechanisms should be upgraded or even reconstructed by correcting procedural data configurations, introducing fundamental data-processing rules, averaging residual rights and renewing the liability system, so as to form a dynamic norm in times of constant changes.The bottom line of such a dynamic norm is to release the value of data in a compliant and orderly manner, yet not sacrifice the stability of the relational contract.

Key words: Relational Contract, Data Processing Activities, Personal Information Protection Law, Procedural Data, Residual Rights

摘要： 数据处理活动符合时间范围长、涉众基数多、权利义务不断修正、内容随技术发展嬗变等特征,可藉由“关系合同”的概念予以统摄。近年来,治理科技等新兴技术、东数西算等国家政策备受瞩目,有望通过数据处理的“扁平化”“去中心化”缓解数据流动和隐私保护的根本性矛盾,但因其导致目标失范、量化失效、权利失衡、责任虚置等问题,击穿了个人信息保护法兜底关系合同的静态格局。为应对数据处理活动的技术流变,个人信息保护法的多项机制也应与时偕行,通过过程信息的正确配置、数据处理的原则补强、剩余权利的实质均分和责任体系的深度重构,动态应对耦合多变的法律风险。坚守的底线是,数据价值的合规有序释放,不以关系合同稳定性的牺牲为代价。

关键词: 关系合同, 数据处理活动, 个人信息保护法, 过程信息, 剩余权利