布兰代斯《论隐私权》.docx
- 文档编号:13254875
- 上传时间:2023-06-12
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:34
- 大小:47.36KB
布兰代斯《论隐私权》.docx
《布兰代斯《论隐私权》.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《布兰代斯《论隐私权》.docx(34页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
布兰代斯《论隐私权》
4Harv.L.Rev.193
HarvardLawReview
December15,1890
*193THERIGHTTOPRIVACY
SamuelD.Warren
LouisD.Brandeis
Boston,December,1890
Copyright©1890HarvardLawReviewAssociation;SamuelD.Warren,LouisD.Brandeis
“Itcouldbedoneonlyonprinciplesofprivatejustice,moralfitness,andpublicconvenience,which,whenappliedtoanewsubject,makecommonlawwithoutaprecedent;muchmorewhenreceivedandapprovedbyusage.”
WILLES,J.,inMillarv.Taylor,4Burr.2303,2312.
THATtheindividualshallhavefullprotectioninpersonandinpropertyisaprincipleasoldasthecommonlaw;butithasbeenfoundnecessaryfromtimetotimetodefineanewtheexactnatureandextentofsuchprotection.Political,social,andeconomicchangesentailtherecognitionofnewrights,andthecommonlaw,initseternalyouth,growstomeetthedemandsofsociety.Thus,inveryearlytimes,thelawgavearemedyonlyforphysicalinterferencewithlifeandproperty,fortrespassesvietarmis.Thenthe“righttolife”servedonlytoprotectthesubjectfrombatteryinitsvariousforms;libertymeantfreedomfromactualrestraint;andtherighttopropertysecuredtotheindividualhislandsandhiscattle.Later,therecamearecognitionofman'sspiritualnature,ofhisfeelingsandhisintellect.Graduallythescopeoftheselegalrightsbroadened;andnowtherighttolifehascometomeantherighttoenjoylife,—therighttobeletalone;therighttolibertysecurestheexerciseofextensivecivilprivileges;andtheterm“property”hasgrowntocompriseeveryformofpossession—intangible,aswellastangible.
人身伤害――噪音与气味――精神价值的法律确认――名誉的法律确认
Thus,withtherecognitionofthelegalvalueofsensations,theprotectionagainstactualbodilyinjurywasextendedtoprohibitmereattemptstodosuchinjury;thatis,theputtinganotherin*194fearofsuchinjury.Fromtheactionofbatterygrewthatofassault.[FN1]Muchlatertherecameaqualifiedprotectionoftheindividualagainstoffensivenoisesandodors,againstdustandsmoke,andexcessivevibration.Thelawofnuisancewasdeveloped.[FN2]Soregardforhumanemotionssoonextendedthescopeofpersonalimmunitybeyondthebodyoftheindividual.Hisreputation,thestandingamonghisfellow-men,wasconsidered,andthelawofslanderandlibelarose.[FN3]Man'sfamilyrelationsbecameapartofthelegalconceptionofhislife,andthealienationofawife'saffectionswasheldremediable.[FN4]Occasionallythelawhalted,—asinitsrefusaltorecognizetheintrusionbyseductionuponthehonorofthefamily.Butevenherethedemandsofsocietyweremet.Ameanfiction,theactionperquodservitiumamisit,wasresortedto,andbyallowingdamagesforinjurytotheparents'feelings,anadequateremedywasordinarilyafforded.[FN5]Similartotheexpansionoftherighttolifewasthegrowthofthelegalconceptionofproperty.Fromcorporealpropertyarosetheincorporealrightsissuingoutofit;andthenthereopenedthewiderealmofintangibleproperty,intheproductsandprocessesofthemind,[FN6]*195asworksofliteratureandart,[FN1]goodwill,[FN2]tradesecrets,andtrademarks.[FN3]
Thisdevelopmentofthelawwasinevitable.Theintenseintellectualandemotionallife,andtheheighteningofsensationswhichcamewiththeadvanceofcivilization,madeitcleartomenthatonlyapartofthepain,pleasure,andprofitoflifelayinphysicalthings.Thoughts,emotions,andsensationsdemandedlegalrecognition,andthebeautifulcapacityforgrowthwhichcharacterizesthecommonlawenabledthejudgestoaffordtherequisiteprotection,withouttheinterpositionofthelegislature.
法官对于新型权利的称呼是学术研究的关注点,再辅之以学术的论证,特别是社会情势的变迁。
Recentinventionsandbusinessmethodscallattentiontothenextstepwhichmustbetakenfortheprotectionoftheperson,andforsecuringtothe,individualwhatJudgeCooleycallstheright“tobeletalone.”[FN4]Instantaneousphotographsandnewspaperenterprisehaveinvadedthesacredprecinctsofprivateanddomesticlife;andnumerousmechanicaldevicesthreatentomakegoodthepredictionthat“whatiswhisperedintheclosetshallbeproclaimedfromthehouse-tops.”Foryearstherehasbeenafeelingthatthelawmustaffordsomeremedyfortheunauthorizedcirculationofportraitsofprivatepersons;[FN5]andtheeviloftheinvasionofprivacybythenewspapers,longkeenlyfelt,hasbeenbutrecentlydiscussedbyanablewriter.[FN6]TheallegedfactsofasomewhatnotoriouscasebroughtbeforeaninferiortribunalinNewYorkafewmonthsago,[FN7]directlyinvolvedtheconsideration*196oftherightofcirculatingportraits;andthequestionwhetherourlawwillrecognizeandprotecttherighttoprivacyinthisandinotherrespectsmustsooncomebeforeourcourtsforconsideration.
Ofthedesirability—indeedofthenecessity—ofsomesuchprotection,therecan,itisbelieved,benodoubt.Thepressisoversteppingineverydirectiontheobviousboundsofproprietyandofdecency.Gossipisnolongertheresourceoftheidleandofthevicious,buthasbecomeatrade,whichispursuedwithindustryaswellaseffrontery.Tosatisfyaprurienttastethedetailsofsexualrelationsarespreadbroadcastinthecolumnsofthedailypapers.Tooccupytheindolent,columnuponcolumnisfilledwithidlegossip,whichcanonlybeprocuredbyintrusionuponthedomesticcircle.Theintensityandcomplexityoflife,attendantuponadvancingcivilization,haverenderednecessarysomeretreatfromtheworld,andman,undertherefininginfluenceofculture,hasbecomemoresensitivetopublicity,sothatsolitudeandprivacyhavebecomemoreessentialtotheindividual;butmodernenterpriseandinventionhave,throughinvasionsuponhisprivacy,subjectedhimtomentalpainanddistress,fargreaterthancouldbeinflictedbymerebodilyinjury.Noristheharmwroughtbysuchinvasionsconfinedtothesufferingofthosewhomaybemade
(隐私报道)的供给创造了需求
thesubjectsofjournalisticorotherenterprise.Inthis,asinotherbranchesofcommerce,thesupplycreatesthedemand.Eachcropofunseemlygossip,thusharvested,becomestheseedofmore,and,indirectproportiontoitscirculation,resultsinaloweringofsocialstandardsandofmorality.Evengossipapparentlyharmless,whenwidelyandpersistentlycirculated,ispotentforevil.Itbothbelittlesandperverts.Itbelittlesbyinvertingtherelativeimportanceofthings,thusdwarfingthethoughtsandaspirationsofapeople.Whenpersonalgossipattainsthedignityofprint,andcrowdsthespaceavailableformattersofrealinteresttothecommunity,whatwonderthattheignorantandthoughtlessmistakeitsrelativeimportance.Easyofcomprehension,appealingtothatweaksideofhumannaturewhichisneverwhollycastdownbythemisfortunesandfrailtiesofourneighbors,noonecanbesurprisedthatitusurpstheplaceofinterestinbrainscapableofotherthings.Trivialitydestroysatoncerobustnessofthoughtanddelicacyoffeeling.Noenthusiasmcanflourish,nogenerousimpulsecansurviveunderitsblightinginfluence.
*197Itisourpurposetoconsiderwhethertheexistinglawaffordsaprinciplewhichcanproperlybeinvokedtoprotecttheprivacyoftheindividual;and,ifitdoes,whatthenatureandextentofsuchprotectionis.
上述部分就是问题的提出:
如何能够保护个人的隐私?
如果可以,则其保护的性质与程度是什么?
Owingtothenatureoftheinstrumentsbywhichprivacyisinvaded,theinjuryinflictedbearsasuperficialresemblancetothewrongsdealtwithbythelawofslanderandoflibel,whilealegalremedyforsuchinjuryseemstoinvolvethetreatmentofmerewoundedfeelings,asasubstantivecauseofaction.Theprincipleonwhichthelawofdefamationrests,covers,however,aradically-differentclassofeffectsfromthoseforwhichattentionisnowasked.Itdealsonlywithdamagetoreputation,withtheinjurydonetotheindividualinhisexternalrelationstothecommunity,byloweringhimintheestimationofhisfellows.Thematterpublishedofhim,howeverwidelycirculated,andhoweverunsuitedtopublicity,must,inordertobeactionable,haveadirecttendencytoinjurehiminhisintercoursewithothers,andevenifinwritingorinprint,mustsubjecthimtothehatred,ridicule,orcontemptofhisfellow-men,—theeffectofthepublicationuponhisestimateofhimselfanduponhisownfeelingsnotforminganessentialelementinthecauseofaction.Inshort,thewrongsandcorrelativerightsrecognizedbythelawofslanderandlibelareintheirnaturematerialratherthanspiritual.Thatbranchofthelawsimplyextendstheprotectionsurroundingphysicalpropertytocertainoftheconditionsnecessaryorhelpfultoworldlyprosperity.Ontheotherhand,ourlawrecognizesnoprincipleuponwhichcompensationcanbegrantedformereinjurytothefeelings.Howeverpainfulthementaleffectsuponanotherofanact,thoughpurelywantonorevenmalicious,yetiftheactitselfisotherwiselawful,thesufferinginflictedisdamnumabsqueinjuria.Injuryoffeelingsmayindeedbetakenaccountofinascertainingtheamountofdamageswhenattendingwhatisrecognizedasalegalinjury;[FN1]*198butoursystem,unliketheRomanlaw,doesnotaffordaremedyevenformentalsufferingwhichresultsfrommerecontumelyandinsult,fromanintentionalandunwarrantedviolationofthe“honor”ofanother.[FN1]
与诽谤、名誉侵权的区别;法律对于精神损害不提供任何救济
Itisnothowevernecessary,inordertosustaintheviewthatthecommonlawrecognizesandupholdsaprincipleapplicabletocasesofinvasionofprivacy,toinvoketheanalogy,whichisbutsuperficial,toinjuriessustained,eitherbyanattackuponreputationorbywhatthecivilianscalledaviolationofhonor;forth
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 论隐私权 布兰代斯 隐私权