Abstract
As data elements have gradually become the core production factor in the era of digital economy, the lack of screening criteria for “creative labor” in the circulation of data elements has turned into a key obstacle restricting the further realization of data value. Current identification standards face dual challenges: insufficient alignment between legal and theoretical frameworks regarding “originality” and “labor empowerment”, coupled with persistent controversies in specific applications such as AI data utilization, cross-border data flows, and judicial practices. Therefore, a tiered identification framework should be established based on technical complexity and value contribution, with differentiated rules tailored to data collection, processing, and circulation stages. The development of “creative labor” identification standards requires efforts across four key dimensions: judicially, by drawing on effective practices in landmark cases to build a consistent adjudication system; technically, by leveraging blockchain and smart contracts to enable objective verification; institutionally, by striking a dynamic balance between advancing digital innovation and ensuring effective regulation; and policy-wise, by implementing comprehensive measures including tiered ownership confirmation, data transaction pricing mechanisms, and optimized cross-border data flow regulations.
Key words
data elements /
data circulation /
creative labor /
judicial collaboration
Cite this article
Download Citations
LI Wen-chao.
Construction of the Screening Criteria for “Creative Labor” in Data Element Circulation[J]. Journal of Beijing Jiaotong University(Social Sciences Edition). 2026, 25(1): 157-167
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
1 丁晓东.数据到底属于谁?——从网络爬虫看平台数据权属与数据保护[J].华东政法大学学报,2019,22(5):69-83.
2 程啸.论数据来源者权益[J].比较法研究,2024,(6):28-41.
3 薛峰,何云峰.马克思主义劳动理论视域下人工智能诠释的三个维度[J].重庆社会科学,2019,(9):61-69.
4 白永秀,刘盼.人工智能背景下马克思劳动价值论的再认识[J].经济学家,2020,(6):16-25.
5 张旭,于蒙蒙.人工智能背景下的劳动价值论研究:核心议题、历史追溯与经典回顾[J].政治经济学评论,2024,15(4):196-224.
6 姚佳.数据权益的知识产权保护及其限度——兼具“财产”与“知识”的双重视角[J].数字法治,2025,(2):127-135.
7 覃斌武,顾男飞.数据可视化表达的著作权认定——兼评黑洞照片争议[J].科技与法律,2020,(4):49-56.
8 梁志文.云计算、技术中立与版权责任[J].法学,2011,(3):84-95.
9 见石丹.大数据时代数据权属及其保护路径研究[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2018,38(3):78-85.
10 谭洪波,耿志超.数据要素驱动新质生产力:理论逻辑、现实挑战和推进路径[J].价格理论与实践,2024,(5):39-44+145.
11 新浪微博诉字节跳动不正当竞争案宣判,字节跳动:将提起上诉[EB/OL].(2021-05-28)[2025-10-15].https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1701003380626303600&wfr=spider&for=pc.
12 黄尹旭.《人工智能生成合成内容标识办法》的规范功能与法律适用[J].法律适用,2025,(9):136-147.
13 马涛,刘秉源.跨境数据流动、数据要素价值化与全球数字贸易治理[J].国际经济评论,2024,(2):151-176+8..
14 罗祥.版权法保护的“贡献”来自提问还是答案?——对人工智能生成内容可版权性的思考[J].南大法学,2024,(5):143-160.
15 曾田.AI时代著作权独创性标准适用问题研究[J].经贸法律评论,2024,(4):140-158.
16 贾淑品,邬瑞钰.人工智能时代马克思劳动价值论的论证与发展[J].科学社会主义,2023,(1):55-61.
17 田友谊,韩雪童.信息化时代创造性劳动的发生机制及其课程实践[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2021,60(6):164-173.
18 黄一锴,房敏.高职院校学生创造性劳动能力培育路径研究[J].中国高等教育,2023,(12):61-64.
19 游家兴,苏三妹.打破数据“烟囱”:大数据驱动的新质生产力与劳动投资效率[J].经济管理,2024,46(9):5-29.
20 李弦.数据要素赋能新质生产力的理论逻辑与实践进路——基于马克思劳动过程理论的分析[J].上海经济研究,2024,(5):25-36.
21 任明,王为久,周文泓,等.数据要素市场化推进:进展、问题与对策[J].图书情报知识,2024,41(5):25-35.
22 王今朝,张潇扬,窦一凡,等.数据要素的类别与定价:基于经济模型分析[J].管理评论,2024,36(7):3-11.
23 黄尹旭,杨东.“利益—权利”双元共生:“数据要素×”的价值创造[J].中国社会科学,2024,(2):47-64+205.
24 刘涛雄,李若菲,戎珂.基于生成场景的数据确权理论与分级授权[J].管理世界,2023,39(2):22-39.
25 马费成,吴逸姝,卢慧质.数据要素价值实现路径研究[J].信息资源管理学报,2023,13(2):4-11.
26 马费成,熊思玥,孙玉姣,等.数据分类分级确权对数据要素价值实现的影响[J].信息资源管理学报,2024,14(1):4-12.
27 史丹,何辉,薛钦源.数据分类分级制度与数据要素市场化:作用机制、现实困境和推进策略[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2024,(4):58-76.
28 李雪梅,赵小磊.基于经济学视角的数据要素定价研究[J].河南社会科学,2024,32(1):33-42.
29 李清逸,罗敬蔚.数据价值链视角下数据要素定价机制研究[J].价格理论与实践,2022,(3):94-97.