Conflicts Of Laws And Resolution Mechanism Of Extraterritorial Application In The Field Of Personal Information Legislation

Due to the wide mobility of personal information and the transnational nature of the source and collection countries of personal information,territorial jurisdiction principle can not play a role in protecting the security of national personal information,so it is necessary to break the shackles of the territorial principle.Due to the inherent tradition of privacy protection in the European Union,<General Data Protection Regulation> set a precedent for the extraterritorial application in the field of personal information.Countries imitate GDPR to enact their own personal information legislation,thus forming the "Brussels effect".Countries have different legislative pursuits in the field of personal information,and there are different definitions of the objects to be protected,such as personal information,personal data and privacy.The popularization of extraterritorial application will aggravate legal conflicts in the field of personal information,increase compliance costs of enterprises and damage cross-border data flow.Therefore,it is necessary to resolve such legal conflicts.From the perspective of American case law,combined with the corresponding theories and legal practices of the United States,paper will summarize the three types of resolution mechanisms formed in the extraterritorial application of the United States: cooperation,blocking law and comity,and the implementation of these three types of resolution mechanisms has its advantages and disadvantages.The resolution mechanism of cooperative can balance the consensus of both sides,but it is difficult to form a unified opinion if the interests of countries are not coordinated.The function of the resolution mechanism of the blocking law is to resist the legal effect of other countries’ laws on the country.However,the effect of the blocking law is often lower than its legislative expectation.At the same time,the characteristics of passivity,political nature and dilemma make it difficult for the blocking law to be used as a tool to resolve legal conflicts.In essence,the comity settlement mechanism is a judicial abstaining act,which is a unilateral act of giving up the jurisdiction of the domestic law on the basis of examining the laws of one’s own country and other countries.The comity law settlement mechanism has no clear legal guidance,and the judge decides independently according to the situation of the case.Accompanied by the dual division of public and private law has been estranged from the division of modern law,principles of public law taboo to withstand scrutiny,and in the process of public law in the United States law conflict resolving many judicial cases affected by conflict law idea,the mechanism of conflict of laws applicable to public law conflict feasible vision a reality.Article 3 of Personal Information Protection Law stipulates extraterritorial application.In order to avoid legal conflicts,our country should promote international cooperation in solving legal conflicts,cautiously formulate blocking laws at the legislative level,re-examine the function of conflict laws,and pay attention to the principle of comitancy at the law enforcement and judicial level.