Digital technology has profoundly challenged traditional understandings of rights while giving rise to new claims whose meanings and boundaries remain to be clarified. Photo: TUCHONG

Digital technology has profoundly challenged traditional understandings of rights on multiple fronts. It has subjected conventional rights to severe tests, sometimes directly conflicting with them and sometimes weakening their protection. At the same time, it has given rise to new claims to rights whose meanings and boundaries remain unclear. Defining the scope and limits of these emerging rights has therefore become a pressing theoretical task.

Multilayered system consisting of six core components

Digital rights can be understood as a complex, multilayered system encompassing the rights to network access, informed consent, algorithmic justice, autonomous action, digital privacy, and digital property. The first four correspond to specific stages of information processing, whereas the last two extend across the entire information lifecycle.

At the stage of information generation and access, the right to network access represents the foundation of equality and autonomy in the digital domain. This right includes both the static guarantee of equal access opportunities and the dynamic protection of individual digital identities. When an individual first enters the digital space, they must create a digital identity to gain access. This identity is not merely a technical credential but also a digital projection of one’s real-world persona, serving as both the basis of recognition and the starting point for personal agency in the virtual environment.

As information begins to circulate, the right to informed consent becomes essential to ensure that data transmission operates according to legitimate, transparent, and ethical standards. This right comprises two dimensions: the right to know and the right to choose. The right to know guarantees that individuals are fully informed about how their data is collected, transmitted, and used. The right to choose ensures that individuals may freely decide whether to consent to such processes. Together, these two elements uphold the principle that personal data should be handled only under conditions of transparency, respect, and informed consent.

During information processing, the right to algorithmic justice emerges as a safeguard against bias and opacity in automated decision-making. Algorithms, as the core mechanisms of information processing systems, are both technological and political in nature. Problems such as algorithmic bias, discrimination, and “black box” opacity have become increasingly salient, raising concerns about fairness and accountability. The right to algorithmic justice demands both transparency of algorithmic processes and fairness in their outcomes. It ensures that individuals are entitled to explanations regarding algorithmic decisions and retain the ability to opt out of purely automated decision-making when their rights are affected.

At the application level, where individuals interact with digital platforms and services, the right to autonomous action protects the freedom to pursue one’s interests in digital environments. As online work, communication, commerce, and payment systems become ubiquitous—and as “smart cities” and “digital villages” continue to expand—this right ensures that the flow of personal behavioral data remains self-directed and unobstructed. It also guarantees fair access to digital resources needed for personal development and well-being.

The right to digital privacy safeguards individual autonomy and confidentiality across all stages of information handling. Individuals have the right to extend privacy protection to any information that can identify them, and to demand data minimization, purpose limitation, and timely deletion. They also retain control over data accessibility and sharing, deciding whether and to what extent their personal information may be disclosed or used. Encryption serves as a vital tool in protecting digital privacy. Governments should therefore permit individuals to employ encryption, anonymization, or pseudonymization to secure their digital presence. Individuals also have the right to require data handlers to encrypt or de-identify their personal information to reduce the risk of identification in the digital sphere.

The right to digital property, meanwhile, centers on respect for value and equitable benefit-sharing throughout the data lifecycle. Since digital property takes varied forms and values across contexts, ownership and entitlement should be determined accordingly. At the stage of network access, for example, virtual user accounts contain personal information with intrinsic economic value, whether derived from the data itself or from the digitization of traditional assets such as electronic currency. Individuals therefore enjoy the right to control and dispose of such property.

During data transmission and processing, data handlers aggregate dispersed information and transform it into valuable predictive and relational insights that generate economic benefits. In this process, digital property rights are shared between individuals and data processors. Individuals retain the right to disclose valuable data or authorize its use, while data processors, once lawfully authorized or working with anonymized information, gain a legitimate right to utilize and profit from it. When personal data is identifiable, processors’ rights to use and derive value from it must rest on explicit consent and authorization from the data subject.

Emerging rights category with five distinct characteristics

As an emerging category of rights, digital rights exhibit distinctive features that differentiate them from traditional rights.

The intangible sharedness of digital rights is particularly significant. First, digital rights exist within virtual rather than physical space. While traditional rights are grounded in tangible social and territorial domains, the widespread application of digital technologies has shifted many rights into digitized form in the virtual realm. Second, digital rights are carried and expressed through data and information. Unlike traditional rights—whose objects are tangible objects, intellectual creations, or personal entitlements—the precise object of digital rights remains debated, though its intrinsic connection to data is undeniable. Finally, digital rights also promote relationships of cooperation and mutual benefit. Whereas traditional rights often operate under a defensive or adversarial logic, digital rights integrate protection with collaboration. On the basis of safeguarding individual interests, they also emphasize shared governance and reciprocal benefits, reflecting a synthesis of defensive and cooperative dimensions in the digital age.

The decentralization of digital rights is reflected in the diversification of actors, the autonomy of content, and the transparency of forms. The rise of platform power has transformed the traditional binary structure of “state-society” into a triadic framework of “public power-social power-private power.” In terms of transparency, decentralized systems enhance the transparency and openness of digital processes, strengthening individuals’ rights to be informed and to give consent. Individuals can understand how their data is used and respond promptly to protect their rights. In terms of content autonomy, decentralization weakens reliance on coercive centralized authorities, strengthening personal control over data and increasing autonomy in digital spaces. In relatively open network environments, individuals’ dependence on centralized platforms is gradually reduced, and users can freely choose platforms and services according to their needs and switch among them as circumstances change. The widespread application of decentralized technologies further enables individuals to participate directly in data flows and determine how their information is used and shared.

The technological dependency of digital rights further distinguishes them from traditional rights. While conventional rights protection has long relied on law and ethics, technology now plays a decisive role in both realizing and protecting digital rights. Rights acquisition depends on technological infrastructure, while rights protection increasingly relies on technological safeguards. Digital networks provide the infrastructure that enables individuals to acquire rights in the first place, by freeing them from the confines of physical space. At the same time, digital platforms grant individuals virtual identities that transcend distinctions of gender, wealth, or status. Yet technology, while empowering rights, also introduces new risks—such as data insecurity and algorithmic manipulation—which must be countered through technological solutions.

The dynamic immediacy of digital rights reflects their capacity to evolve with changing times and social needs. This dynamism is evident both in the evolving content of rights and in the comprehensive nature of their protection. Digital rights are rooted in substantial interests, ethical considerations, and legal values; they represent an active response to the needs of individuals in digital contexts. However, as information flows more rapidly through digital networks, violations of rights also spread faster. Infringements occurring at one point in the system can quickly extend across the entire chain of information circulation, causing systemic damage.

Finally, the inclusive extensibility of digital rights underscores their integrative and evolutionary nature. Unlike traditional rights, which focus on the single core value of equality and freedom, digital rights mutually reinforce one another throughout the process of data circulation. They promote the integration of traditional rights with rights related to digital elements, expanding both the depth and breadth of traditional rights’ value connotations. In this process of fusion and expansion, digital rights constitute a composite category that combines multiple forms of rights, representing a digital innovation in both the boundaries and the exercise of traditional rights.

Within the domain of equality, digital rights specifically address injustices caused by the digital divide, elevating the notion of legal fairness to a broader, value-based fairness that ensures equal rights for all. Within the domain of freedom, they address the impact of technology on human autonomy. The intrusion and control of digital technologies challenges traditional conceptions of freedom both positively and negatively, reshaping the very meaning of liberty in the digital age.

Lyu Pusheng (professor) and Gao Yuan are from the School of Political Science and Public Administration at Wuhan University.