【摘要】 数据跨境流动的实际需要与掌控数据资源的迫切需求致使较多国家单方面立法扩张本国在数据领域的域外管辖权，这一现象在全球范围内形成明显趋势。数据领域域外管辖的立法模式并非杂乱无章，大致划分为两种：一是依托个人数据保护法案的欧盟模式；二是依托跨境取证法案的美国模式。在国际习惯法框架下，前者以属地管辖原则和效果原则为合法性基础，后者以属人管辖原则为依据。但同时，在数据领域，各国域外管辖权的扩张注定会在国际范围内引起管辖权冲突，且很可能侵犯他国数据主权。我国已经初步建立了个人信息保护法的域外适用制度，面对这一趋势带来的危机与挑战，我国应当界定数据立法域外管辖的边界，在坚决维护我国主权利益的同时有条件地承认与执行外国判决，进一步完善数据存储地模式并且强化阻断立法的执行性来应对他国不当的域外管辖。更多还原

【Abstract】 The actual needs of cross-border flow of data and the urgent need to control data resources have caused many countries to unilaterally expand their extraterritorial jurisdiction in the data field through legislation. This phenomenon has formed a clear trend on a global scale. The legislative models of extraterritorial jurisdiction in the data field are not messy and can be roughly divided into two types: One is European Union model that relies on the personal data protection act;The second is America model that relies on cross-border evidence collection act. Under the framework of international customary law, the former is based on the principle of territorial jurisdiction and the principle of effects-based jurisdiction, while the latter is based on the principle of personal jurisdiction.But at the same time, in the field of data, the expansion of countries’ extraterritorial jurisdiction is bound to cause jurisdictional conflicts on an international scale, and is likely to infringe on the data sovereignty of other countries. China has initially established an extraterritorial application system for personal information protection law. In the face of crises and challenges brought about by this trend,China should define the boundaries of extraterritorial jurisdiction for data legislation, conditionally recognize and enforce foreign judgments while safeguarding sovereign interests as well, further improve the data location mode and strengthen the enforcement of blocking legislation to deal with improper extraterritorial jurisdiction by other countries.更多还原