With the deepening advancement of data-factorization and the national cultural digitalization strategy, the inherent tension between the protection and utilization of intangible cultural heritage (ICH) data has become increasingly pronounced. Traditional intellectual property paradigms face limitations due to their difficulty in accommodating the collective nature, living inheritance, and community-connectedness of ICH. While emerging theories on data-factor property rights offer an economic perspective for delineating data ownership, their singular focus on economic efficiency is inadequate for fully bearing and balancing the cultural dignity, ethnic identity, and spiritual-ethical values embedded within ICH data.

Consequently, there is a need to construct a specialized theoretical rights framework that aligns with the unique characteristics of ICH data. This framework should be grounded in the dual jurisprudential foundations of “community empowerment” and “internalization of cultural ethics”. While acknowledging the economic value of data, it must integrate ethical requirements—such as cultural respect, prior informed consent, and benefit-sharing—directly into the rights structure. Building upon this foundation, a systematic “separation of rights” normative system for ICH data can be established. First, the “right of representation” over original ICH data resources should be explicitly vested in source communities, legally affirming their status as cultural subjects and the source of control. Second, a “licensing right”, mandating prior informed consent mechanisms that embody full respect and procedural justice, should be established as a prerequisite for any substantive organization, digitization, or primary development of the data. Third, to promote data circulation and innovative utilization, the “right of operation” over data products or derivative applications resulting from deep processing may be recognized. However, this must be accompanied by the synchronous establishment of a fair, transparent, and enforceable benefit-sharing mechanism to ensure that generated economic and cultural value is continually returned to the source communities.

To ensure the standardized operation of these three rights, a “community trust” can be introduced as the institutional architecture. Under this model, a legally recognized community representative body acts as the trustee-manager, uniformly exercising the right of representation and the licensing right, while supervising operational activities and benefit distribution. Through this integrated systematic approach, an organic balance can be achieved in the digital era between maintaining the cultural dignity of ICH data and releasing its data value. This provides a viable institutional path for related legislation and practice, one that possesses both theoretical rationality and operational feasibility.