The Study On Network Virtual Property

Since the " the first case of virtual property " virtual property became important issues of concern for scholars and practitioners. As new things were constantly evolving, and the research also constantly deepened. Currently scholars differ on important issues: whether virtual property is property or not, which should be included in the scope of which legal protection, how to define the rights and obligations of the parties involved and so on. Today in the online game industry, the size of the annual income of more than one hundred billion, there is a need to further clarify the legal issues related to virtual property. Because virtual property appeared not too long, academic research for issues has not fully extended and deepened. And I believe that based on the vigorous development of virtual property, the impact on people, it is necessary to further study for the network virtual property nature, attributes, and how to protect. At the same time based on the current situation of the dispute and the lack of legislation, the legislature should take it seriously. Legal profession should also find ways to solve the huge number of virtual property disputes.The first part research the relationship of virtual property and property. The property referred to as "slaves, cattle and sheep, all kinds of goods" in ancient times. Into the agricultural society, land, housing became a very important property of the community. Light, electricity, heat, etc., which is difficult to control in the past become the property in modern society. Stocks, bonds, trade mark, a variety of intellectual property become a very important type of property. With the social progress, property is always in a state of change. However, the property has its basic properties. Some scholars believe that the property is the things. According to the Roman law, the things can be divided into a body of material and non-physical things. Some scholars believe that the things can include all property in human society. However, the concept of right and things are not the same level of logic. Many of the characteristics of the property are not fit into the category of things. To avoid confusion of logical system, the German property law has made it clear that the things are material objects. Because development and progress of social, property and things split. Although in the long history the form of of property in constantly evolving, but it has also created a stable attributes:objectivity, value, scarcity, controllable.Analysis of negative theory and affirmative one, and traditional property law theory as proof, we can concluded that network virtual property meets the basic attributes of property, is property.The second part research attributes of network virtual property rights. There is a big difference about attributes of network virtual property rights in academics and practitioners since the " the first case of virtual property ".And no clear legal provisions often leads to similar cases referee inconsistencies phenomenon in judicial practice, it also leads players, operators and legal workers "confused". The theory of network virtual property rights include the theory of real right, the theory of the intellectual property rights, the theory of the new property and the theory of intangible property rights. But network virtual property should not belong to adjustment range of the property law because of its non-material, but also because of its dominance and exclusivity make it different from the claims, which don’t not have creative process make it different from the knowledge of products, the new property is hard to solve practical problems. The inclusiveness and openness of intangible property system provide the conditions for network virtual property to include in the system. It will not bring a big impact, destruction logic and integrity to the system of the traditional property, debt, intellectual property, but also can be targeted to take protective measures in accordance with their characteristics.The third part analyzes ownership of virtual property based on the development process of the online game as well as the design. From the process of network game production, pre-game designers and operators own the virtual property. The players can make virtual property different from the "original state" through the game, trading, etc., and take its ownership. I believe that when to solve virtual property disputes needs to consider the stage of virtual property. Its ownership can not be generalized. Through the erection of Private Server, the use of illegal plug methods to obtain virtual property isn’t legal, and it maybe infringe the copyright and property of game designer and operators.The fourth part describes today’s major case and type against the network virtual property, defines the rights and obligations of the parties involved in major disputes types in order to resolve the dispute. The solution to such disputes often need to determine the value of network virtual property, the current choices of the reference value to determine it include a player’s direct economic investment, trading platform, the price on trading platforms, the sale price from operators, neutral body identification, the appraisals from neutral body and price for stolen goods. I believe that these methods have advantages and disadvantages. A player’s direct economic investment can not reflect the cost of time, the price on trading platform is difficult to reflect the true value of rare best equipment, and the procedure of neutral body identification is more complicated and time-consuming. So determining its value in accordance with the comprehensive type of disputes is appropriate.Then discusses two controversial problem of the virtual network property:the theft of virtual property whether or not can apply to bona fide acquisition; virtual property infringement whether or not can request compensation for moral damage. The first question:After analyzing the domestic and foreign legislation as well as trade circumstances of virtual property special, we believe that as long as the transferee meets in good faith and pays a reasonable price that he can obtain the ownership of the theft of virtual property. This system helps protect the security of transactions, maintaining social order and stability. The second question, we believe that not all virtual property infringement suffered can obtain compensation for moral damage. To obtain compensation for moral damage must meet two conditions:first, the victim of virtual property has spiritual interests; second, the infringer’s conduct caused serious mental harm to the victim.The fifth part research the legal protection of network virtual property. Basic on the previous analysis of the rights and obligations of operators, further clarify obligations of the game operators in the virtual network which should bear the responsibility for the protection of property. Based on the characteristics of virtual space, players rely on operators and technical capabilities of carriers, game operators should assume corresponding security obligations for user virtual property. Paper describes the specific content and the legal basis for security obligations. I find that operator set the game protocol to avoid main duty and increased responsibility of the user. Such provisions shall be in accordance with the provisions of Article 39,40,41 in contract law to identify its effectiveness. Through comparative study of the legislation of virtual property in countries and regions as South Korea, the United States, Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, we can find they have done a useful exploration of new things, we can draw lesson from the successful experience of them. Based on the amount in virtual property dispute and the majority of the characteristics of the dispute is not complicated, we can introduce small claims procedure. This system can effectively improve the efficiency of dispute resolution, easy defend rights. According to the experience of virtual property disputes settled by the courts of Shanghai, we can set similar goods and services online dispute processing mode to "mediation" and "arbitration" for most network virtual property disputes, it is more convenient and can save expenses and party activist judicial costs.In short, the problem of virtual property has been developed to the point where the legal profession can not be avoided. Laws need to take a timely response to issues related to virtual property to curb violations effectively, resolve disputes, and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of citizens. If the related work stalled, laws will be hard to adjust the new relationship. This is not conducive to the healthy development of the online gaming industry and the stability order of society.