This case centers on virtual property maintained in a virtual world on the Internet. The plaintiff claims an ownership interest in this virtual property. He also asserts that the defendants, the operators of this virtual world, unlawfully confiscated his virtual property and denied him access to their virtual world. The case raises new questions about rights and obligations that emanate out of the relationship between the owner and creator of a virtual world and its resident customers, as noted by the Pennsylvania federal trial judge. And as the judge correctly pointed out, while the property and the world where the property are found are virtual, the dispute is quite real.
Read this item from C|Net’s Eric Sinrod
Previously from WNM:
Gold farming and the digital sweatshop
Intellectual property for virtual things
Your virtual money’s no good here. But why?
Death & (Virtual) Taxes
Online “banker” runs off with cash, avatars cry foul