The Judicial Protection Path of Network Virtual Property: From the Perspective of the Revision of the "Civil Case Classification" in 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62517/jel.202614211

Author(s)

Zhiguang Yu

Affiliation(s)

School of Law, Xinjiang University of Finance and Economics, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China

Abstract

Article 127 of the Civil Code establishes the principle of protecting online virtual property through a referential clause, yet fails to delineate its conceptual scope and legal attributes, resulting in longstanding dual challenges in judicial practice: "ambiguous substantive rules and unclear procedural access." In December 2025, the Supreme People’s Court issued its third amendment to the Provisions on Causes of Civil Cases, introducing for the first time a first-level cause of action titled "Disputes over Data and Online Virtual Property," under which three third-level causes—disputes over ownership, contractual disputes, and infringement disputes—were further specified. This provides an institutional framework for the protection of virtual property at the procedural level. However, the amendment does not resolve the suspension of attribute determination at the substantive level. Issues such as inconsistent valuation standards in judicial practice, tensions between platform rules and user rights, and the particular challenges posed by virtual currencies remain prominent. Based on a review of the academic debates surrounding the legal nature of online virtual property, this paper examines the practical progress and institutional dilemmas of judicial protection under the new system of causes of action. It further proposes a systematic approach centered on "categorized rights confirmation—dynamic remedies—collaborative governance" as a pathway for improvement, with the aim of providing theoretical reference for enhancing the civil judicial protection of online virtual property.

Keywords

Network Virtual Property; Judicial Protection; Case Type Regulations; Legal Attributes; Typified Protection

References

[1]Lu Yimin. From Possession to Control: The Rules for the Concurrent Application of Offenses in Digital Property Infringement. Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law, No. 5, 2025. [2]Zhang Yin. Examination of the Current Situation and Path Improvement of Judicial Protection of Network Virtual Property. Digital Law, 2024(4): 45:53. [3]Si Wei, Chen Jian. Reflection and Reconstruction of the Nature of Network Virtual Property Rights. Digital Law, 2024(3): 78:89. [4]Wang Yuping, Chen Qi. Analysis of NFT Trading Platform Infringement Liability and Governance Approaches: From the Perspective of China's First NFT Infringement Case. Science Technology Entrepreneurship Monthly, vol. 6, 2025. [5]Zhang Xinbao. Discussion on the Nature and Judicial Protection Path of Game Account and "Gold Coins" Rights. Legal Application, 2025(11): 23:32. [6]Wang Changyang. Research on the Enforcement of Digital Virtual Property. Journal of Communication University of China, 2025(3): 124:136. [7]Xie Xiao. Identification Standards and Type Construction of Network Virtual Property in the Context of Digital Economy. Law and Business Studies, 2025(3): 101:115. [8]Liang Yawei. Judicial Recognition of Virtual Property Value from the Perspective of Evidence Appraisal: A Study Based on 100 Cases [C]. Judicial Case Research Institute of the Supreme People's Court, 2019. [9]Xu Jianbo. From Interests to Rights: Path Selection for the Rightsification of Network Virtual Property Interests. Journal of Guizhou Police University, 2025(2): 49:57. [10]Dong Xiangyu. Dilemmas and Solutions in Determining Platform Liability in Digital Product Transaction Disputes. Jiangsu Social Sciences, vol. 2, 2025.