Är virtuell egendom fortfarande egendomlig? - En undersökning om huruvida virtuell egendom är tjänlig som kreditsäkerhetsobjekt vid pantsättning i svensk rätt

Sammanfattning: Virtual property in videogames with real monetary value is a reality. The purpose of this paper is to assess whether virtual property may be pledged in a credit transaction. This issue is addressed using both the Swedish legal dogmatic method (Sw. rättsdogmatisk metod), and partly a comparative method, in conjunction with Swedish and foreign material. The existence of virtual property is based on a contractual relationship between the users and the game providers. Virtual property is code that is (1) intangible, (2) rivalrous, (3) interconnected, and (4) persistent. The inescapable position of dependence between users and providers does not change what virtual property is, but does affect the application of the Swedish pledge legislation. In order to pledge virtual property, it must be property that can be attributed to a type of property that can be pledged. To classify virtual property as property, an object fiction (Sw. objektfiktion) must be used. This requires one of the following circumstances to be present: (1) legislator’s acknowledgement; (2) customary ground; or (3) sufficiently high and public acceptance. Even if the object fiction can be used, virtual property cannot be attributed to a property type, and is hence property sui generis. Should the opposite be true, virtual property ought to be classified as a right of use. The current legislation does not allow for property sui generis nor rights of usage to be pledged. Other obstacles to pledge virtual property are, due to the aforementioned contractual relationship, that a valid pledge agreement cannot be concluded, and that virtual property cannot be sold. Additionally, no specific action (Sw. sakrättsligt moment) to achieve creditor protection is available. In conclusion, virtual property cannot be pledged in a credit transaction in accordance with today’s legislation.