Peculiarities of countering legalization of criminal income with the help of virtual assets: legislative regulation and practical implementation

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to define and characterize peculiarities of countering the legalization of criminal income with the help of virtual assets. Design/methodology/approach The analysis of the legislative delineation and the realities of the practical implementation of the features of combating the legalization of criminal proceeds with the help of virtual assets in Ukraine was carried out with the help of general scientific methods of cognition. The systematic method helped identify the main ways to legalize criminal proceeds with the help of virtual assets. Using legal techniques, proposals will be formulated to amend draft legislation on legislative regulation of the concept of “virtual assets”. The generalization method was used to develop ways to combat the legalization of criminal proceeds with the help of virtual assets. The method of legal forecasting was used to substantiate the proposed areas of combating money laundering with the help of virtual assets. The method of extrapolation will be used to determine the possibility of implementing foreign experience in domestic practice to combat money laundering with the help of virtual assets. Findings One of the relatively new and increasingly popular ways of money laundering is to commit this act with the help of virtual assets. Methods of money laundering through virtual assets include services for the conversion of virtual assets, P2P exchange, gambling sites, virtual asset mixers and the use of fictitious internet sites selling digital goods. The difficulty of counteracting the legalization of criminal proceeds with the help of virtual assets is primarily due to the lack of legislative regulation of the concept of “virtual assets” in Ukraine. Yes, the draft law is currently being finalized. Besides, even the current edition is not evaluated by the authors as perfect. After all, the issue of the content of the concept of “virtual assets” and its relationship with virtual securities, cryptocurrency and virtual property remains unresolved. Originality/value One of the relatively new and increasingly popular ways of money laundering is to commit this act with the help of virtual assets. Methods of money laundering through virtual assets include services for the conversion of virtual assets, P2P exchange, gambling sites, virtual asset mixers and the use of fictitious internet sites selling digital goods. It is essential to intensify financial monitoring by financial control bodies over the activities of conversion service centers. Moreover, given the transnational nature of legalizing criminal proceeds, especially those committed through virtual assets, international cooperation in combating this crime is vital. The authors have proposed specific measures to ensure that a coherent consolidation of efforts can be built.

Virtual Property Pada Game Online Dalam Perspektif Hukum Ekonomi Syariah

The development of technology has brought a variety of high-tech entertainment, one of which is developing games (games) both offline and online. Online games are games that are widely enjoyed, especially by children and teenagers. Today's online game play is not just a game, but in it there are economic activities in the form of buying and selling which have an effect on ownership of virtual objects (Virtual Property. The conclusion of this study is that Virtual Property can be recognized as a treasure in Islam. Although it does not have a real form, there is a value that is recognized by the community so that it becomes part of the property. Because it is recognized as property, buying and selling with this object is permissible and lawful. Recognition of the existence of virtual property is based on the theory of urf, namely that everything that is considered good and permissible by the community can then be a legal argument.

Theoretical and practical aspects of legal qualification of virtual property in Russia and abroad

The subject of this research is the theoretical and practical aspects of legal qualification of virtual property – digital online objects (cryptocurrencies, game property, user accounts, etc.) in Russia and abroad. Virtual property is viewed through the prism of the concept of “asset” / “economic asset”, established in the national and foreign legislation and doctrine. Real right to game objects in online games are considered through the lens of John Locke’s labor theory of property (acquisition), M. Radin’s theory of personality, theories of utilitarianism (deterrence of negative behavior and economic efficiency), law enforcement practices and legislation (South Korea, China, etc.). Real right to online accounts (Google, Yahoo etc.) are examined in the context of allowability of transferring personal and business accounts from the perspective of property and conventional law. The relevance, theoretical and practical importance of this research is are substantiated by supplementing the tangible objects of proprietary right with digital, created in modern reality with the use of digital technologies (cryptocurrencies, tokens, etc.), which requires clarification of their legal regime in the context of the effective legislation of the Russian Federation and foreign countries, ideas for its amendment, and law enforcement practice. The author concludes that the legal doctrine of a number of countries, distinguishing tangible and intangible, virtual objects (game objects, user accounts) recognized the existence and legal status of virtual property (Hong Kong, European Union, South Korea, Russian Federation, Taiwan), qualifying it as the analogue of digital information and content; legally - movable (Taiwan) or other (Russian Federation) property; property (the European Court of Human Rights) or utilitarian (mandatory) digital (Russian Federation) rights; economically – virtual (financial, in form of future income), and material (in form of commercial ties, domain names, etc.) assets (the European Court of Human Rights, Russian Federation).

Terms of service as a ground for establishment of ownership to virtual property

Problem setting. Today, the use of numerous sites is allowed only with the consent of the user agreements (Terms of Service) offered by them. Most often, users tick them, which is tantamount to signing such agreements, without even reading. However, it turns out that in most cases, user agreements, which are essentially agreements between users and providers, are aimed only at securing the interests of providers and in fact impose significant restrictions on users without granting them any rights other than the right to use the service. In addition, providers create them in such a way as not to draw the attention of users to the presence of the contract in this relationship. Such agreements are generally placed as hyperlinks at the bottom of the page or are created as a step that the user must agree to during registration. On this basis, the question of the need to strengthen the protection of users’ rights as a weaker party to the contract, by analogy with consumer protection, is increasingly raised. Moreover, the possibility of considering a user agreement as a kind of contract is widely discussed. Analysis of recent researches and publications. Given the novelty of such a phenomenon as user agreement, today there are not many studies devoted to them, especially in domestic science. Among foreign researchers of the legal nature and specifics of user agreements can be mentioned K. Cornelius, L. Belli and J. Venturini, T. Romm, P. Randolph, M. Radin, A. Savelyev, N. Vlasova. Thus, there is a lack of domestic research on the legal nature of user agreements, so there is an urgent need for research in this area. Target of research is to study the legal nature of the user agreement and analyze the possibility of it to become a ground for legal relationships, in particular, a ground for establishment of ownership to virtual property. Article’s main body. The article analyzes the possibility of considering user agreements as potential grounds for the emergence of ownership to virtual property. The judicial practice to protect the rights of users of accounts and European approaches to the protection of user rights are analyzed in the article. The research data, which give grounds to speak about violation of user rights by user agreements are given. In turn, this gives reason to question the possibility of considering the user agreement as a kind of contract. However, the analysis performed allows us to conclude that it is possible to consider the user agreement as a mixed contract, which can potentially serve as a ground for the emergence of virtual property rights. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Terms of Service agreements should be considered as mixed agreements that contain elements of several agreements. In particular, in the context of the emergence of virtual property rights from such agreements, elements of the Terms of Service agreement should be distinguished, which determine the legal consequences for the virtual property created within the online platforms. In the doctrine, the concept of virtual property as a kind of property right is already quite common today, and this kind of right may well arise from the contract, which in this case may be the Terms of Service agreement. If the Terms of Service agreement is recognized as the ground for the emergence of virtual property rights, it is necessary to provide in it how the balance of interests of platform developers and users in relation to virtual property will be determined. Obviously, all the features of the implementation and protection of virtual property rights, cases of its restriction will be specified in the contract.

Civil Law Protection of Network Virtual Property

<p>With the rapid development of science and technology, the form of property is not confined to the traditional concept of real life any more, and it also includes network virtual property. Besides, economic benefits are considerable as the network industry grows, which makes trading of virtual property a very common behavior in the real word. In such situation, there are various disputes concerned with virtual property emerging. However, relevant research and legislation can’t make breakthroughs as virtual property has vague legal status, complicated process of identification, and different definitions as well as unsolved legal protection method in academic field. Compared with the development of the network industry, legislation in the scope of virtual property has lagged far behind, which is hard to be the theoretical basis for solving disputes.</p><p>By analyzing the attributes of virtual property, and combining relevant cases with research results, the author seeks to put forward the protection rules of virtual property in line with the current situation in China, with civil law protection as the core. Possible further researches and prospects on protecting virtual property are also discussed in this article.</p>

Provider risks connected with uncertainty in the legal nature of online games’ terms of use

In the practice of the Russian courts, when creating an account in an online multiplayer game, any agreement concluded between the provider and the user seems to be covered by article 1062 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which is why this topic is not subject to judicial examination. However, this approach is unlikely to be applied for much longer, as it does not stand up to criticism. It can only be interpreted as a court attempt to insulate itself from the issue of virtual property. This article is devoted to the consideration the key risks to a provider related to the uncertain legal status of an online games’ terms of use, particularly the prohibition to share a user’s account or login credentials with anyone and a user’s actual rights to virtual content associated with his account. To achieve the research goal, the authors review the legal literature and perform a case study in this area, use a comparative method to identify legislative approaches in different legal systems regarding a user’s rights to their account and the virtual content connected with it, and determine the aspects of the user agreement that obviously contain risks for the provider. As a result of the research, the authors conclude that online multiplayer games are a sphere that tends to self-regulate. Therefore, to the extent possible, the risk of imbalance between self-regulation capabilities and the need to avoid abuse of the current situation, both by providers and users, should be minimized. The main source of regulation for relations between providers and players remains an agreement between them, which can be qualified as a mixed contract. However, such a qualification carries a risk for the provider, due to the complexity of determining the consequences of using the agreement as a single document, which combines various goals, ranging from determining the amount of processing of a player’s data and to fixing the legal regime of a user’s account. Regarding prohibition to share a user’s account, the authors assume that, according to Russian legislation, the most appropriate path is to determine it as a prohibition of assignment to secure providers from the liability for protection of users’ data. The lack of special regulation in this area allows the provider, through the terms of use, to sidestep the potential risk of protecting the player’s copyright on virtual content associated with his account. The authors, however, suggest that using an analogue of the American “sweat of the brow” doctrine in user agreements can to a certain extent remove the provider’s risks associated with the players’ real rights to their in-game property.