《虚拟财产论文虚拟财产 法律属性 新型财产 虚拟财产权 民法保护》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《虚拟财产论文虚拟财产 法律属性 新型财产 虚拟财产权 民法保护（7页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、虚拟财产论文：虚拟财产 法律属性 新型财产 虚拟财产权 民法保护【中文摘要】网络虚拟空间是一把双刃剑,它在给人们带来巨大便利的同时也向传统法律提出了前所未有的挑战,虚拟财产就是其中之一。现实生活中,有关虚拟财产的纠纷越来越多,但我国有关虚拟财产的专门立法还处于缺失状态。对于虚拟财产的法律地位,众多法学界的学者也是众说纷纭,一直没有得出一个权威的结论。在司法实践中,由于立法的缺位,也很难寻求适用于虚拟财产案件的法律。对网络虚拟财产的研究,不仅在理论上是对传统财产权理论在互联网时代的开展、补充；而且在司法实践上,对解决日益增多的虚拟财产民事纠纷也有着重要的意义。因此理清虚拟财产的法律地位并在此根底
2、上构建虚拟财产的民法保护就显得十分迫切并具有现实意义了。本文通过总结他人理论研究成果,借鉴国内外立法实践经验教训,详细论述了虚拟财产的法律地位和民法保护问题。第一局部,以虚拟财产的来源为根底对虚拟财产的概念从广义和狭义两个角度进行了论述,并主张广义上的虚拟财产更符合现实生活中虚拟财产的范围。然后在对虚拟财产进行界定的根底上进一步总结出了虚拟财产的本质特征：虚拟性、价值性、排他性、期限性、合法性；第二局部和第三局部有关虚拟财产的法律地位问题是本文的重点论述对象。第二局部从虚拟财产的财产属性、法律属性两个层次上阐述了虚拟财产的法律地位。第一个层次着重解决虚拟财产是否属于财产的问题。首先介绍了大陆法
3、系、英美法系和经济学上的财产概念,总结出了财产的一般本质特征。然后列举了虚拟财产是否属于财产的两种观点,并对虚拟财产否认论进行了驳斥。最后证明了虚拟财产具有财产的一般本质特征,从而得出虚拟财产当属财产的结论；第二个层次主要论述虚拟财产属于何种财产的问题。有关虚拟财产的法律属性,学界目前主要有物、债、智力成果三种观点,此局部对这几种观点逐一进行了评析,认为这些观点都不能很好的界定虚拟财产。这也说明虚拟财产与传统财产法中的各种财产类型都不相符,因此作者主张将虚拟财产作为一种新型财产对待；第三局部在第二局部的根底上,详细论证了存在于虚拟财产上的权利即虚拟财产权的问题。本局部首先论证了虚拟财产权的主体
4、归属,无论从用户和运营商之间的关系还是从用户获得虚拟财产的方式讲,用户作为虚拟财产的主体都具有正当性,运营商在一定情况下可以对虚拟财产进行变更是基于其对效劳器和客服端程序的知识产权,而非虚拟财产权,故运营商不享有虚拟财产权。接下来再分析了虚拟财产权的权能并将虚拟财产权和所有权进行了比拟,认为虚拟财产权和所有权相似但又有别于所有权。最后得出虚拟财产权是一种明显有别于债权、物权和知识产权的新型财产权利的结论；第四局部主要论述虚拟财产的民法保护。该局部首先介绍了美国、韩国和我国台湾地区对虚拟财产的保护概况,再结合我国目前有关虚拟财产的立法和实践现状,提出了对虚拟财产的积极保护和消极保护建议。积极保护
5、主要是建议尽快出台针对虚拟财产的专门立法,从法律上确定虚拟财产的法律地位和用户的虚拟财产权；完善用户最终许可协议；建立完善的第三方交易平台；消极保护主要是对虚拟财产纠纷中的一些难题提出了有针对性的解决对策。【英文摘要】Virtual space is a double edged sword, it has not only brought a huge convenience to people but also the unprecedented challenges to the traditional law, virtual property is one of them. In o
6、ur real life, the disputes about virtual property are more and more, but the specific legislation of virtual property is a bank. For the legal status of virtual property, many famous scholars in law field have different opinions and have not come to a definitive conclusion yet. In judicial practice,
7、 because of the absence of legislation, it is difficult to seek for the law of virtual property cases. The research of virtual property, which is not only the development of traditional property rights theory, but also has important significance for solving virtual property disputes. So clear of the
8、 virtual property legal status and to construct the virtual property protection of civil law on this basis is very urgent and has realistic meanings.This paper summarizes theoretical research results of others, learn from the lessons of practical experience in legislation abroad, and details the vir
9、tual property legal status and protection of civil law.In part one, I discuss the concept of virtual property from the broad and narrow perspectives, and advocate a broad sense of virtual property in real life more in line with the range of virtual property. Then on the basis of the concept of virtu
10、al property, I further sum up the essence of virtual property features:virtual, value, exclusivity, duration, legitimacy;Part two and part three about the legal status of virtual property are the focus of this paper.Part two expounds the legal status of the virtual property on two levels. The first
11、level focuses on whether virtual property belongs to personal possession. At first, I introduce the concept of virtual property in civil law, common law and economics, and conclude the essential features of property. Then I enumerate two viewpoints that whether virtual property belongs to personal p
12、ossession, and I rebut the opinion that the virtual property doesnt belong to personal possession. Finally, I prove the virtual property has the essential features of property, so virtual property ought to be one of properties. The second level discusses the variety of virtual property in personal p
13、ossession. There are three viewpoints about the legal attribute of virtual property: theory of property right, theory of obligatory right and theory of intellectual property right. I think that these views dont well define virtual property. This also indicates that virtual property can not be attrib
14、uted to any kind of traditional possession law. So I advocate that virtual property should be treated as a new kind of property.In part three, I describe the virtual property right which is above on virtual property. This section first demonstrates the principal of virtual property ownership, both f
15、rom users and operators or from the relationship between the way users get about virtual property, the user as the main body of virtual property has the legitimacy. In certain circumstances, the operator can change the virtual property based on the server and the customer service side of its intelle
16、ctual property right, rather than the virtual property right, so the operator doesnt have a virtual property right. Next to analyze the power of virtual property right, and compare it with ownership. I think the virtual property right is similar with ownership but has something different from the former. Finally, I make a conclusion that the virtual property right is a new right which differs from other well-known property rights.The fourth part mainly demonstrates the civil law protectio
