This is a fascinating and important ruling on virtual property (thanks to Peter Harter for pointing it out to me). I would have expected something like this to happen in the litigious US first (and maybe it has and I don’t know about it), but it seems to follow a natural law theory of property. If you mix your labor with something that was up to that point not owned, you own it. Here’s another blogger’s thoughts on it.
Please follow and like Sonia Arrison:
Virtual property protections in China