Social Media Account as an Object of Virtual Property



This article analyzes the concept of virtual property as well as the legal nature of social media accounts to explore whether these can be considered objects of property, in particular, of virtual property rights. It examines the essence of virtual property and reveals the specifics of owner’s powers regarding to digital assets. It also specifies what kind of objects should be treated as digital assets. The technical and legal nature of a social media account are analyzed to reveal whether the latter can be considered as “possession” in terms of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Some legal issues regarding to the use of a social media account including the division of rights to business accounts and inheritance of social media accounts are investigated. The approaches in various countries to the problem of determination of the post-mortem fate of digital assets are analyzed, and a unified tendency to consider social media accounts as part of the estate transferred to the heir is revealed. The conclusion is drawn that the extension of the property regime to social media accounts could ensure an appropriate legal protection of users’ rights.

Account; Digital Assets; Inheritance; Possession; Social Media; Users; Virtual Property

p. 201–226
Author biography

Kateryna Nekit

National University "Odessa Law Academy"

Associate Professor, Department of Civil Law

[1] Abramovitch, S. H. (2009). Virtual property in virtual worlds. [online] Available from: 9981-36f713c92820 [Accessed 21 July 2020].

[2] Ajemian v. Yahoo!, Inc. 84 N.E.3d 766. (2017) No. 17-1005, 2018 WL 489291 (U.S. Mar. 26, 2018).

[3] Ardis Health, LLC v. Nankivell. (2011) No. 11 Civ. 5013 (NRB). 2011 WL 4965172 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 19, 2011).

[4] Ark Land Co. v. Harper. (2004) No. 599 S.E.2d 754, 761 (W. Va. 2004).

[5] Banta, N. M. (2014) Inherit the Cloud: The Role of Private Contracts in Distributing or Deleting Digital Assets at Death. Fordham Law Review, 83 (2).

[6] BBC News. (2018). Parents win rights to dead child's Facebook. [online] Available from: [Accessed 26 April 2020].

[7] Blazer, Ch. (2006) The five indicia of virtual property. Pierce Law Review, 5.

[8] Castronova, E. (2001) Virtual worlds: a first-hand account of market and society on the Cyberian Frontier. CESifo Working Paper Series, 618.

[9] CDM Media USA, Inc. v. Simms. (2015) No. 14 CV 9111. 2015 WL 1399050 (N.D. III. Mar. 25, 2015).

[10] Conway, H. and Grattan S. (2017) The “New” New Property: Dealing with Digital Assets on Death. In: Modern Studies in Property Law. Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing.

[11] DaCunha, N. (2010) Virtual property, real concerns. Akron Intellectual Property Journal, 4 (1).

[12] Douglas, Z., Pauwelyn, J., Vinuales, J. E. (2014) The foundations of international investments law: bringing theory into practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [online] Available from: [Accessed 20 April 2020].

[13] Eagle v. Morgan. (2013) No. 11-4303, 2013 WL 943350, at *9 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 12, 2013).

[14] Edosomwan, S., Prakasa, S., Kouame, D., Watson, J. and Seymour, T. (2011) The History of Social Media and its Impact on Business. The Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 16 (3).

[15] (2019) User account | [online] Available from: [Accessed 26 April 2020].

[16] Erlank, W. (2012) Property in virtual worlds. PhD. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University.

[17] Fairfield, J. (2005) Virtual property. Boston University Law Review, 85. [online] Available from: [Accessed 26 April 2020].

[18] Fuchs, C. (2014) Social Media: A Critical Introduction. London: Sage.

[19] Gasus Dosier- und Fördertechnik GmbH v Netherlands, Merits. (1995) Application No. 15375/89, A/306-B, [1995] ECHR 7. (1995). 20 EHRR 403, IHRL 3433 (ECHR 1995), 23rd February 1995, European Court of Human Rights [ECHR].

[20] Gong, J. (2011) Defining and addressing virtual property to international treaties. Boston University Journal of Science & Technology Law, 17.

[21] House of Representatives 147th General Assembly. (2014) An Act to Amend Title 12 of the Delaware Code Relating to Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets and Digital Accounts. House Bill no. 345. Available from: [Accessed 26 April 2020].

[22] Hurter, E. (2009) The international domain name classification debate: are domain names “virtual property”, intellectual property, property or no property at all? The Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa, 42 (3).

[23] In re Borders Grp. (2011) No. 11-10614 (MG), 2011 WL 5520261, at *13 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2011).

[24] In re CTLI, LLC. (2015) 528 B.R. 359, 359 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Apr. 3, 2015).

[25] Investopedia. (2019) Economic Value. [online] Available from: [Accessed 13 April 2020].

[26] LaMotta, L. (2007) How to Make Money Online. [online] Available from: [Accessed 8 May 2020].

[27] Larissa, F. (2012). Is Blogging Really a Way for Women to Earn a Living? [online] Available from: [Accessed 8 May 2020].

[28] Lastowka, G. and Hunter, D. (2004) The laws of the virtual worlds. California Law Review, 92 (1).

[29] Leeson, P. A. (2016) How many #followers do you have?: evaluating the rise of social media and issues concerning in re CTLI’s determination that social media accounts are property of the estate. Catholic University Law Review, 66 (2).

[30] Lizerbram, D. (2013) A Legal Perspective: Who Owns Social Media Profiles? [blog] Marketo. Available from: [Accessed 26 April 2020].

[31] Louis, T. (2013) How Much Is A User Worth? [online] Available from: [Accessed 26 April 2020].

[32] Mousourakis, G. (2015) Roman law and the origins of the civil law tradition. Switzerland: Springer.

[33] Naito, A. (2012) A Fourth Amendment Status Update: Applying Constitutional Privacy Protection to Employees’ Social Media Use. Journal of Constitutional Law, 14 (3).

[34] National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. (2015) Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (2015). [online] Available from: 81c6-b39a91ecdf22&tab=librarydocuments [Accessed 26 April 2020].

[35] Nelmark, D. (2004) Virtual property: the challenges of regulating intangible, exclusionary property interests such as domain names. Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, 3.

[36] Nelson, J. W. (2010). The virtual property problem: what property rights in virtual resources might look like, how they might work, and why they are a bad idea. McGeorge Law Review, 41.

[37] Obar, J. A. and Wildman, S. (2015) Social Media Definition and the Governance Challenge: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Telecommunications Policy, 39 (9).

[38] Palka, P. (2017) Virtual property: towards a general theory. PhD. Florence: European University Institute.

[39] Park, S. and Abril, P. (2016) Digital Self-Ownership: A Publicity-Rights Framework for Determining Employee Social Media Rights. American Business Law Journal, 53 (3).

[40] (2019) User account Definition from PC Magazine Encyclopedia. [online] Available from: [Accessed 26 April 2020].

[41] PhoneDog v. Kravitz. (2011) No. C 11-03474 MEJ. 2011 WL 5415612 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011).

[42] Saghinadze and Others v. Georgia. (2010) Application no. 18768/05, Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights, 27 May 2010. [online] Available from:,ECHR,4c04c1f22.html [Accessed 8 May 2020].

[43] Samples, J. (2020) Why the Government Should Not Regulate Content Moderation of Social Media. Cato Institute Policy Analysis, 865.

[44] Sheldon, D. (2007) Claiming ownership, but getting owned: contractual limitations on asserting property interests in virtual goods. UCLA Law Review, 54.

[45] Standage, T. (2013) Writing on the Wall: Social Media – The First 2,000 Years. New York: Bloomsbury.

[46] Stephens, M. (2002) Sales of in-game assets: an illustration of the continuing failure of intellectual property law to protect digital-content creators. Texas Law Review, 80.

[47] The Conversation. (2018) Estate planning for your digital assets. [online] Available from: [Accessed 26 April 2020].

[48] Van der Walt, A. J. (2011) Constitutional Property Law. 3rd ed. Cape Town: Juta Law.






PDF views