北方法学
北方法學
북방법학
NORTHERN LEGAL SCIENCE
2012年
2期
145-160
,共16页
网络游戏%虚拟世界%虚拟财产%职业玩家
網絡遊戲%虛擬世界%虛擬財產%職業玩傢
망락유희%허의세계%허의재산%직업완가
online games%fictitious world%fictitious property%professional game players
王志祥博士发表在《北方法学》20l0年第4期上的《论虚拟财产刑事保护的正当性——与侯国云教授商榷》一文，对笔者发表在《中国人民公安大学学报（社会科学版）））2008年第3期上的《论网络虚拟财产刑事保护的不当性——让虚拟财产永远待在虚拟世界》进行了系统的辩论和批评。为避免对读者产生误导，倡导游戏产业健康发展，此文再次阐述笔者对虚拟财产的基本观点：虚拟物品和虚拟财产的划分不科学，游戏商和玩家都是虚拟财产的主体。虚拟财产没有客观性和现实性，它在现实世界中不具有任何效用性。虚拟财产也不具有稀缺性，更不能在现实世界中流转。游戏只是娱乐，不是劳动，虚拟财产作为整个游戏软件的组成部分，不应该另行卖钱。用虚拟财产兑换现实货币违反价值规律和价值交换规则，虚拟交易属于干扰金融秩序的违法行为，保护虚拟财产将会给社会带来极大危害，应让虚拟财产永远待在虚拟世界。
王誌祥博士髮錶在《北方法學》20l0年第4期上的《論虛擬財產刑事保護的正噹性——與侯國雲教授商榷》一文，對筆者髮錶在《中國人民公安大學學報（社會科學版）））2008年第3期上的《論網絡虛擬財產刑事保護的不噹性——讓虛擬財產永遠待在虛擬世界》進行瞭繫統的辯論和批評。為避免對讀者產生誤導，倡導遊戲產業健康髮展，此文再次闡述筆者對虛擬財產的基本觀點：虛擬物品和虛擬財產的劃分不科學，遊戲商和玩傢都是虛擬財產的主體。虛擬財產沒有客觀性和現實性，它在現實世界中不具有任何效用性。虛擬財產也不具有稀缺性，更不能在現實世界中流轉。遊戲隻是娛樂，不是勞動，虛擬財產作為整箇遊戲軟件的組成部分，不應該另行賣錢。用虛擬財產兌換現實貨幣違反價值規律和價值交換規則，虛擬交易屬于榦擾金融秩序的違法行為，保護虛擬財產將會給社會帶來極大危害，應讓虛擬財產永遠待在虛擬世界。
왕지상박사발표재《북방법학》20l0년제4기상적《론허의재산형사보호적정당성——여후국운교수상각》일문，대필자발표재《중국인민공안대학학보（사회과학판）））2008년제3기상적《론망락허의재산형사보호적불당성——양허의재산영원대재허의세계》진행료계통적변론화비평。위피면대독자산생오도，창도유희산업건강발전，차문재차천술필자대허의재산적기본관점：허의물품화허의재산적화분불과학，유희상화완가도시허의재산적주체。허의재산몰유객관성화현실성，타재현실세계중불구유임하효용성。허의재산야불구유희결성，경불능재현실세계중류전。유희지시오악，불시노동，허의재산작위정개유희연건적조성부분，불응해령행매전。용허의재산태환현실화폐위반개치규률화개치교환규칙，허의교역속우간우금융질서적위법행위，보호허의재산장회급사회대래겁대위해，응양허의재산영원대재허의세계。
Doctor WANG Zhi -xiang published a paper in the Northern Legal Science （No. 4, 2010） , named ＂On the Legitimacy of the Criminal Proteetion for Fictitious Property＂. In this paper, he put forth a systemic debate and criticism on my journal paper, published in the Journal of Chines People＇ s Public Securi- ty University （ Social Sciences Edition） （ No. 3, 2008）, named ＂On the Illegitimacy of Criminal Protection for Fictitious Property--Let the Fictitious Property Stay in Fictitious Spaee＂. In order to avoid arousing misunder- standing and to enhance the sound development of online game industries, this paper aims to restate my opin- ions on fictitious property. The classification between fictitious things and fictitious property is not scientific, since both the game providers and players are subjects of fictitious property. So the fictitious property is not objective or real, with no actual effects in the real world. Besides the fictitious property is not scare resource and cannot be exchanged in the real world. Moreover, games are for fun rather than for work, so being part of the game software, fictitious property should not be charged with money. The transaction of fictitious property with eurrencies is against the rules of value and value exchange. Such transaction is illegal for interrupting the financial order and to protect the fictitious property will cause serious harm to the society. Therefore, this pa- per reiterates that the fictitious property should stay in fictitious space forever. These statements are ready for arguments with Doctor WANG.
