DIGITAL RIGHTS AS AN OBJECT OF THEFT: DEBATES IN CRIMINAL LAW DOCTRINE AND THEIR RESOLUTION

Abstract

The relevance of the research is determined by the need to develop theoretically mature criminal law doctrine justifications for determining the status of digital rights as an object of theft. Research into scientific approaches to resolving this issue reveals a division among academics into two main schools of thought: some argue in favor of recognizing digital rights as an object of theft, while others, absolutizing the tangible attribute, defend the viewpoint that it is impossible to encompass digital rights within the category of “another’s property” and propose new criminal offense categories. The rapidly expanding digital rights market and the heightened risk of criminal attacks on new digital assets are making the need for a clear criminal law framework for digital rights, especially concerning their classification as objects of property offenses, increasingly palpable. Purpose: to test the hypothesis of recognizing digital rights as an object of theft by verifying this digital phenomenon according to three differential criteria identified in criminal law theory, and to propose the author’s position arguing for the inclusion of digital rights in the criminal law category of property. Methods: the formal-logical method allows for the verification of digital rights based on three systemic characteristics of the object of theft and substantiates the conclusion about recognizing them as property in the criminal law sense. The legal-dogmatic method is used to conduct a systematic analysis of civil and criminal legislation norms, identify terminological discrepancies between branches of law, and justify the possibility of recognizing digital rights as objects of theft without amending the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The legal modeling method is employed to determine the moment of completion of digital rights theft, taking into account the technological features of their issuance and circulation based on smart contracts. Results: the article systematizes the economic, legal, and technological aspects of the issuance and circulation of digital rights. The study confirms the hypothesis that digital rights possess all the characteristics of an object of theft. Referencing current legislation, legislative initiatives, and law enforcement practice, the author consistently substantiates a stable trend of distancing from the tangible attribute when qualifying the theft of civil rights objects, the issuance and circulation of which are carried out in the form of entries in information systems.