The UK Court of Appeals has made a significant ruling regarding virtual currency. They decided that money earned in Massively Multiplayer Online games can be treated as actual property. Because of this, stealing this in-game currency is now considered criminal theft.
This decision comes after a legal case involving a former developer for Jagex, the company behind RuneScape. The developer was accused of accessing nearly 70 different player accounts. He allegedly took large amounts of gold from these accounts and sold the currency for Bitcoin. Jagex calculated that the total value of the stolen gold was £543,123. This value was based on the rate at which in-game Bonds can be purchased with gold. These Bonds are important because they can be exchanged for a game subscription, which usually requires real money to buy.
The original verdict in this case went in favor of the defense. The court at that time believed that “gold pieces were not rivalrous and were more akin to pure information.” Because of this view, the gold was not considered stealable. Taking the gold was not seen as theft under the 1968 Theft Act. This act defines stealable items as “money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.” Since the court viewed RuneScape gold as similar to pure information, there was no legal basis to treat it as a stealable good.
However, when the case reached the Court of Appeals, the judges disagreed with the previous ruling. Lord Justice Popplewell, His Honour Judge Mayo DL, and Mr Justice Soole examined the case. They felt that the original verdict did not “bear analysis.” Essentially, they overturned the earlier decision.
In the conclusion of the ruling, found in the case R v Andrew Lakeman [2026], the judges determined that RuneScape gold does fall under the “intangible property” section of the Theft definition. Section 85 of the ruling reads that these items are properly described as something that can be stolen using normal language. They do not fall into any established exceptions.
The ruling further explained that the gold is not just “pure knowledge.” Functionally, the gold exists as identifiable assets. It is distinct from the computer code that creates it and exists outside of people’s minds. The judges noted there is no good policy reason to exclude these items from the category of property that can be stolen.
On the contrary, the gold has an ascertainable monetary value. It can be traded for that value both inside the game and outside of it. Within the game rules, the gold represents money’s worth because it can be used to purchase a Bond. Outside the game, the gold is regularly traded for real money. The judges stated that these assets are capable of being subject to dishonest dealing. This deprives the owner of their use and value. They concluded that it would be surprising if such dishonest dealing did not amount to the offense of theft.
This ruling brings a chapter in Jagex’s ongoing battle against a former employee to a close. However, it also raises interesting questions about the legal future of video game currencies. If stealing in-game gold is now a legal precedent for theft, it affects other hackers in the UK. This applies to hackers targeting other games as well.
If in-game items have value and are not just packets of valueless data, it changes the landscape. This could impact the ongoing debate about whether loot boxes constitute gambling within UK institutions. This court case may very well be the gift that keeps on giving, influencing legal discussions for years to come.
