20 year-old Yan Yifan stole and sold the login credentials of 30 gamers, and a Chinese judge has upheld his 5000 RMB ($870) fine. In its decision, the court said that "online game players had spent time, energy and money gaining the game's equipment and adding value to the virtual goods." The article goes on to say that others in China have been calling for explicit legal protections for this kind of "virtual property."

This is interesting because it's the same kind of theoretical justification for copyright in things like databases: no creativity required, just hard work. The tension between creativity and this "sweat of the brow" approach is discussed in this paper, and traces of both are evident in the patois of copyright, but neither encompasses the utilitarian justifications provided by the US Constitution. There, neither creativity nor hard work are sufficient to justify copyright protection. Instead, the Constitution says that protection is granted in order to promote the creation of new works. In case you were wondering.