Dutch court rules virtual theft is real
In September 2007, two teens, both aged 14 at the time, forced a 13-year-old classmate to hand over two items he had acquired playing Runescape, an internet game extremely popular with 10 to 15-year-old boys.
The culprits, who cannot be named due to their age, kicked, hit and threatened their classmate with a knife before the 13-year-old gave in and transferred the Runescape items, an amulet and a mask, to his attackers’ online accounts.
The public prosecutor argued, in what has become known as the ‘Runescape’ case, that virtual items used in the game should be considered as real and tangible goods as they have real, tangible value for the owner. The prosecutor noted that winning, collecting and trading Runescape objects play an important role in the virtual world and can also be sold for money in the real world.
Well, you seem to have not just theft but assault & battery here. The ruling makes sense – something belonged to A and B & C forced him to hand it over. BUT, if Rune stuff weren’t being traded in the real world, how would it be valused as far as petit/grand larceny?