ChapterPDF Available

THREE-DIMENSIONAL LAW METAVERSE LAW

Authors:
  • Istanbul University Cerrahpasa

Abstract

The Metaverse, which is known as virtual universe, meta universe, exoplanet, various types of dimensional technology, real-time collaboration software, virtual and augmented realities and a digital ecosystem based on blockchain-based, differently designed financial tools, has made a rapid entry into our lives. The metaverse is a virtual public space, a virtual living space, perhaps the universe beyond our imaginations. A world metaverse whose principles, development, and management are not strictly governed and whose shortcomings have not even been fully determined. While there were still lacks in the law in terms of internet data and governance, there is now a big world in front of humanity where people can access the metadata universe through augmented reality, virtual reality and as avatars with their own versions. The world of law is not fully prepared for this virtual world. The problems to be encountered are different and seem to be different as we enter the metaverse world. This article aims to provide an overview of the law of the metaverse and to propose solutions.
THREE-DIMENSIONAL LAW
METAVERSE LAW
Aynur AYDIN1
ABSTRACT
The Metaverse, which is known as virtual universe, meta universe, exoplanet, various
types of dimensional technology, real-time collaboration software, virtual and augmented
realities and a digital ecosystem based on blockchain-based, differently designed financial
tools, has made a rapid entry into our lives. The metaverse is a virtual public space, a virtual
living space, perhaps the universe beyond our imaginations. A world metaverse whose
principles, development, and management are not strictly governed and whose shortcomings
have not even been fully determined. While there were still lacks in the law in terms of
internet data and governance, there is now a big world in front of humanity where people can
access the metadata universe through augmented reality, virtual reality and as avatars with
their own versions. The world of law is not fully prepared for this virtual world. The
problems to be encountered are different and seem to be different as we enter the metaverse
world. This article aims to provide an overview of the law of the metaverse and to propose
solutions.
Keywords:
Metaverse, Law, Avatar, Metaverse Law
INTRODUCTION
Computer screens in millions of homes have become a tangible portal to a virtual
world, similar to real life but more limitless and tangible, where people live, work, shop, play,
1 Istanbul University- Cerrahpasa, Forest Faculty, The Department of Environmental Law and Forestry, Istanbul,
Turkey, ORCID: 0000-0003-3647-6150, e-mail:aynur.aydin@iuc.edu.tr
learn and interact with each other in another world. There is now another world where
individuals can do whatever they want with identities and digital wallets they create with
digital copies or avatars. It is called the Metaverse. It is also known as a virtual universe,
meta-universe, or another universe. This virtual world, a digital ecosystem built on various
types of dimensional technology, real-time collaboration software, virtual and augmented
realities, and differentiated financial instruments with a blockchain base, is unlike any other.
A virtual public and living space, perhaps the universe beyond our dreams. The Metaverse is
now an industry estimated by technology companies to create a market opportunity of 1
trillion dollars (880 billion Euros) per year. Its principles, development and shortcomings
have not yet been determined. While there are still gaps in the laws on internet data and
governance, there is now a big world where people can access the universe of metadata
through augmented and virtual reality, and versions of themselves as avatars.
The law is still watching what is happening and the problems that are emerging.
Wearable technology is being created to allow avatars to feel physical interaction. Sexual
assault is mentioned in Meta's Horizon Worlds Metaverse. Will avatars be responsible for
criminal acts committed in the metadata repository? What about intellectual property rights?
Is it possible to establish a marriage bond between avatars? What legal consequences will this
marriage contract have? Will there be a belief system in the virtual world and how will its
rules shape the virtual world? How will the owner's right be enforced in case of an
unauthorized trespass on the land purchased by paying large sums of money? If a university is
established, according to which procedures and principles will it operate? Will the avatar
receive a diploma? Will there be natural resources? I wonder how the trading system will be
established when energy is produced. Will there also be carbon emissions and emission
trading? Will the environment be polluted? If so, how will those responsible be found? And
there are manymorequestions in this 3Dvirtualworld.
While the majority, especially those over the age of 40, have not yet recognised this
virtual world, technology company investments and the market created to show the size of the
issue; the law is lagging. Although being able to adapt to developing and changing events is
an approach inherent in law, how to manage this universe, which is a technologically difficult
system to understand, and which rules will be valid seems to be the biggest legal challenge. In
this period of a re-adaptation process, it is essential to act as soon as possible to identify the
problems that are likely to occur in the meta-universe and to act with a set of agreed rules.
Because it seems clear that this is one of the most progressive technological evolutions of the
next 20 years. Although some argue otherwise…
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
What is Metaverse?
The world has entered a new era that offers countless technological tools and
opportunities daily (Bak, 2018). In this new era, different and new digital concepts and
dimensions are coming to the agenda. Metaverse is one of them. Although the concept is
considerably new, its origins date back to Snow Crash (Dünya Bülteni, 2022), a sci-fi novel
written by author Neal Stephenson in 1992, that is a virtual reality-based internet technology
dating back decades. "Metaverse" has made headlines since Facebook announced in October
2021 that it was changing its legal corporate name to "Meta" (BBC, 2022). Since then, it has
become a frequently heard concept and heavily invested in.
The metaverse is a virtual space that facilitates online interaction with other people,
objects, and places. The design and functions of a virtual world allow people to work, play,
shop or socialize through their avatars in a shared space. The concept of meta-universe has
begun to enter everyday life with striking examples. In April 2020, more than 12 million
people attended a virtual concert performed by American rapper Travis Scott. Figures that
can't be reached in real life are considered normal in the meta-universe. In addition, the
purchase of "virtual lands" (Deacons, 2023), by international companies and individuals to
claim regional sovereignty in the meta-universe is an indication that this has also entered the
normalization process.
It is not surprising that the physical universe, which has become accustomed to and
even addicted to the Internet in the last 30 years, shows interest in the more impressive, three-
dimensional and entirely personal interactive structure of the meta-universe. The fact that it
can be used at all levels of industry from healthcare, entertainment, and culture to education
and defense, and that it offers a wide range of new opportunities and instruments
(Lucidrealitylabs, 2023), will make the meta-universe even more indispensable globally.
However, it should be emphasized that the meta-universe is still not a complete reality, but a
series of possibilities and/or predictions. Within this set of possibilities, it is usual to come
across different opinions. While one view believes and defends that the metaverse will
improve lives by providing experiences that cannot be had in the physical world, the other
side believes that it will only be an extension of the digital experiences we have today and
will lead to addictive behaviors and greater social media disturbances, including violent
tendencies (Euronews, 2022). Those who are positive about the metaverse argue that it will
improve companies' ability to collect personal data, as users' actions, habits, and physiological
responses can be tracked and recorded, giving such companies a deeper understanding of their
customers' thought processes and behavior (Tatlerasia, 2023). In addition, the fact that some
believe that it is not a very different application from the digital experiences we have today, as
well as those who believe that the meta-universe will soon become a reality despite all its
problems, is a sign that uncertainty will continue for a while.
It is claimed by some futurologists that the Machina Sapiens species of intelligent
creatures will be born, will share the earth with human beings, and artificial intelligence will
reach human intelligence by 2029 and already surpass human intelligence by 2045. Even the
claim that machines will gain consciousness and reach singularity is quite popular today
(Çetingül, 2021).
It is not difficult to conclude that there are many unanswered questions and unresolved
issues regarding the meta-universe. How exactly the meta-universe will be shaped, by whom
it will be regulated, which business and transactions it will cover, and what kind of structuring
it will require at the legal level are still open to discussion.
Another concept that entered our daily lives with the meta-universe is the avatar. Users
participate in this virtual universe with their own digital-virtual identities. A virtual identity
called an avatar is assigned to users to be created by their personal preferences. This identity,
which sometimes includes personal data such as name, image, age, gender, occupation, and
location, enables the users to represent themselves in the relevant medium and to be
recognized and distinguished by other users or third-party participants (Akkurt, 2017). There
are questions and problems with the system as a whole, along with avatars, their work and
actions. As a very brief introduction shows, it is not easy to say whether we are ready for the
meta-universe or whether it is just a trend or an exciting form of capital investment, but it is
necessary to observe the change and experience what it will bring. Considering that the meta-
universe is an unlimited marketplace; where personal data is stored and users interact deeply,
it is clear that it will bring many legal problems.
How will "ownership" be defined in the case of digital artwork? Will the ownership
here be limited to a mere licensing and service provision? (Theconservation, 2023). Virtual
real estate has become a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) (Gazetevatan, 2023), or "Nitelikli Fikri
Tapu" in Turkish, as individuals and companies spend enormous amounts to own a "property"
in the metaverse. Will the procedures and principles of real estate ownership also apply here?
What will be done in case of violation of residential immunity? Is it possible to establish
mortgages and obtain loans on real estate? In the meta-universe, there is unlimited storage of
data on individuals, which may even include their characteristics. Then, is the protection of
this data not a legal problem in itself? In an environment where user interaction is so intense
through avatars when unlawful acts occur, will an application equivalent to the actions
occurring in the real world be applied? How will the concept of enforcement work here? How
will the application be in offences that require physical presence for the commission of the
offence? Will the avatar of the offender be responsible for the offence? If so, what will be the
effect of the offence’s enforcement in the virtual world? How will the resulting unlawful acts
be punished?
How will an avatar be held responsible for its actions in the metadata store? In cases
where there is no evidence of physical harm, how will it be possible to prove this and/or to
establish damage? These are just the initial questions that come to mind. In this world, which
is populated with virtual reality headsets and augmented reality glasses, even these questions
are enough to show the issue's complexity.
Undoubtedly, the global pandemic has accelerated the development of the meta-
universe. Virtual applications that companies started to use to support remote working, remote
training, and pieces of practices with technical devices used in medical procedures in
hospitals during the pandemic seem to be corporate applications of the meta-universe
(Techtarget, 2023). In this regard, the way law operates, the binding norms, and their
enforcers should be aligned with universal international legal standards as soon as possible.
The Meta-Universe and Law
All the questions to be addressed about the meta-universe were asked during the
development process of the Internet, countries' legislation was updated accordingly, various
tort definitions were made, and different penalties were brought to the agenda. The meta-
universe is not so different from the Internet. Those interested in the history of the Internet
will recall the cyber utopians of the 1990s who declared the Internet to be a space independent
of laws and jurisdiction (Brian, 2023). But as time goes by, the idea that the Internet can be
absolutely above and beyond the law has disappeared. The same will be the case for the meta-
universe. Soon, if the predictions of those who think positively about the meta-universe are
actualized, meta-law will also progress and norms, governance and decision-making
processes will become clarified.
The meta-universe is not above real-world laws and is neither new nor lawless. As
technology evolves, the challenge understands how law can work at different layers to
regulate different aspects of an online experience (Woon, 2023).
It is important to note that existing rules in the meta-universe are not above the law.
Existing regulations governing areas such as anti-money laundering, contracts, data
protection, defamation, tort, gaming and gambling, intellectual property, tax and financial
regulation already apply to the meta-universe order. The metaverse will be majorly regulated
by the laws of the current internet and the real world (Deacons, 2023). One of the great
paradoxes of the legal profession is the stereotype that lawyers are allergic to technology and
the difficulties experienced by society in the way it interacts with technological progress
(Liu, 2023). It is argued that when it comes to the meta-universe, the interest of lawyers is still
in its infancy (Reuters, 2023).
However, considering that the author of the article is also a lawyer and taking into
account the number of legal publications on the subject, it will be seen that it is not too late
and that the matter has drawn the attention of this occupational group. However, there is no
doubt that as technology develops, virtual worlds will develop further, and users will be able
to interact with each other more intensely and realistically. In addition, this will require legal
experts to devote more time to the subject. In fact, in 2020, the issue was also subject to the
Turkish supreme judiciary (Yargıtay, 2020) and it was decided that avatars have a material
value (Akbay, 2022). The decision will be discussed in the conclusion section of the study.
Although the subject is very broad and open to expansion, the emerging and potential
problems can be summarized under particular headings. Although not all issues will be
summarized, to give an idea, these headings will be discussed below. Because each heading
can be the subject of a separate study.
Intellectual Property
The values, shaped as a result of the activities of persons, artefacts and/or products do
not only consist of things that take place in the material world in the sense of goods. In
addition, there are also intellectual products that emerge from the ideas, creative aspects and
talents of individuals. Products such as science and literature, music, fine arts or cinema,
which bear the characteristics of their owner, are defined as works in this sense.
The Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works explains what these works are in detail.
Accordingly, computer programs and their designs, choreographic works, non-verbal stage
works, photographic works, maps, plans, projects, pictures, models and similar works of
geography and topography, all kinds of architectural and urban design and projects,
architectural models, industrial, environmental and stage design and projects; works of
science and literature. Oil and watercolor paintings that have aesthetic value, all kinds of
paintings, patterns, pastels, engravings, beautiful writings and illuminations, calligraphy,
serigraphy, sculptures, works of architecture, handcrafts and small works of art, miniatures
and textile with decorative art products, fashion designs, cartoon works are defined as works
of fine arts. In addition, cinema works are also included in the definition of works of the Law.
Just like other works and products, legal systems also protect these intellectual
products with legal norms. This is called intellectual property right. Just like the right of
ownership, which grants the owner the widest powers such as use, benefit and disposition,
intellectual property right grants the right to hold the protection rights of their work, and
prevent and/or restrict the use of others.
Considering the definition of work in the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works, it is
clear that perhaps the most important legal problems encountered in the meta-universe, which
creates its universe, can produce or use works of art, copy, create trademarks, create identities,
make and use software, sell virtual land and therefore have to make mapping, contain famous
architectural designs, and create digital content by the user, will be concentrated at this point.
In general, virtual world platforms do not like to grant physical property rights to their
users due to the legal problems they may create. This is because it is both difficult and, in
some cases, impossible to recognize the powers arising from property rights in real life in the
virtual world. Instead, they grant limited-use licenses through end-user license agreements to
users (Theastrologypage, 2022), to exercise rights and similar rights recognized in the real
world. At this point, it is extremely important to take the studies that find end-user license
agreements limiting user rights and worry in terms of agreement requirements, bindingness
and transfer conditions into account (Begiter, 2023).
When it is necessary to provide users with the right to property on the components
they have created, these rights will strictly be confined by intellectual property rights. As in
the real world, regulations and associated sanctions will need to be applied to prevent the
copying of created digital content.
At this stage, blockchain and smart contracts can be used to legalize many intellectual
properties in the meta-universe ecosystem, such as who owns them, whether they can be
reproduced, or whether they can be prevented from being changed (Avcı, 2023). Every
business transaction requires a contract, and a written contract provides the power of proof. In
particular, every software provider needs a contract to limit its liability for damages, maintain
control over the distribution, and use of the software; protect its licenses and restrict misuse of
the software. Contracts are also necessary to determine intellectual property rights, the
validity of terms and rights, the user's use of the software, and restrictions within the software
(Avcı, 2022).
It is also possible that contractual disputes can be resolved with a legal expert in the
virtual world (Blockchain Council, 2023).
At this point, smart contracts have already taken their place in the virtual world. We
can define smart contracts as a process in which the codes that contract terms are embedded in
are activated with the data and all transactions are carried out transparently, without
intermediaries, and outside intervention is almost impossible. The most common example for
a simple explanation of this concept is the "buying food or beverages from vending machines
after a person's command in return for a given amount" process (Finetechistanbul, 2023).
It also seems possible to apply the EU Digital Copyright Directive 2019/790 (Soysal,
2019) to works in the meta-universe. The Directive aims to create a compromise and balance
between authors, performing artists, publishers and internet platform companies operating in
the digital space (Kılıç, 2017). Due to these circumstances, the European Commission is in
the process of evaluating a reform of co-created intellectual property arising from new
technologies.
Regulation of NFTs and Taxation
NFTs in the meta-universe are subject to traditional financial regulations such as
commodities, banking, and securities laws. How these assets are created and traded may
designate them as investment contracts and thus bring them within the scope of securities law.
The issuance, lending and trading of cryptocurrencies on the Metaverse will likely apply
banking, money transfer and other financial regimes to the system (Blockchian Council,
2023).
It is also controversial whether the goods acquired in the meta-universe, where trading
transactions are rapidly increasing, can be subject to seizure. For example, within the scope of
the Regulation on the Non-Use of Crypto Assets in Payments dated 16 April 2021, the Central
Bank of the Republic of Turkey defined crypto assets as "intangible assets that are created in a
virtual environment using distributed ledger technology or a similar technology and
distributed over digital networks, but are not qualified as nominal, dematerialized or
electronic money; payment, security or other capital market instrument". Within the scope of
this definition introduced by the CBRT, crypto assets were prevented from being
characterized as securities, capital market instruments or payment instruments. On the other
hand, a court decision issued after the Crypto Asset Regulation introduces a different
definition than the Crypto Asset Regulation, stating that cryptocurrencies are "considered as a
type of foreign exchange or virtual currency" and allow the seizure of crypto assets.
Therefore, while a consensus has not yet been reached even in real-world regulations, issues
such as attachment of properties acquired in the metaverse universe, the procedure of
attachment, etc are among the most important issues that need to be regulated in this universe
(Mükyen, 2022).
Law of Liability
The concept of liability is more specific to private law. Established concepts such as
tort and compensation liability are used in private law. When we talk about responsibility in
criminal law, we are talking about results attribution to the perpetrator. Therefore, to
determine whether the actions of artificial intelligence systems can be considered acts in the
context of criminal law, it is necessary to clarify whether these systems can be seen as
perpetrators of a crime (Pekmez, 2018).
A tort is an unlawful act that harms a person's body or property. Torts will also be
encountered in the meta-universe. U users can harm other digital personalities with whom
they interact, which has entered the agenda of the meta-universe with allegations of physical
assault, property damage, slander, and defamation offences.
Certain torts and offences are impossible to commit in a virtual world. In most cases,
if an avatar causes trouble in the virtual world, it is likely to be warned, suspended, or
permanently banned. But can there be virtual world activities that are harmful enough to
warrant civil or criminal sanctions in real life? In general, if an event in the virtual world
results in harm in real life, it may have legal consequences in real life (Abovethelaw, 2022).
The question of what will happen if the same situation occurs in the virtual world should be
answered.
There are some offences, such as wounding, killing and kidnapping, which primarily
target the human body and require the physical presence of a human being. Therefore, since
the user does not have a body in the meta-universe, it is not foreseen that these offences can
be committed by a user. However, some offences do not require the physical presence of a
human being, such as copyright infringement, trademark infringement, property issues, and
verbal abuse. As a result, such offences can also be committed by a user in the virtual
universe because users carry their minds into the universe.
The question at this point is whether, for these offences and disputes arising from the
actions of the avatar, one can go to the identity of the real user behind the digital identity. The
perpetrator's identity is necessary for the victim or the plaintiff since the law will only have
recourse against the person behind the avatar and not against the avatar itself. In this case, for
the service provider to track every movement of all avatars would mean collecting
information about the identity of another user behind the avatar, which would raise issues
related to users' right to privacy (Cheong, 2022).
When users interact through their avatars, situations may occur that would be
equivalent to breaking the law if they occurred between people in the real world (Lau, 2022).
Such incidents may violate criminal law norms. It will become necessary to distinguish
between a legal avatar and the natural person who manages that avatar. To determine whether
an avatar has human rights and whether liability may arise consequently, the requirements for
recognition as a natural person must first be properly recognized (Jiahong&Burgess, 2019).
To talk about liability, the existence of the capacity of rights and obligations, in other
words, the existence of personality is a prerequisite. That is to say, to hold artificial
intelligence responsible for the damage caused by its autonomous decisions and actions,
artificial intelligence must first have personality in the legal sense. The concept of a person is
an exclusively legal concept, with its emphasis on the power to have rights. The fact that
personality is a legal concept requires personality model proposals should also be analyzed
within legal boundaries (Şahin&Şahin, 2022).
In the Turkish Civil Code and contemporary legal systems, there are two types of
persons: natural and legal. Natural persons are equal in terms of having rights and obligations
(Oğuzman et. al, 2018, Hatemi, 2018, Ayan&Ayan, 2016, Akipek et.al, 2018, Dural&Öğüz,
2018). In this sense, every human being has the capacity to have rights from the moment of
conception, provided they are born alive and whole. With the capacity to have rights, people
are considered to have the power to acquire property, establish contractual relations, incur
debts in any other way, and be responsible for their actions; to be citizens, taxpayers, parties
in litigation, voters, authors, guardians/guardians, etc. Legal persons, on the other hand, are
persons or groups of persons or property other than humans who are orientated towards a
specific purpose and to which a hypothetical personality is assigned. Legal persons are not
humans, but they are given a personality by law due to the requirements of social life. Thus,
due to the personality assigned to them, legal persons may incur debts, acquire property,
establish contractual relations, and incur contractual liability (Bak, 2018).
At this stage, it is useful to look at the legal debates regarding artificial intelligence,
which is sometimes attributed to human characteristics as a legal entity, sometimes as a
natural person, and sometimes as a slave. The artificial intelligence concept can be defined as
machines that can imitate what humans can do and that machines can also carry out the
problem-solving ability of humans (Bozkurt&Bak, 2018). The concept of artificial
intelligence with human characteristics has gradually become an indispensable part of human
life with the advancement of technology.
So much so that it is possible to come across artificial intelligence in the ABS systems
of automobiles, search engines of computers, smartphones, smart homes and offices. Since
the concept is included in real life and will develop further, it does not seem possible to find
solutions to the problems to be encountered by ignoring entities that have human-specific
abilities and are even more autonomous (Kılıçarslan, 2019).
Robots and artificial intelligence and the problems that may arise from them are
widely discussed at the academic level in terms of liability law and the law of persons. On 27
January 2017, the European Parliament published the Robotics Recommendation Report of
the Legal Affairs Committee of the European Parliament, which contains a series of
recommendations to create a legal basis for solving the problems that artificial intelligence
will create in the future (Europarl, 2022). The most striking and revolutionary feature of this
Report is the proposal to give artificial intelligence an "electronic personality”. The report
proposes the creation of a special legal status for robots in the long term. According to the
Report, by granting electronic personality to robots, robots will be liable for the damages they
cause, and in other cases where robots make autonomous decisions or communicate
independently with third parties, the fact that robots also have a personality can be directly
taken into account. (Art. 59/f) The electronic personality proposal is also a proposal in line
with the sui generis status of artificial intelligence entities. Because, at least for the time
being, they cannot have the legal status of a human being, the report states that electronic
personality can be accepted as an alternative. Rather than being the property of a person,
artificial intelligence is a person who can have rights, incur debts, and perhaps even become a
taxpayer (Kılıçarslan, 2019).
It is also possible to apply the definitions for artificial intelligence to the avatars of the
meta-universe. However, there is a fundamental difference. Within artificial intelligence,
there are different statuses regulated depending on the autonomous decision-making criterion.
In this sense, a distinction similar to the capacity distinction made in natural persons has been
made and three types have been determined as full capacity artificial intelligence (the
presence of the will of the artificial intelligence and the absence of the command), limited
capacity artificial intelligence (the presence of the will of the artificial intelligence and the
presence of the command), and artificial intelligence without full capacity (the absence of the
will of the artificial intelligence and the presence of the command) (Lawtudent, 2022).
As can be seen, this distinction is made in terms of two elements. The first of these is
the order given by someone else and the receipt of this order. The other element is the
presence of the will of artificial intelligence. At this point, there is certainly a command given
by the person who gives the avatar its identity, and there is no will towards the action
performed In other words, the responsibility arising from the fact that the avatar acts
following the instructions of a natural person and performs its actions as a result of the will of
the natural person should be on the natural person.
In the literature on this subject, there is an opinion that the artificial intelligence user
may be held liable for the damages caused by its non-autonomous behaviour by analogy with
the provisions of "animal keeper's liability". Within the scope of this provision, an "animal
keeper" is a person who undertakes the care and management of the animal permanently or
temporarily. Therefore, it is concluded that the person/persons who keep the animal and are
responsible for the damage caused by the animal may be the owner, usufructuary, lessee or
operator of the animal (Bak, 2018, Akkurt, 2019). It is also among the opinions in the
literature that a solution can be sought by regulating the responsibility of the employee
(Atakan, 2022).
DISCUSSION
When trying to get used to a foreign universe, it is usual that the concepts that are tried
to be learned are sometimes confused, not understood, and remain unresolved. In this process,
if the meta-universe possibility sequence fully realizes itself, all issues will already be on the
agenda, nationally and internationally accepted norms will be established, and the main
principles will be learned. Changes will be experienced like every transition and getting used
to every new subject. Perhaps there may be a transition from utopia to dystopia or vice versa.
Who knows.
The law will play its role in this process. It does not seem difficult to solve intellectual
property problems with legal means used in the real world. Examples include smart contracts
and end-user license agreements that are adapted to the meta-universe and include digital
resolution processes.
As for the liability of avatars, unlike artificial intelligence, which has its own will and
does not even need to be commanded, there is no need to recognize a legal personality for
non-autonomous digital personalities. Since they cannot make decisions on their own and
their producers, users and software developers can be easily identified; they can be held
legally and criminally liable for any problems that may arise (Uçak, 2022). Therefore, it
would not be meaningful to create a separate personality for avatars that are not autonomous
and act depending on the will of the natural person who created them. It is possible to find a
legal solution with the most appropriate one of the cases of strict liability against damage
caused by the act of the avatar. In strict liability regulations, the establishment of liability is
based on a specially stipulated reason instead of fault. Therefore, in cases of strict liability, the
facts of the injured party and the compensation for the damage are taken into consideration,
not the damaging party (Başoğlu, 2015).
Therefore, although some think otherwise, depending on the concrete case, views
based on the responsibility of the animal owner could be adopted for avatars. On the other
hand, the opinions that advocate giving special legal status to a non-autonomous system based
on direct liability do not seem possible in the current legal order since the perpetrator can only
be a natural person (Çetingül, 2021).
While writing this conclusion, a Court of Cassation decision dated 2020 (Lexpera,
2023) is important in terms of showing how much the issue is now in life and the law has
evolved accordingly.
"Unlawful seizure of the game character used by the victim in a game played on the
internet" and its characterisation as "theft" and acquittal of the perpetrator. In this current
issue before the Court of Cassation, "...There is no offence without a subject. The subject of
the offence is the physical, material structure of the object or person. The offence of theft
requires something with volume and weight, i.e. a movable property, which is an object. The
subject of the IT offence regulated under Article 244/4 of the TPC is "data" in the context of
the concrete case. Data may mostly express an economic value. By the principle of legality, in
the absence of any legal regulation that recognizes data as movable property, it is not possible
to accept the act of taking data from its location without the consent of the possessor as theft.
The element of the act here is the sending of the data in the information system belonging to a
person to another place. It is a virtual act committed in the computer environment, that is, in
electronic media. There is no doubt that the unidentified perpetrator seized the game character
belonging to the victim after reaching the link in the e-mail sent by the perpetrator. Although
the game character expresses an economic value; it is not a movable property. The game
character obtained from the computer environment is data that can be bought and sold and has
a material value. Moreover, it is not physically taken from its location. On the other hand, the
act attributed to the defendant is "sending the existing data to another place", which is one of
the optional acts regulated in paragraph 2 of Article 244 of the TPC, and the "unfair benefit"
specified in paragraph 4 of the same Law is in question."
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
As can be seen, issues that would have been unthinkable 30 years ago are now the
subject of judicial decisions and legal discussions. Therefore, the issues that the law will
address and discuss will change, but the solution will always be sought in the rules of law
applied in real life or applied by analogy. However, this situation will never change the fact
that the protected subject of the law is a natural person (human being) with a soul, decision-
making ability and will. Because what is real is the physical world and social life and all the
rules regulating them. For this reason, metaverse law will be shaped in the light of general
legal principles of law and will also establish its own rules. The legal academic platform
should be well prepared for this in advance.
REFERENCES
Abovethelaw, Accesed: 11/12/2022, From:https://abovethelaw.com/2022/02/the-problems-
with-trying-to-apply-real-world-laws-in-the-virtual-metaverse/
Akbay A., Accesed: 25/12/2022, From: https://www.hukukvebilisimdergisi.com/avatarlar-ve-
veri-gizliligi-metaversede-kisisel-veriler-korunabilir-mi/
Akipek, J., Akıntürk, T., Ateş, D.(2018), Turkish Civil Law - Initial Provisions, Law of
Persons, C. I, Edition 14, Istanbul
Akkurt, S.S., (2017), An Overview of Criminal Liability for Violation of Personal Rights by
Social Media Users in the Context of Civil Law, Selçuk University Law Faculty Journal,
25:2, 329-373.
Akkurt, S.S., (2019), Legal Liability Arising from Autonomous Behaviours of Artificial
Intelligence, Journal of the Court of Dispute, 7:13.
Atakan A., (2022), Evaluation of the Liability and Insurance of Artificial Intelligence Robot
within the Scope of Employer's Liability, Thessaloniki Taad, 13:50,
Avcı G., Accesed: 10/01/2023, From: https://girisim.io/metaverse-ekosisteminde-fikri-
mulkiyet/
Avcı G., Accesed:20/12/2022 From: https://www.finahukuk.com/2022/03/12/metaverse-
hukuk/
Ayan, M., Ayan N., (2016), Law of Persons, Edition 8, Ankara
Bak B., (2018), Legal Status of Artificial Intelligence in terms of Civil Law and Legal
Liability Arising from the Use of Artificial Intelligence TAAD, 9:35
Bak B., (2018). The Legal Status of Artificial Intelligence Concerning Civil Law and The
Liability Thereof, 9, 231.
Başoğlu B., (2015), Non-Contractual No Fault Liability Law and Especially Evaluations on
Danger Liabilit, İnönü University Journal of Faculty of Law, 6:2.
BBC., Accesed:12/12/2022, From: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59083601
Begiter N., Accesed: 06/01/2023,
From:http://www.ozgurlukicin.com/media/dosya/oi_say18_kucuk.pdf
Blockchain Council, Accesed: 08/01/2023, From:
https://www.blockchain-council.org/metaverse/what-laws-govern-the-metaverse/
Bozkurt, A., Bak, B., (2018) 'Artificial Intelligence', Futurist Hukuk, Aristo Publishing House,
Istanbul, 6.
Brian H., Accesed; 21/01/2023, From: https://forkast.news/what-will-be-the-law-of-
metaverse/
Çetingül, N. (2021). Discussion of the legal status of artificial intelligence in terms of criminal
responsibility, Istanbul Commerce University Journal of Social Sciences, 20(41), 1015-1042.
doi: 10.46928/iticusbe.979344 pp 23-24
Cheong B,C,.(2022), Avatars in the metaverse: potential legal issues and remedies: Int.
Cybersecur. Law Rev. 3:467–494
Deacons., Accesed: 15/01/2023, From: https://www.deacons.com/2022/06/07/is-the-
metaverse-above-the-law/
Dünya Bülteni., Accesed: 10/12/2022, From: https://www.dunyabulteni.net/analiz/metaverse-
firsat-mi-tehdit-mi-h516455.html
Dural, M, Öğüz, T. (2018), Turkish Private Law - Law of Persons, C. 2, Istanbul
Euronews., Accesed: 12/12/2022, From: https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/02/18/sexual-
harassment-data-and-ownership-the-metaverse-s-legal-minefields-we-need-to-navigate
Europarl, Accesed: 19/12/2022, From: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-
2017-0005_EN.html
Finetechistanbul, Accesed: 11/01/2023, From: https://fintechistanbul.org/2022/06/03/akilli-
sozlesme-smart-contract-nedir-nasil-calisir/
Gazetevatan., Accesed:14/01/2023, From: https://www.gazetevatan.com/gundem/nftnin-
turkce-karsiligi-belli-oldu-2034293
Hatemi, H., (2018), Law of Persons, Edition 7, Istanbul
Jiahong C., Burgess P., (2019), “The boundaries of legal personhood: how spontaneous
intelligence can problematise differences between humans, artificial intelligence, companies
and animals”, 27Artificial Intelligence and Law 73–92
Kılıç B., (2017), The European Commission on European Union Copyright Law with the
Aim of the Digital Single Market Review of Proposed Regulations and Directive Proposals,
Ankara Bar Association, Journal of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 26 April
World Intellectual Property Day Special Issue, 166-178
Kılıçarslan S.K., (2019), Discussions on the Legal Status and Legal Personality of Artificial
Intelligence, 4:2, 363-389
Lau L,. Acceseed, 01/02/2022, From: https://www.thefashionlaw.com/from-data-to-user-
interactions-legal-issues-facing-the-metaverse/
Lawtudent, Accesed: 22/12/2022, From: https://lawtudent.com/makale/yapay-zekanin-
hukuki-statusu-elektronik-gercek-kisi-kavrami/
Lexpera, Accesed: 14/01/2023, From: https://www.lexpera.com.tr/ictihat/yargitay/e-2019-
9265-k-2020-258-t-8-1-2020
Liu I,. Accesed:10/01/2023, From: https://abovethelaw.com/2022/11/lawyers-our-only-hope-
in-the-metaverse/
Lucidrealitylabs., Accesed: 02/01/2023, From: https://lucidrealitylabs.com/blog/7-challenges-
of-the-metaverse
Mükyen B., Accesed: 11/117 2022 From: https://www.tomorrow.com.tr/teknoloji/1802/
Oğuzman, M. K., Seliçi, Ö., Oktay - Özdemir, S. (2018), Law of Persons (Real and Legal
Persons), Edition 17, Istanbul
Pekmez, 2018, p.182??????????????????????????????????????????????
Reuters, Accesed:05/01/2023, From: https://www.reuters.com/business/legal/reed-smith-
boldly-goes-where-no-law-firm-has-gone-before-metaverse-2021-05-20/
Şahin G.Ö., & Şahin Ç., (2022), Eurobotics Report on the Recognition of Electronic
Personality Model for Artificial Intelligent Entities and its Approach to the Issue in the
Context of Intellectual Property Issues, Inonu University Law Review InULR 13(1): 110-
128
Soysal T., (2019), The Concept of 'Value Gap' in the Music Industry within the Framework of
the European Union Copyright Directive in the Digital Single Market and the Effects of the
Regulation on Internet Content Sharing Site, Ankara Barosu Dergisi, 77:4, 139-142.
Tatlerasia., Accesed: 04/01/2023, From: https://www.tatlerasia.com/power- amaçlı /ideas-
education/virtual-reality-metaverse-laws-and-the-legal-system
Techtarget, Accesed:11/01/2023, From: https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/feature/The-
metaverse-explained-Everything-you-need-to-know
Theastrologypage, Accesed: 28/12/2022, From: https://tr.theastrologypage.com/end-user-
license-agreement
Theconservation., Accesed:12/01/2023, From: https://theconversation.com/the-metaverse-
three-legal-issues-we-need-to-address-175891
Uçak M., Accesed; 02/08/2022, From: https://hukuktar.org/2017/08/02/yapay-zekaya-hukuki-
kisilik-taninmasi/
Woon A., Accesed: 20/01/2023, From: https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/the-metaverse-
is-not-above-real-world-law
Yargıtay., (2020), 13. CD, E. 2019/9265, K. 2020/258,
Article
Full-text available
Анотація. Науково-технічна революція 5.0 та технології Web 3.0 створюють умови реновації різних форм суспільних відносин із застосуванням технологій віртуальної та доповненої реальності Метавсесвіту (Metaverse). Згідно з запропонованою теорією правове регулювання суспільних відносин в Metaverse потребує розробки комплексної електронної юрисдикції на основі новітнього базового законодавства. Формування правового регулювання Metaverse − неодмінна умова необхідності створення електронної юрисдикції Metaverse, яка включатиме галузеві Кодекси Metaverse. Metaverse, як електронне суспільство майбутнього, ще не має чітких юридичних меж, і завдання науковців полягає у тому, щоб прогнозувати та окреслювати з достатньою впевненістю майбутні контури юридичних повноважень для віртуальних середовищ. Сьогодні дискусії в науковій спільноті щодо доцільності та необхідності правового регулювання Metaverse активно ведуться навколо кількох ключових питань. По-перше, виникає питання про те, яку правову базу слід застосовувати в Metaverse та як вирішити конфлікти між різними правовими системами. По-друге, тривають дискусії щодо того, чи мають теперішні регуляторні органи у фізичному світі здатність ефективно регулювати Metaverse за допомогою чинних законів і правил. По-третє, постає питання про те, як розглядати правопорушення, що відбуваються у віртуальному середовищі, та чи повинні вони регулюватися чинним деліктним, чи кримінальним законодавством, або ж необхідно створити окрему транскордонну електронну юрисдикцію для Metaverse. Регулювання соціальних відносин у межах Metaverse має зосереджуватися на одній центральній меті: чіткому визначенні статусу електронних сутностей, суб'єктів та об'єктів, встановленні їхніх прав, обов'язків та відповідальності, а також визначенні різних типів відносин між віртуальними сутностями, суб'єктами та об'єктами в межах конкретного Metaverse, а також між різними Metaverse в межах електронної юрисдикції та в транскордонному контексті. Одним з базових компонентів електронної юрисдикції Metaverse є Модельний Кримінальний кодекс Metaverse, який окреслить норми та правопорушення, застосовні до аналогових, змішаних та електронних юрисдикцій.
Article
Full-text available
The Scientific and Technical Revolution 5.0 and WEB 3.0 technologies create conditions for the renovation of various forms of social relations with the use of virtual and augmented reality technologies in the metaverse. According to the proposed theory, the legal regulation of social relations in the metaverse requires the development of a comprehensive electronic jurisdiction based on the latest basic legislation. The formation of legal regulation of the metaverse is a prerequisite for the need to form an electronic jurisdiction of the metaverse, which will include sectoral Metaverse Codes. The metaverse, as the electronic society of the future, does not yet have clear legal boundaries, and the task of scholars is to predict and outline with sufficient certainty the future contours of legal authority for virtual environments. Today, discussions in the scientific community about the feasibility and necessity of legal regulation of the metaverse often revolve around several key issues. First, there is the question of what legal framework should be applied in the metaverse and how conflicts between different legal systems should be resolved. Second, there is a debate about whether current regulatory bodies in the physical world have the capacity to effectively regulate the metaverse through existing laws and regulations. Third, there is the question of how to deal with offences committed in the virtual environment, and whether they should be dealt with under existing tort or criminal law, or whether a separate cross-border electronic jurisdiction should be created. The regulation of social relations in the metaverse should focus on one central goal: to clearly define the status of electronic entities, subjects and objects, to establish their rights, duties and responsibilities, and to define the different types of relations between virtual entities, subjects and objects within a given metaverse, as well as between different metaverses within an electronic jurisdiction and in a cross-border context. An essential component of the Metaverse Electronic Jurisdiction is a Metaverse Model Criminal Code that will outline the norms and offences applicable to analogue, hybrid and electronic jurisdictions. This code will define the types of socially harmful acts or crimes and the corresponding criminal penalties that will be applied within the metaverse. The formation of the electronic jurisdiction of the metaverse and the development of a Metaverse Model Criminal Code is a current scientific and legal issue.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.