Recently, a typical enforcement case reported by the Beijing Higher People's Court has attracted widespread attention. This case explicitly includes online virtual assets such as livestreaming revenue and digital collectibles within the scope of assets eligible for enforcement. This judicial practice provides an innovative path to solving the "difficulty in enforcement." Case Introduction: From "No Assets Available for Enforcement" to Successfully Seizing 200,000 Yuan in Livestreaming Revenue After a contract dispute case between a certain industrial company and Mr. Wang entered the enforcement process, the court, through its asset tracing system, found that Mr. Wang had no traditional assets available for enforcement, such as real estate, vehicles, or bank deposits. The case was temporarily terminated. Later, the applicant discovered a clue: Mr. Wang had been engaged in diamond sales and promotion activities on a certain livestreaming platform for a long time, possessing a fixed account and revenue. This clue was submitted to the Beijing Court's "Enforcement Property Clue Transfer Center" and quickly transferred to the Fengtai District People's Court of Beijing. After verifying the situation, the court issued a "Notice of Assistance in Enforcement" to the platform's operating company, legally freezing and seizing approximately 200,000 yuan of livestreaming revenue from Mr. Wang's account. After the funds were received, both parties reached a settlement agreement to offset the remaining debt with future livestreaming commissions in installments. The successful handling of this case provides an operational model for handling similar new types of property enforcement cases. Case Review: Identification Standards and Enforcement Basis of Virtual Property Online virtual property possesses the dual attributes of "virtuality" and "property": the former determines the particularity of its existence and enforcement path, while the latter constitutes the legal basis for its status as liable property. 1. Virtuality: Unlike traditional property, the "virtuality" of online virtual property is manifested in three core elements: – No physical form: It is not a tangible object in the physical world, but a virtual object existing in cyberspace, essentially an electromagnetic record stored on a specific server; – Dependence on space: Its existence depends on cyberspace; its creation, use, and even transaction cannot be separated from the internet, and it loses its basis for existence once it leaves the network platform; – Unstable property value: Its economic value is usually only recognized within a specific group. For example, equipment in a specific online game has property value for the player of that game, but does not have corresponding property value for other entities who have no contact with the game. Legal Basis: Article 127 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China stipulates: "Where the law provides for the protection of data and virtual property on the internet, such provisions shall apply." This article clarifies the legal protection status of data and virtual property on the internet in the basic civil law. 2.Property Attributes: Despite their virtual nature, online virtual property possesses the three core characteristics of property, thus falling under the category of liable property: – Value: It has objective economic value or market transaction price; – Disposability: It can be possessed, used, and disposed of by the right holder; – Liquidity: It can be converted into monetary funds through transactions, auctions, etc. Therefore, virtual property possessing the above attributes is liable property, and courts can take compulsory enforcement measures against it according to law. Scope of Enforcement: Which virtual properties might be "listed"? In judicial practice, the types of virtual property that can be enforced are constantly expanding: 1. Digital Assets: Such as digital collectibles (NFTs); 2. Accounts and Virtual Items: Self-media accounts with high commercial value (such as Douyin, WeChat official accounts, etc.); gifts on live streaming platforms; high-level game accounts and rare equipment; valuable domain names; 3. Right to Income and Operating Rights: Operating rights of online platform stores; membership rights with property attributes, etc.; 4. Data Property: Databases and customer information assets legally held by enterprises with commercial value, etc. The criteria for judgment are as stated above: whether the property has a clear value, whether it can be effectively controlled, and whether it can be legally valued and realized. Case Extension: Exploring Diversified Execution Methods Based on the above property attributes, in addition to the case mentioned at the beginning of this article, judicial practice has explored several other effective execution paths: 1. Direct Auction for Realization: The Linshui County People's Court of Sichuan Province publicly auctioned a top-level game account of an enforcement debtor on a judicial auction platform, which was eventually sold for 213,000 yuan, successfully realizing the asset. [(2025) Chuan 1623 Zhi 961] 2. Debt Settlement with Property: In the labor dispute case between Zhou and a certain trading company in Zhuzhou, after negotiation, the applicant agreed to accept the live streaming account of the enforcement debtor company to offset all debts, and the case was closed after the account access was transferred. Practical Operation Guidelines: From Clues to Repayment For creditors and their lawyers, the following strategies can be adopted: Step 1: Clue Discovery Investigate whether the enforcement debtor is: Don't just focus on traditional assets such as real estate and cars. Your debtor may be hiding wealth in their mobile phone. Please focus on investigating whether the person subject to enforcement is active in the following areas: – Live streaming/short video circle: Is he/she a streamer or highly active creator on a certain platform? Has he/she withdrawn the revenue from the live streaming room? – Gaming circle: Is he/she a hardcore gamer? Does he/she own a high-level, well-equipped game account that can be sold at a high price? – Digital collectibles circle: Does he/she keep up with trends and hold NFTs, digital artworks, etc.?- E-commerce/Self-media Circle: Do you operate Taobao stores, Xianyu accounts, WeChat official accounts, Douyin accounts, or other accounts that generate revenue? Step Two: Target and Submit "Precise Clues" to the Court Finding clues is just the beginning; submitting them to the court is crucial. – Organize Clues: Systematically organize the clues you discover, clearly stating the platform name, the other party's account ID, and the type of asset you suspect (such as live streaming revenue, store deposits, etc.); – Formal Submission: Form these materials into a written document and formally submit them through the court's "Property Clue Transfer Center" or other official channels; – In-depth Investigation (Advanced): If more detailed information is needed (such as account transaction records, linked mobile phone numbers, etc.), you can apply for a lawyer's investigation order to retrieve the information from the relevant platform. This is much more effective than investigating on your own. Step Three: Tailored Enforcement Strategies and Targeted Enforcement Applications Different types of virtual property require different enforcement methods. When submitting an application to the court, be sure to address the specific issues: – Accounts with remaining balances (such as livestream earnings or wallet balances): Directly apply for freezing and deduction; – Valuable virtual items (such as game equipment or unwithdrawn copyright revenue): Apply to the court for seizure and require the judgment debtor to forcibly deliver them; – Assets with market value: Apply to the court to commission a professional agency to conduct an appraisal, followed by an online judicial auction, with the proceeds used to repay debts; – The most difficult accounts to handle (such as self-media accounts or shops): This involves not only "seizure" but also applying to change the real-name authentication information! Only by changing the "owner" of the account to a creditor or buyer can the transfer of rights be completely achieved, and only then can the enforcement be truly effective. Step Four: Platform Collaboration: Clarifying Legal Obligations The court's judgment requires the platform's cooperation to truly take effect. In this step, we need to urge the court to take proactive measures: – Send letters to platforms: Request the court to promptly issue a "Notice of Assistance in Execution" to the relevant platforms (such as Douyin, Tencent, Alibaba Auction, etc.), clearly requiring the platforms to fulfill their legal obligations such as inquiry, freezing, deduction, and cooperation in transferring ownership; – Overcome difficulties: For virtual assets such as live streaming accounts and self-media accounts that require changes in ownership, it is essential to clearly require the platforms to assist in the mandatory change of "real-name authentication information" and "linked mobile phone number." This is crucial; otherwise, even if the account is blocked, the person subject to enforcement may still be able to recover it through appeal, resulting in the failure of enforcement. Legal basis: There is no need to worry about the platform's lack of cooperation. Supreme People's Court Guiding Case No. 267 has provided clear legal rules for this type of operation. With the court's document and this precedent as support, the platform has an obligation to cooperate in completing the change of ownership, ensuring that there are no concerns about the enforcement outcome.Summary From discovering clues to final recovery, the path is clear: locating people and assets → submitting to the court → classifying applications → platform cooperation. Each step requires strategy and patience, but with the right methods, this "new continent" of virtual assets can also become an effective guarantee for creditors to realize their rights. Conclusion This case from the Beijing High Court sends a clear and important signal: virtual property is no longer just "a string of code" on a screen, but "real money" protected by law. For the court, it breaks down the boundaries of traditional property, expanding the scope of investigation and control to the digital realm, and opening up new paths for creditors to realize their rights. For lawyers, this is an upgrade of professional capabilities—only by understanding the rules of live streaming, games, and digital collectibles can they truly help clients in the digital economy era. For the public, this is both a "reassurance" and a "warning sign": your digital wealth will be protected by the judiciary, but trying to evade debts by "hiding assets in a mobile phone" will no longer work. The enforcement of virtual property from individual cases to the norm is an inevitable step in the judiciary keeping pace with the times. It extends the reach of law into the digital world, and gives tangible backing to the value of every digital labor effort. [Xu Qian, Jin Weilin]