Search the Community

RuneScape gold can be stolen under UK law, Court of Appeal rules Virtual gold inside the online game Old School RuneScape can amount to “property” capable of being stolen under the Theft Act, the Court of Appeal has ruled. The decision overturns an earlier ruling that in-game currency was merely information and therefore outside the scope of criminal theft laws. The case arises from the prosecution of a former employee of game developer Jagex, accused of hacking player accounts and transferring hundreds of billions of in-game gold pieces for real-world profit. What the court decided In its judgment in R v Lakeman [2026] EWCA Crim 4, the Court of Appeal said RuneScape “gold pieces” fall within the definition of “other intangible property” under section 4 of the Theft Act 1968. The court rejected arguments that the currency was too abstract, infinite, or non-rivalrous to be considered property. Lord Justice Popplewell, giving the leading judgment, said it would be “surprising and unsatisfactory” if assets that are regularly traded and have real-world value could not be stolen simply because they exist in a digital environment. Background to the case Old School RuneScape is a long-running online role-playing game in which players accumulate wealth in the form of gold pieces, earned through gameplay or indirectly by purchasing “bonds” with real money. Although Jagex prohibits the sale of gold for real-world currency, an active black market exists. At the time of the alleged offences, gold equivalent to a £6 bond could be purchased unofficially for about £2.70. Prosecutors allege the defendant, a content developer at Jagex, gained unauthorised access to 68 player accounts between March and July 2018 and transferred approximately 705 billion gold pieces, later converting the proceeds into Bitcoin and cash. The alleged real-world value was estimated at £543,000. The defendant denies the charges. Why the ruling matters At an earlier preparatory hearing, a Crown Court judge ruled that RuneScape gold was not property, describing it as “pure information” with an effectively infinite supply. On that basis, he dismissed the theft charge. The Court of Appeal disagreed. It held that the correct focus is not on the underlying computer code but on the functional asset experienced by players in the game. The judges found that gold pieces are: clearly identifiable within the game transferable between players rivalrous, meaning use by one player excludes use by others capable of being the subject of dishonest dealing The court said the fact that Jagex can alter or delete virtual currency under its terms and conditions does not prevent gold from being property for criminal law purposes. Contracts do not override criminal law The defence relied heavily on Jagex’s user agreements, which state that players do not “own” virtual currency and that it has no real-world monetary value. The Court of Appeal said such contractual terms are not decisive when interpreting the Theft Act. Under the Act, property can “belong to another” if they have possession or control of it, even without enforceable civil ownership rights. The court compared the situation to other contexts where criminal law recognises property despite civil law restrictions, including the theft of illegal drugs. Wider implications The ruling is one of the most detailed examinations by a UK appellate court of whether digital assets inside video games can be stolen. While the court stressed that its decision applies to criminal law and does not automatically create civil property rights, legal experts say it may influence future prosecutions involving virtual items, gaming fraud, and digital economies. The case will now return to the Crown Court, where the theft charge — along with computer misuse and money-laundering counts — can proceed to trial.