Possessory Interference with Digital Assets: Chinese Civil Law, Singaporean Common Law, and the Problem of Tortious Remedy

Abstract

This Article examines whether tortious remedies for interference with non-fungible tokens are available under the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China and the common law of Singapore. The analysis proceeds from a three-layer separation of the underlying copyrighted work, the cryptographic token, and the impugned conduct. Under the Chinese Civil Code, Articles 114-115 define property rights (物权) by reference to direct control and exclusion over specific things (物), while Article 127 delegates the protection of network virtual property (网络虚拟财产) to unspecified future legislation. Under Singaporean law, the High Court in CLM v CLN accepted that cryptocurrencies satisfy the Ainsworth criteria for proprietary status, but no court has extended the tort of conversion to digital tokens. Both systems have recognized digital assets as property without resolving whether existing tortious remedies attach. The analysis maps the functional requirements of Chinese property-interference liability and Singaporean conversion onto private-key-controlled tokens, sets out a five-step operational test for routing claims, and identifies the doctrinal obstacles in each system.