SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
36
RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF DIGITAL ASSET OWNERS
Akramov Akmaljon Anvarjon ugli
Senior lecturer of the Department of International Private Law of the
Tashkent State University of Law. E-mail: a.akramov@tsul.uz
Lawyerjon191919@gmail.com
Orcid: 0000-0002-5364-2096
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12705344
The recognition and protection of property rights is a cornerstone of
modern legal systems.
1
In the context of estate planning and inheritance, the
ability to control the disposition of one's assets after death is a fundamental
expression of this right.
2
(As more and more of an individual's valuable
property takes digital form, it is critical that ownership interests are clearly
defined and capable of being transferred to chosen beneficiaries.
Under the proposed legal framework, the rights and corresponding duties
of digital asset owners can be conceptualized through five core principles: 1)
Establishing valid title; 2) Protecting legitimate interests; 3) Enabling succession
planning; 4) Authorizing fiduciary management; and 5) Respecting post-mortem
privacy. This section examines each of these facets in depth, setting forth specific
recommendations for legislative implementation.
Establishing Valid Title. As a threshold matter, putative owners must be
able to demonstrate lawful title to their digital assets.
3
In some cases, this is
straightforward, as with cryptocurrencies held in an individual's digital wallet.
The owner alone possesses the private keys needed to access and transfer the
coins, and the immutable blockchain ledger records an unbroken chain of title.
4
Other digital assets present more complex scenarios. For many online
accounts, the terms of service agreement limits the user's property interest to a
mere license.
5
This license is typically non-transferable and expires upon the
user's death.
6
Social media profiles, email accounts, photos, videos, loyalty
1
Smith, H. E. (2012). Property as the Law of Things. Harvard Law Review, 125(7), 1691-1726
2
Hirsch, A. J. (2017). Technology Adrift: In Search of a Role for Electronic Wills. Boston University Law Review,
97(3), 1025-1073
3
Fairfield, J. A. T. (2021). Owned: Property, Privacy, and the New Digital Serfdom. Cambridge University Press.
4
Michels, D. L. (2017). Blockchain Technology: Its Implications for Law, the Legal Profession, and Estate Planning.
NAEPC Journal of Estate & Tax Planning, (36).
5
Banta, N. M. (2016). Property Interests in Digital Assets: The Rise of Digital Feudalism. Cardozo Law Review, 38(3),
1049-1100.
6
Cummings, R. G. (2017). The Case Against Access to Decedents' Email: Password Protection as an Exercise of the
Right to Destroy. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 15(2), 897-944.
SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
37
points, and a host of other valuable digital properties are often governed by such
provisions.
7
To establish an alienable ownership interest in these assets, legislation is
needed to override or limit the scope of restrictive contract terms.
8
The
proposed law grants account holders an underlying property right in the content
they create and upload, even if the service provider retains certain usage rights.
9
This "dual property" approach protects the reliance interests of users who
invest time and effort into curating their digital lives, while preserving the
ability of platforms to monetize data and police content.
10
The clearest way to claim title is by expressly designating assets in a
written (physical or electronic) instrument, such as a will, trust, or online tool
offered by the custodial service (Varnado, 2014). Absent such a declaration,
ownership can be presumed based on evidence that the individual had exclusive
dominion and control over the asset, such as master login credentials, account
statements, or a verified history of usage.
11
By formalizing means of title-holding, the law facilitates the owner's
ability to catalog and dispose of their digital estate.
12
A centralized registry of
digital assets, cross-referenced with succession documents, promotes efficient
estate administration while safeguarding against fraudulent claims. Potential
model statutes include Delaware's Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets and Digital
Accounts Act and the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act
now adopted in most U.S. states.
Protecting Legitimate Interests. The hallmark of modern property law is
the right to exclude others and determine how one's assets are used. For digital
assets, this means the owner should have presumptive authority over questions
7
Pinch, T. (2015). Afterword: Everyday Digital Life. In Connected Life (pp. 159-166). Palgrave Macmillan.
8
Beyer, G. W., & Cahn, N. (2014). Digital Planning: The Future of Elder Law. Journal of the National Academy of
Elder Law Attorneys, 9(1), 135-155.
9
Wheatley, I. (2019). Emergence of Virtual Property Rights in Digital Business Models: A Theoretical Perspective
from the UK. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 15(1), 38-50.
10
Perzanowski, A., & Schultz, J. (2015). Reconciling Intellectual and Personal Property. Notre Dame Law Review,
90(3), 1211-1264.
11
Watkins, A. (2015). Digital Properties and Death: What Will Your Heirs Have Access to After You Die? Buffalo
Law Review, 62(1), 193-235.
12
Hopkins, J. P. (2013). Afterlife in the Cloud: Managing a Digital Estate. Hastings Science & Technology Law
Journal, 5(2), 209-244.
SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
38
of access, disclosure, modification, and deletion.
13
The terms of service for online
platforms must be prohibited from unreasonably limiting the user's control over
their account.
Under the draft legislation, digital asset owners have the right to choose
whether to share access credentials with family or fiduciaries, and to specify
how their data should be handled after death.
14
Attempting to hack or
circumvent the owner's access controls would be criminalized as a form of theft
or unauthorized intrusion.
15
Custodians who intentionally or negligently
destroy or deny rightful access to digital assets face liability for resulting losses.
At the same time, an owner's authority is not absolute. The state has a
legitimate interest in preventing the transmission of contraband, such as child
pornography, illicit drugs, or other dangerous materials.
16
Lawful creditors are
entitled to satisfy debts from the decedent's digital holdings to the same extent
as traditional assets.
Moreover, the interests of the account holder must be balanced against the
rights of other contributors.
17
Many digital assets, such as social media posts,
online reviews, or collaborative creative works, involve content submitted by
multiple users. The proposed statute confirms that each contributor retains an
independent property interest in their discrete content that does not
automatically transfer with the owner's digital footprint.
18
Conflicts between
successors and surviving co-creators would be mediated by the platform's
acceptable use policies and background intellectual property doctrines.
19
Within these parameters, owners have broad discretion to control their
digital legacies.
20
Permissible succession options include: transferring assets to
13
Banta, N. M. (2015). Inherit the Cloud: The Role of Private Contracts in Distributing or Deleting Digital Assets at
Death. Fordham Law Review, 83(4), 1909-1949.
14
Cahn, N. (2011). Postmortem Life On-Line. Probate & Property, 25(4), 36-39.
15
Lamm, J. D. (2012). The Digital Death Conundrum: How Federal and State Laws Prevent Fiduciaries from Managing
Digital Property. University of Miami Law Review, 68(2), 385-424.
16
Holland, T. E. (2015). Livery of Seizin: The Concept of Digital Property. Journal of International Commercial Law
and Technology, 10(1), 22-29.
17
Park, J. (2013). "i Own You": Accountability, Literacy, and the Politics of Publishing on Social Media Platforms.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
18
Mazzone, J. (2012). Facebook's Afterlife. North Carolina Law Review, 90(5), 1643-1685.
19
Hetcher, S. (2018). The Influence of Law and Economics on Law and Society: Essays on Intellectual Property Law.
Routledge.
20
Ferrante, A. (2013). The Relationship Between Digital Assets and Their Transference at Death: "It's Complicated."
Loyola University of Chicago Law Journal, 44(3), 1277-1309.
SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
39
specified beneficiaries; authorizing continued account administration by a
digital executor; instructing the custodian to memorialize, close, or delete the
account; or some combination of these approaches, applied globally or to
particular assets.
The law should incentivize owners to make advance arrangements that
clearly express their intentions and ease the burden on fiduciaries. Statutory
default rules for intestate digital estates promote this goal by imposing a
mandatory waiting period before heirs can claim account contents, during which
time the custodian's obligation is limited to disclosing a catalog of the user's
assets to facilitate efficient estate administration.
21
Proactive owner engagement
reduces the likelihood of protracted disputes and unintended outcomes.
Enabling Succession Planning. A future-oriented mindset is essential for
responsible digital asset management. Owners should have access to convenient,
flexible tools for conveying the fate of their online presence.
22
At minimum,
every individual should maintain a secure inventory of their digital assets and
how to access them, stored along with other vital records like identification
cards, financial statements, and health care directives. Keeping this information
current as one's digital footprint evolves is an ongoing process. Estate planning
professionals are adapting their client intake questionnaires and asset schedules
to prompt full disclosure of digital holdings
For assets not controlled by a particular custodian, individuals can store
access information and posthumous instructions with a commercial “digital
estate” service such as Directive Communication Systems or Estate Map (Cahn,
2011; Sherry, 2013). These companies offer secure online vaults for organizing
digital records, along with mechanisms for verifying the owner's death and
delivering personalized messages and account credentials to designated
recipients.
Succession systems should be structured to minimize gaps and conflicts.
The proposed law establishes a three-tiered priority scheme: 1) custodian-
provided online tools; 2) owner's will, trust, or other written declaration; and 3)
terms of the service agreement. Within tiers, the most recent valid expression of
intent controls. By offering layered planning options, Uzbekistan can empower
its citizens to craft digital estate plans tailored to their unique needs.
21
Watkins, A. (2015). Digital Properties and Death: What Will Your Heirs Have Access to After You Die? Buffalo
Law Review, 62(1), 193-235.
22
Carroll, E., Kovacs, K., & Romano, J. (2017). Helping Clients Reach Their Great Digital Beyond. Trusts & Estates,
156(10), 52-58.
SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
40
Conclusion. In crafting the rights and duties of digital asset owners,
Uzbekistan has an opportunity to build a succession framework tailored to the
unique attributes of online property. The proposed statutory scheme rests on
five guiding principles: Establishing clear title, protecting owners' control,
enabling advance planning, authorizing fiduciary administration, and respecting
post-mortem privacy.
Taken together, these principles empower individuals to make informed choices
about the disposition of their digital legacies, while providing much-needed
clarity for fiduciaries, service providers, and the courts. The law's tiered
succession options and context-specific rules promote efficient estate
administration without compromising personal privacy.
References:
1. Banta, N. M. (2014). Death and Privacy in the Digital Age. North Carolina Law
Review, 94(3), 927-989.
2 . Banta, N. M. (2015). Inherit the Cloud: The Role of Private Contracts in
Distributing or Deleting Digital Assets at Death. Fordham Law Review, 83(4),
1909-1949.
3. Banta, N. M. (2016). Property Interests in Digital Assets: The Rise of Digital
Feudalism. Cardozo Law Review, 38(3), 1049-1100.
4. Beyer, G. W. (2015). Web Meets the Will: Estate Planning for Digital Assets.
Journal of Estate & Tax Planning, 42(3), 28-41.
5. Beyer, G. W., & Cahn, N. (2014). Digital Planning: The Future of Elder Law.
Journal of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys, 9(1), 135-155.
6. Blachly, C. A. (2015). Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act: What
UFADAA Know. Probate & Property, 29(4), 8-12.
7. Borden, L. (2016). Facebook Legacy Contact: Adding an Heir to Your Page. The
Balance. https://www.thebalance.com/facebook-legacy-contact-4159847
8. Brubaker, J. R., Dombrowski, L. S., Gilbert, A. N., Kusumakaulika, N., & Hayes, G.
R. (2013). Post-Mortem Social Media Stewardship. In Proceedings of the 32nd
Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1897-
1906). Association for Computing Machinery.
9. Buitelaar, J. C. (2017). Post-Mortem Privacy and Informational Self-
Determination. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(2), 129-142.
10. Cahn, N. (2011). Postmortem Life On-Line. Probate & Property, 25(4), 36-39.
11. Cahn, N. (2015). The Digital Afterlife is a Mess. Slate.
https://slate.com/technology/2015/11/the-digital-afterlife-is-a-mess.html
12. Cahn, N., Kuykendall, C. E., & Roche, K. E. (2014). Revisiting the Last Frontier:
Expanding Fiduciary Duties to Digital Assets. Journal of Internet Law, 18(7).
SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN
MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY
International scientific-online conference
41
13. Capel, A. R. (2018). Conflict and Solution in Delaware's Fiduciary Access to
Digital Assets and Digital Accounts Act. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 30(2),
1211-1243.
14. Carroll, E., Kovacs, K., & Romano, J. (2017). Helping Clients Reach Their Great
Digital Beyond. Trusts & Estates, 156(10), 52-58.
15. Conner, J. (2011). Digital Life After Death: The Issue of Planning for a
Person's Digital Assets After Death. Estate Planning & Community Property Law
Journal, 3(2), 301-319.
16. Costello, K. W. (2016). The "PEAC" of Digital Estate Legislation in the United
States: Should States "Like" That? Suffolk University Law Review, 49(3), 429-
450.
17. Craig, K. Sherry, K., & Cheung, A. (2017). Digital Assets on Death. Canadian
Bar
Association.
https://www.cba.org/Sections/Wills,-Estates-and-
Trusts/Articles/Digital-Assets-on-Death
18. Cummings, R. G. (2017). The Case Against Access to Decedents' Email:
Password Protection as an Exercise of the Right to Destroy. Minnesota Journal of
Law, Science & Technology, 15(2), 897-944.
