According to Duke Law and Technology's "Who Owns the Virtual Items", (
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi...6&context=dltr)
"Without the guidance of any property regime for virtual items, some courts have simply chosen to treat virtual property as any other personal property owned by the players" in response to a 2007 conviction in Japan, "(explaining that when a Japanese woman destroyed her virtual ex-husband’s in-game character,
she was charged with illegally manipulating electronic data);"
They also cited in a 2007 Dutch conviction that "(explaining that the Dutch courts treated the theft of virtual items in the game “Habbo” as theft of real-life personal property was necessary because the players pay real-life cash to play the game and for the virtual items)."
I have a claim to this property by United States consumer law, my materia that has been destroyed, and it is illegal by failure to provide effective notice that accommodates visual disabilities.