The concept of free transfer of digital rights (from the perspective of the obligor’s will)

A basic postulate of the civil transfer and exchange of digital assets consists in the rule according to which their transfer on the basis of a transaction is not subject to agreement with the obligated party (Article 141.1(3) of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). However, the interpretation of this legal provision gives rise to certain difficulties in both doctrine and practice. Moreover, the very idea of the universalism of the concept of free (in the context of the indifference of the opinion of the debtor or other obligated party) circulation of digital rights can be subject to criticism. The present study sets out to establish the legal significance of this concept in primary terms of the (in)expediency of giving it an unconditional character. For this purpose, a comprehensive analysis of the content of the norm of Article 141.1(3) of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (in conjunction with other legislative provisions regarding the transfer of property rights and the functioning of information systems) is carried out on the basis of general scientific (formal and dialectical logic) and specific scientific (legal-dogmatic, comparative legal, interpretation of legal norms) methods along with the rules of information systems developed by individual operators. The presented analysis of the general meaning and limitations of the scope of the norm of Article 141.1(3) of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation reveals the critical problem of the (un) reasonableness of its qualification. The inadequacy of the differentiation of the modes of transfer of digital rights (in terms of taking into account the opinion of the obligated person) based on the legal and factual basis (transaction or occurrence of circumstances provided for by law) consists in the impossibility of demonstrating that the norm under study cannot abrogate the need to obtain the consent of subjects other than the person obligated under the digital right. the absence of indisputable factors for qualifying the rule as imperative is demonstrated in terms of the exercise and disposal of digital rights solely in the information system without recourse to a third party and not determining the inadmissibility of introducing a permit-based procedure. since the existence of political and legal grounds for refusing to perceive the concept of free transfer of digital rights as unconditional must be acknowledged, the fundamental acceptability of decentralized regulation of issues of coordinating the conclusion of a transaction with an obligated party is confirmed. The secondary nature of local regulation of the conditions for the circulation of digital rights in the rules of the information system is substantiated in terms of necessity for such conditions to be determined by the parties to the agreement).

1. Agibalova, E. N. (2020). Tsifrovyye prava v sisteme ob’yektov grazhdanskikh prav [Digital rights in the system of civil rights objects]. Yuridicheskiy Vestnik Dagestanskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta, 33(1), 90–99. https://doi.org/10.21779/2224-0241-2020-33-1-90-99

2. Chetvergov, D. S. (2025). Pravovyye problemy posrednicheskoy deyatel’nosti na rynke tsifrovykh finansovykh aktivov [Legal issues of intermediary activities in the digital assets market]. Actual Problems of Russian Law, 20(5), 124–135. https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2025.174.5.124-135

3. Dakhayeva, Z. I. (2025). Tsifrovyye prava v sisteme ob’yektov grazhdanskikh prav: problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya v Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Digital rights in the system of civil rights objects: problems of legal regulation in the russian federation]. Ekonomika i Upravleniye: Problemy, Resheniya, 12(3 March), 175–181. https://doi.org/10.36871/ek.up.p.r.2025.03.12.021

4. Gazgireyev, N. Sh. (2025). Pravovaya regulyatsiya tsifrovykh prav v kontekste formirovaniya i razvitiya tsifrovoy sredy [legal regulation of digital rights in the context of the formation and development of the digital environment]. Zakon i Vlast’, 3, 83–87.

5. Kontsevoy, A. V. (2020). K voprosu ob elementakh konstruktsii kriptovalyutnogo obyazatel’stva i yego differentsiatsii ot denezhnykh, valyutnykh i fondovykh obyazatel’stv [On the issue of the elements of the design of a cryptocurrency obligation and its differentiation from monetary, currency and stock obligations]. Yurist, 7, 13–17. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-3929-2020-7-13-17

6. Lisitsa, V. N. (2024). Tsifrovyye prava kak grazhdanskiye prava, deystvuyushchiye v informatsionnoy sisteme [Digital rights as civil rights operating in the information system]. Pravovaya Politika i Pravovaya Zhizn’, 3, 149–154. https://doi.org/10.24412/1608-8794-2024-3-149-154

7. Markina, M. V. (2022). Tsifrovyye prava, prinadlezhashchiye yuridicheskim litsam, kak oborotosposobnyy ob’yekt grazhdanskikh prav [Digital rights owned by legal entities as a negotiable object of civil rights]. Yurist, 11, 36–40. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-3929-2022-11-36-40

8. Mograbyan, A. S. (2022). Tsifrovyye prava kak ob’yekty grazhdanskikh prav v Rossii [Digital rights as objects of civil rights in russia]. Actual Problems of Russian Law, 17(10), 141–147. https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2022.143.10.141-147

9. Muratova, S. A., & Druzhinin, I. D. (2023). Otdel’nyye problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya tsifrovykh prav [Certain problems of legal regulation of digital rights]. Tsivilist, 6, 31–37.

10. Nepomnyashchiy, P. A. (2024). Ponyatiye, sushchnost’ i znacheniye tsifrovykh prav kak ob’yektov nasledstvennykh pravootnosheniy [Concept, essence and significance of digital rights as objects of inheritance legal relations]. Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL), 11(123), 199–207. https://doi.org/10.17803/2311-5998.2024.123.11.199-207

11. Nigmatzyanova, D. A. (2024). Problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya ucheta tsifrovykh finansovykh aktivov v Rossii [Legal issues in the regulation of accounting for digital financial assets in Russia]. Digital Law Journal, 5(3), 95–108. https://doi.org/10.38044/2686-9136-2024-5-3-95-108

12. Novoselova, L., Gabov, A., Savel’yev, A., Genkin, A., Sarbash, S., Asoskov, A., Semenov, A., Yankovskiy, R., Zhuravlev, A., Tolkachev, A., Kamel’kova, A., Uspenskiy, M., Krupenin, R., Kislyy, V., Zhuzhzhalov, P., Popov, V., & Agranovskaya, M. (2019). Tsifrovyye prava kak novyy ob’yekt grazhdanskogo prava [Digital rights as a new object of civil law]. Zakon, 5, 31–54.

13. Odintsov, S. V., & Mironov, E. Yu. (2020). Tsifrovizatsiya imushchestvennogo oborota: doktrinal’nyye traktovki i zakonodatel’naya praktika [Digitalization of property turnover: doctrinal interpretations and legislative practice]. Sovremennoye Pravo, 11, 97–104. https://doi.org/10.25799/ni.2020.56.25.010

14. Ovchinnikov, A. I., & Fatkhi, V. I. (2019). Tsifrovyye prava kak ob’’yekty grazhdanskikh prav [Digital rights as objects of civil rights]. Filosofiya Prava, 3(90), 104–112.

15. Perepyolkina, N. V., & Perepyolkin, P. E. (2025). K voprosu o yuridicheskoy sushchnosti tsifrovykh prav [On the legal essence of digital rights]. Vestnik Povolzhskogo Instituta Upravleniya, 25(3), 112–120.

16. Polezhayev, O. A. (2023). NFT-aktivy v sisteme ob’yektov grazhdanskikh prav: problemy yuridicheskoy kvalifikatsii otnosheniy [NFT-assets in the system of civil rights objects: problems of legal qualification of relations]. Zakon, 9, 68–75. https://doi.org/10.37239/0869-4400-2023-20-9-68-75

17. Sarayeva, O. N. (2025). Tsifrovyye finansovyye aktivy v kontekste ikh rasprostraneniya i razvitiya v Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Digital financial assets in the context of their distribution and development in the Russian Federation]. Pravo i Gosudarstvo: Teoriya i Praktika, 3, 642–646. https://doi.org/10.47643/1815-1337_2025_3_642

18. Shengeliya, I. (2024). TSFA v strukture derivativa: mekhanika i yuridicheskiye riski [DFA in the derivative structure: mechanics and legal risks]. Bankovskoye Obozreniye. Prilozheniye «FinLegal», 2, 75–79.

19. Shipikova, A. G. (2024). Podkhody k opredeleniyu tsifrovogo ob’yekta i tsifrovogo aktiva [Approaches to defining a digital object and a digital asset]. Digital Law Journal, 5(2), 53–68. https://doi.org/10.38044/2686-9136-2024-5-2-1

20. Vasilevskaya, L. Yu. (2020). Tsifrovizatsiya grazhdanskogo oborota: problemy i tendentsii [Digitalization of civil turnover: Problems and trends]. Rossiyskiy Yuridicheskiy Zhurnal, 6, 105–117. https://doi.org/10.34076/2071-3797-2020-6-105-117

21. Vavilin, E. V. (2024). Osushchestvleniye i zashchita grazhdanskikh prav v usloviyakh tsifrovoy transformatsii otnosheniy [implementation and protection of civil rights in the context of digital transformation of relations]. Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Pravo, 53, 110–121. https://doi.org/10.17223/22253513/53/8

22. Volos, A. A. (2024a). svoboda dogovora i yeye predely v tsifrovoy srede [freedom of contract and its limits in the digital environment]. Vestnik Permskogo Universiteta. Yuridicheskiye Nauki, 2(64), 254–273. https://doi.org/10.17072/1995-4190-2024-64-254-273

23. Volos, A. A. (2024b). Tsifrovyye prava: nekotoryye problemy tolkovaniya pravil stat’i 141.1 Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Digital rights: Some problems of interpretation of the rules of Article 141.1 of the Civil Code of the russian federation]. Bankovskoye Pravo, 3, 16–23. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-3945-2024-3-16-23

24. Zakirov, R. Yu., & Shavaliyeva, D. R. (2021). Tsifrovyye prava kak ob’yekt grazhdanskikh prav [Digital rights as an object of civil rights]. Regulirovaniye pravootnosheniy v usloviyakh tsifrovizatsii v period pandemii: sovremennoye sostoyaniye i perspektivy razvitiya: sb. statey. Kazan’, Otechestvo, 33–37.

25. Zaytsev, V. V. (2025). Mekhanizm pravovogo regulirovaniya oborota tsifrovykh aktivov [The mechanism of legal regulation of the turnover of digital assets]. Vlast’ Zakona, 1(61), 89–103.

26. Zhanabilova, A. B. (2023). Pravovoye regulirovaniye oborota tsifrovykh aktivov i vozmozhnost’ ikh nasledovaniya v Kazakhstane i Rossii [Legal regulation of the circulation of digital assets and the possibility of their inheritance in Kazakhstan and Russia]. Notarius, 4, 39–42. https://doi.org/10.18572/1813-1204-2023-4-39-42