ABSTRACT
The emergence of the metaverse, a persistent, immersive virtual environment where users engage through avatars in augmented or virtual reality settings, has opened up new avenues for social interaction, trade, human activity, and regrettably, criminal conduct. Although many countries rely on conventional criminal law frameworks that were created for physical spaces, these frameworks might not be adequate to deal with crimes committed in virtual worlds.
This article explores how acts such as harassment, assault, theft of virtual assets, and identity fraud manifest in the metaverse, and compares how the United States, the European Union, and India currently approach liability, jurisdiction, and enforcement. It argues that the core criminal law concepts of actus reus, mens rea, and legal harm must be re conceptualised for immersive virtual environments.
In order to prevent the metaverse from turning into a lawless area of actual harm, the article suggests a hybrid architecture that combines modified national criminal laws, platform governance procedures, and international cooperation.
KEYWORDS: Metaverse, Metacrime, Virtual Crimes, Criminal Laws, Avatar liability.
INTRODUCTION
The concept of the metaverse has evolved rapidly from speculative fiction into a tangible, expansive virtual environment in which users—represented by avatars—live, work, socialise and transact. In these contexts, immersive technologies like virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and blockchain-based digital assets come together to create persistent worlds that represent many aspects of the “real” world but are not limited by geography, physical embodiment, or temporal boundaries.
The question of whether injuries sustained and committed in the metaverse should be covered by criminal law? For example, if an avatar is virtually sexually assaulted, or virtual goods of real economic value are stolen, or if an avatar is harassed to the point of psychological trauma, does the existing criminal law suffice? This article argues that the unique characteristics of the metaverse—avatar-mediated embodiment, durable virtual property, cross-border platforms, and the blurring of virtual and real harm—make the current criminal law frameworks in these jurisdictions increasingly insufficient. It contends that a hybrid framework that combines national law, platform governance, and international cooperation is the best course of action and that we must rethink the fundamental concepts of actus reus, mens rea, legal injury, and jurisdiction in this new context.