Barter Currency, Not Fictional Currency

One annoying phrase that keeps being passed around like a left-handed Marlboro is, 'fictional currency'. We all know that the Linden dollar is real money in a very intuitive sense - and the magazine cover at right about says it all. We know, but people like to hide behind the Second Life Terms of Service. It isn't that simple. It is worth bearing in mind that Terms of Service are not necessarily Law.

Tateru Nino did some research which deals directly with Australian Law, and it is well worth the read. In it, she writes:

Vandeverre is right ... and wrong when he says "have no monetary value". You see, as long as he sticks to first party tokens (W$, in this case) he's right. We're just talking game tokens. However, any interaction with Linden Dollars (L$) or other currencies messes up the statement.

W$ within Vandeverre's system represent a game token. A fictional token, a fictional service - you can get away with calling that a 'game' as Vandeverre does. So long as 'game tokens' can only be purchased, but never exchanged into third-party units of exchange (or third party game tokens) - they remain game tokens. Fictional.
Some jurisdictions consider them tokens even if you can trade them for other units/tokens/goods/services, because they do not fall into that jurisdiction's narrow definition of currency.
Vandeverre's jurisdiction is not one of those. Australia Tax Law recognizes convertible tokens as a barter currency.

This is all her personal opinion, but she did her research - including pointing to Australian Barter Transaction Law. But when you look at a magazine cover that says, "Virtual World, Real Money", and you read Benjamin Duranske's comment on how demonstrating the buying and selling of Linden Dollars... things seem to be pretty clear. Toss in the fact that [w:copyright] in Second Life is real enough for lawsuits, how can one say that a [w:fictional currency] is being spent for real items, and that loss in 'fictional currency revenue' is worth a lawsuit?

And let's not forget that Matthew Beller, who works for SEC calls it a [w:Fiat Currency] instead of a [w:fictional currency]

But people keep hiding behind that phrase, 'fictional currency' - and in doing so, them may be placing themselves in a very bad position. And if they are handling other people's money, well - maybe they should be very careful.

'So what are you in for?
'Well, they said it wasn't fictional currency...'
'If you do fictional things for me, I won't hurt you'