Case summary

In September 2023, the plaintiff, who was under 10 years old, used his mother's identity information to complete the real-name authentication on the game platform operated by the defendant and downloaded the game. In over 30 days, the child topped up more than 100,000 yuan ($13,744.6) through his mother's Alipay account to buy in-game items and skins. Discovering that behavior on Oct 16, 2023, the plaintiff's parents immediately contacted the customer service of the game platform to apply for a refund, which was denied by the defendant, operator of the platform. The parents therefore sued the defendant at the Beijing Internet Court (BIC) and requested a full refund.

The plaintiff's parents argued that the plaintiff was under 10 years old with limited capacity for civil conduct. His actions required the consent or subsequent approval of his legal guardian to be legally binding. Without it, the plaintiff's top-up act should be deemed invalid and the fee involved should be fully returned.

The defendant argued that the real-name authentication information of the game account involved in the case belongs to the plaintiff's mother. The defendant has integrated a real-name verification system for anti-addiction measures in the online game, and also set up a parental control mode. Therefore it had fulfilled its due management obligation and duty of care. 

Main considerations

According to China's Law on the Protection of Minors and the Regulations on the Protection of Minors in Cyberspace, the country has established a unified electronic identity authentication system for minors playing online games. Online game service providers mustrequire minors to register and log in to online games with real identity information, and are required to verify the real identity information of minor users through the unified electronic identity authentication system.

In this case, the game platform operated by the defendant provided user systems, payment systems, program downloads, and promotional services for the game company involved in this case, and therefore should be deemed as a joint operator of the game. The platform adopted a real-name authentication mechanism, and users could enter the game involved in the case without further real-name authentication after they provided their real name and logged onto the platform, and effectively replaces the game's internal authentication mechanism. Therefore, the defendant as a joint operator of the game had the obligation to strictly implement the real-name registration and log-in of minor users.

The game involved in the case is a game adapted from popular cartoons for children and primary school students, posing great appeal to them. The defendant should have foreseen that the target audience of the game involved was likely to include minors.

Although the defendant adopted the real-name authentication system and other measures such as pop-up window prompts, parental control mode and alerts from customer service, when spotting the player was a minor, the defendant not only failed to lock down the minor's ID information, but provided suggestions that minors could easily modify the real-name authentication information by "editing the ID information", so they could fake the ID information and evade supervision. Therefore, it could be determined that the defendant failed to meet the requirements and take effective measures to ensure that minor users were using real ID information to register and log on the games.

The plaintiff was a person with limited civil capacity, and his legal agent was not aware of the topping-up and explicitly refused to ratify it. The plaintiff's actions should therefore be deemed as legally invalid, and the network service contract between the plaintiff and the defendant should be invalid as well.

Based on ascertained facts, the defendant did not strictly implement the real-name authentication system of online games for minors, and was liable for the invalidity of the contract. On the other hand, the legal agents of the plaintiff did not restrict the specific use of the child's mobile phone, thereby neglecting their supervision obligation. The plaintiff did fake information to avoid real-name authentication, and was therefore also liable for the invalidity of the contract. Based on all aforementioned considerations, the BIC determined that it was appropriate for the top-up amount to be returned. 

Details of the judgement

The BIC ordered the defendant to return part of the top-up amount to the plaintiff, while the plaintiff's other claims were rejected. 

Tips from the judge

Minors, who may be subject to internet addiction and impulsive consumption, are easy targets for popular and animation-adapted online games. In reality, some minors often use their guardian's mobile phones, purchase online accounts with adult ID information, or rent other adults' phones to access the internet and extend their online play time.  

The Law on the Protection of Minors has a chapter specifically on "internet protection". And China's first comprehensive legislation on the online protection of minors, the Regulations on the Online Protection of Minors, came into effect on Jan 1, 2024. Both stipulate that online game service providers have the responsibility and obligation to protect minors. They should not only implement such mechanisms as real-name authentication and anti-addiction, but also provide safe and healthy gaming experience for minors.

The judgement of this case establishes that online game operators have the obligation to implement the real-name authentication system for minors. If a minor tops up their account due to the operator's failure to implement this system strictly, the operator bears primary responsibility. The judgement of this case also strongly urged the internet service providers to enhance their awareness of online protection of minors, and fully and continuously protect them in accordance with the law.

Meanwhile, minors' guardians must exercise necessary control over the online behavior of their children, and keep their financial account information private to avoid financial losses. As for online game service providers, they should take effective technical measures as far as possible to implement the online game real-name authentication and anti-addiction systems for minors, optimize the consumption prompt function, and prevent minors from using adult identity information for account registration and top-up consumption.