It all began, as most modern tragedies do, with a simple click. “This will be fun,” my then-husband, Kevin, said, his face bathed in the cool blue light of his VR headset. We were building our dream home in the metaverse, “Nova-Verse.” I designed a gorgeous, glass-walled villa overlooking a digital sunset. He, however, had other plans.
He spent our entire shared crypto wallet, 42 ETH, but who’s counting? on a “one-of-one” NFT named Sir Berington: a pixelated penguin wearing a monocle and a top hat. He claimed it was an “investment.” I claimed he had lost his mind.
The final straw was when he replaced my cherished, AI-generated “Mona Lisa 2.0” that hung in our virtual foyer with Sir Berington. A penguin. In a top hat. Staring judgmentally at our guests.
“We need to talk,” I said, my avatar crossing its arms.
“We can work this out,” his avatar replied, adjusting its own top hat.
We couldn’t. So, I sued him for divorce in the metaverse.
Welcome to the future of family law
The courthouse was a sleek, minimalist server room. Our judge, a shimmering, polygonal entity named Justice AI, materialized on the bench. Its voice was calm, synthesized, and utterly devoid of sympathy.
“Petitioner,” it began, its light pulsing. “You claim emotional distress due to the displacement of a non-fungible token, hash #MONA-2049. Is this correct?”
“Yes, Your Honor. It was a masterpiece.”
“Objection!” Kevin’s lawyer, a legal-bot named Sue-Bot 5000, chimed in. “The artwork was community-rated at a 6.7/10 on the ‘Aesthetic Pleasure Index.’ Its cultural value is negligible.”
Justice AI turned to Kevin. “Respondent. The purchase of ‘Sir Berington,’ hash #PENGU-42, depleted a shared liquidity pool. Justify this expenditure.”
Kevin puffed out his digital chest. “Your Honor, Sir Berington is not just a penguin. He is a symbol of our potential. He represents whimsy! He has utility—he grants access to the ‘Frosty Lounge,’ an exclusive club for aquatic NFT holders.”
I felt my real-world eye twitch.
The great alimony debate: Pixel vs. principal
The core of the trial was asset division. I wanted the villa. He wanted the penguin. But then came the alimony debate.
“My client seeks monthly payments of 5,000 $META tokens,” Sue-Bot 5000 stated. “To maintain his standard of living within the Frosty Lounge.”
Justice AI processed this. “The petitioner’s counterproposal is the transfer of Sir Berington itself as a one-time settlement.”
This was where it got educational. Justice AI explained that under the platform’s smart contract law, Sir Berington wasn’t just a picture. It was a deed of ownership, a membership key, and a financial asset all rolled into one. The code was the law, and the law stated that whoever held the NFT held the rights. There was no room for arguing that it was “just a stupid penguin.” The blockchain disagreed.
Furthermore, since our “marriage” was a smart contract partnership registered on-chain, its dissolution had to be executed by one as well. Justice AI couldn’t award me real-world assets, only the digital ones we had willingly placed within its jurisdiction.
The verdict
In the end, Justice AI ruled with cold, unfeeling logic.
“The court finds the ‘Mona Lisa 2.0’ to be subjective in value. The purchase of ‘Sir Berington,’ while financially impactful, did not violate the terms of the shared wallet smart contract, which granted both parties equal spending rights.”
My heart sank.
“However,” it continued, “the respondent’s unilateral alteration of communal property, the villa’s interior, constitutes a breach of the ‘Co-habitation Agreement,’ addendum 4C.”
The ruling was this: I was awarded sole ownership of the Nova-Verse villa. Kevin kept Sir Berington and his top-hatted dreams. We were both granted a clean, on-chain divorce, our digital lives neatly untangled by code.
As we logged out, Kevin’s avatar gave a little bow. Sir Berington’s monocle seemed to glint with triumph.
So, what’s the lesson? Before you say “I do” in the metaverse, get a prenup. A smart contract prenup. Because in the court of the future, the law isn’t about hearts and minds. It’s about hashes and blocks. And sometimes, a pixelated penguin really is worth more than love.
This is a fictional satire designed for educational entertainment. It explores potential future scenarios involving blockchain and digital assets in a humorous way. This is not legal, financial, or personal advice. Concepts like metaverse divorce and AI judges are fictional and do not reflect actual law. For real-world matters, always consult qualified professionals.
