Abstract
The argument that public international law should give special protection to a new class of virtual cultural property has a certain degree of appeal. It fits within three trends at once: 1) the trend towards recognizing the claims of indigenous peoples to prevent the uncompensated foreign exploitation of their traditional cultural property; 2) the ongoing expansion of intellectual property rights; and 3) the growing recognition of the increasing importance of rights in digital property in general and virtual property in particular. This paper concentrates on identifying to what extent this claim of right is rooted in international law. Although the claim to control the use of a country name is not utterly without support in international law, this paper suggests that the claim that governments have a trademark-like right in their country names--or in particular representations of their country names--is not grounded in existing concepts of international law, and it also suggests that the case for making new law in this area is ultimately not persuasive.