Skip to main content
PraxiHub
Literature ReviewPublished

From Digital Ownership to Digital Asset Continuity

Direct ownership does not ensure continuity after death, incapacity, key loss, coercion, or prolonged inactivity; durable recovery requires governed and revocable policies.

Published
Published July 30, 2026
Reading time
15 min read · 3165 words

Abstract

Direct control of a digital asset does not ensure that control can survive death, incapacity, key loss, or prolonged inactivity. This narrative evidence review distinguishes ownership from continuity and examines four layers that must remain aligned: legal entitlement, technical control, current intent, and operational execution. Evidence from digital-inheritance law, platform policies, and a 2025 blockchain-based digital-will prototype shows why a private key, will, smart contract, custodian, or inactivity timer is insufficient alone. The paper proposes a continuity-policy model built around revocable instructions, bounded roles, event verification, delay, auditability, and failure handling. It does not claim a universal legal solution. The principal finding is conceptual: continuity is a lifecycle property of a governed system, not an attribute automatically conferred by digital ownership. **Keywords:** digital asset continuity; digital inheritance; private keys; digital estate; revocable instructions; blockchain automation

Abstract

Direct control of a digital asset does not ensure that control can survive death, incapacity, key loss, or prolonged inactivity. This narrative evidence review distinguishes ownership from continuity and examines four layers that must remain aligned: legal entitlement, technical control, current intent, and operational execution. Evidence from digital-inheritance law, platform policies, and a 2025 blockchain-based digital-will prototype shows why a private key, will, smart contract, custodian, or inactivity timer is insufficient alone. The paper proposes a continuity-policy model built around revocable instructions, bounded roles, event verification, delay, auditability, and failure handling. It does not claim a universal legal solution. The principal finding is conceptual: continuity is a lifecycle property of a governed system, not an attribute automatically conferred by digital ownership.

Keywords: digital asset continuity; digital inheritance; private keys; digital estate; revocable instructions; blockchain automation

Continue reading this research

Sign in to access the complete research, analysis, conclusion and references.

Sign inCreate account

Publication disclosures

Conflict of interest
PraxiHub is associated with Praxifi. The author may hold roles or ownership interests in Praxifi, whose broader research interests include digital-asset continuity and constrained automation. This relationship may create a potential conflict. The analysis does not validate or recommend a Praxifi product.
Relationship to Praxifi
PraxiHub is associated with Praxifi and serves as its research and knowledge initiative. Some authors, editors, contributors, or administrators of PraxiHub may also hold roles, ownership interests, or professional responsibilities within Praxifi.

Citation and access

Suggested citation

Saee Ghaemi (2026). From Digital Ownership to Digital Asset Continuity. PraxiHub.

BibTeX

@misc{Ghaemi2026From,
  author = {Ghaemi, Saee},
  title = {From Digital Ownership to Digital Asset Continuity},
  year = {2026},
  url = {https://thepraxihub.com/research/from-digital-ownership-to-digital-asset-continuity}
}

Related Research