Two typical cases involving digital collectibles in China have emerged within the new business models underpinned by new technologies, revealing the chaotic state of the digital collectibles trading market. Many viewpoints expressed in the judgments of these cases have sparked intense debate in both academic and practical circles, making them worthy of in-depth analysis. Firstly, the technical principles of the transaction preparatory actions and the transaction actions involved in digital collectibles trading have been clarified. It is noted that there is consensus on the legal regulation of transaction preparatory actions, but the primary dispute lies in the regulation of transaction actions, with three major viewpoints: The first viewpoint is the right to distribute regulation theory, which argues that transaction actions should be regulated by right to distribute, and under this premise, the principle of exhaustion of right to distribute should also apply to secondary transactions. The second viewpoint is the right of communication through information network regulation theory, which argues that although transaction actions resemble traditional distribution actions due to the new technology, they do not meet the requirement of tangible medium under right to distribute and thus should still be regulated by right of communication through information network. The third viewpoint is the credit rights regulation theory, which asserts that since digital collectibles are not physical objects, their transactions should not be regulated under the right to distribute in copyright law; instead, the purchase of digital collectibles should be regarded as a transfer of credit rights, regulated by relevant provisions in the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter Civil Code). The fundamental cause of these disputes lies in the unclear legal nature of digital collectibles. Secondly, due to the lack of explicit provisions on the legal nature of virtual property in Article 127 of the Civil Code, disputes have arisen regarding the legal nature of virtual property, and as a type of virtual property, the legal nature of digital collectibles is also contested. Based on the contractual relationship between trading platforms and users, the credit rights theory holds that virtual property should be classified as a subject of credit rights, and the property rights associated with digital collectibles and other virtual properties should be considered as credit rights. The new type of rights theory argues that traditional civil law theory cannot explain new products arising under the development of new technologies such as virtual property, and thus holders of virtual property should be granted new types of rights. The property rights theory suggests that digital collectibles, with characteristics like virtuality, scarcity and exchangeability, and disposability and exclusivity, should be regarded as property rights protected by civil law. However, due to the current immaturity of relevant theories, such as the scope of protection, rights, and obligations of digital collectibles, property rights should not yet be elevated to the status of formal rights. The real rights theory asserts that virtual property is the object of real rights. The viewpoints of the credit rights theory, new type of rights theory, and property rights theory are all subject to further scrutiny, and the real rights theory can be established based on both the characteristics of the object and the content. Finally, once the legal nature of digital collectibles is clarified, it becomes clear that both the right of communication through information network regulation theory and the credit rights regulation theory are unreasonable. With the new changes brought about by the fixation of works and transfer of carriers in the context of NFTs, the right to distribute should be explained from a functionalist perspective. The issue of the tangible medium requirement of right to distribute should not prevent the application of right to distribute regulation to digital collectibles transactions, and the principle of exhaustion of the right to distribute should also apply to secondary transactions of digital collectibles, extending to digital collectibles trading scenarios.