Digital assets have various definitions and can be classified according to different characteristics, yet these classifications do not provide a robust and comprehensive legal definition. The definitions in Principle 2 of the Unidroit DAPL Principles are technology-, business model-, and jurisdiction-neutral, meaning they can be applied across both civil law and common law jurisdictions. The key definition is ‘digital asset’, which refers to “an electronic record which is capable of being subject to control”—where ‘electronic record’ means information stored in an electronic medium that is capable of being retrieved, and ‘control’ is defined in Principle 6. Some electronic records might colloquially be described as ‘digital assets’ but would not satisfy the criteria for ‘control’ under Principle 6 and consequently fall outside the scope of the Principles. Control, as defined, requires exclusivity (subject to the qualifications in Principle 6(3)). The definitions in Principle 2 thus focus on ensuring legal certainty and predictability, accommodating both existing digital assets and emerging technologies. Beyond the core definition, Principle 2 also defines related concepts such as ‘transfer’, ‘insolvency-related proceeding’, and ‘Principles law’. Furthermore, Principle 4 addresses ‘linked assets’—situations where a digital asset is linked to another asset (whether tangible or intangible, such as gold, securities, or real estate). The legal effects of such links are determined by the applicable domestic law governing the linked asset, thereby connecting the DAPL framework with existing legal regimes.