I have some concerns about this on a lot of levels to be honest. To be frank I think the guy is just out for attention (as was the video game dude) and got his five minutes of fame. Also it's been unclear if the goverment has so far recognized these unions, or if it was just a ceremony, and/if there are american-style marital benefits attached.
That said, I think it establishes a bad precedent. Whether people like it or not I *DO* believe that society needs to follow certain rules to work. I think that marriage and such is a fundemental part of our societal structure that needs to be closely watched and maintained in a general sense.
I look at the entire "gay marriage debate" (which I am not going to re-open seriously) and how people have defended it over a period of time by saying "well hey, it's not like people are going to start marrying animals" and poking fun at such alleged concerns. It is rapidly getting to the point though that we're seeing things moving in that kind of a direction one step at a time. If some guy can marry a pillow, or a non-existant virtual character, why can't he marry another possesion like an animal? We haven't gotten there yet, but this is why this kind of thing is a slippery slope, and one where all jokes aside I think clear lines should be drawn.
Where should that line be drawn? Before people immediatly jump on me and start saying there shouldn't be one at all, consider for example that some guy steals something of yours like a pet, computer, car, or whatever and gets some whack job to marry him to it when such things are recognized. "I'm not a thief, me and his Lamborgini were in love with each other, I didn't steal his car... I eloped with it, and have a marriage certificate to prove it!". Absurd? Well no more absurd in proportion to current situations than the current situations were to say the marriage conventions of 20 years ago before such issues began to become a political aspect in society. Even saying the above should still be theft does ultimatly present a "line" and I think it should be quite a bit further back than that.
I don't think we're quite to the point of seriously discussing robots and AIs, and VIs, but I think that kind of a situation won't be as big a deal as many think when it arrives some day. Mainly because I for one think the whole "robot/machine/AI revolt" schtick is simply paranoid techno-phobia. This gets well off subject and into a whole differant line of reasoning.
I guess overall is what I'm saying is that seeing as we've seen this kind of thing (in the article) twice now, it's rapidly going from being a funny stunt, to outright disturbing. What's more people are going to crave more attention and keep pushing it.