Abstract This paper critically examines the intersection and interactions between conventional law produced and enforced by national legal systems (ie the ‘code of law’) and the internal rules of blockchain systems, which take the form of executable software code and cryptographic algorithms operating across a distributed computing network (‘code as law’). In so doing, it seeks to identify whether, and to what extent, ‘regulation by blockchain’ will successfully avoid governance by conventional law. It identifies three different ways in which the code of law is likely to interact with code as law, based primarily on the intended motives and purposes of those engaged in activities in developing, maintaining or undertaking transactions upon the network. It argues that these different classes of case are likely to generate different kinds of dynamic interaction between the blockchain code and conventional legal systems, and critically examines the normative foundations of these emerging and anticipated interactions.
A decade after the financial market started experimenting with blockchain, the prevailing view of EU regulators has been that blockchain based transactions do not fit into the current regulatory regime. This was illustrated by the European Banking Authority’s warning to the consumers issued in 2013 of the absence of specific legal regime designed to protect the consumers dealing with exchange platforms. A similar position was adopted by the European Securities and Market Authority in its 2017 investor alert indicating that ICO operating in unregulated spaces pose several risks the consumers should be aware of.By Examining developments until December 2018, this article argues that the extent of regulatory uncertainty is overstated and recommends a functional approach to regulation. It posits that although blockchain and cryptocurrencies are new technologies, the legal transactions they enable are not entirely novel and could largely be regulated under the existing legal rules without the need for sweeping reform.
In honor of the seventy-fifth anniversary of The Business Lawyer (TBL), we reviewed the roughly 400 papers published in TBL on secured transactions since inception, in 1946. We find that, while TBL has always provided excellent coverage of secured credit, earlier works were more likely to focus on questions of policy than those published more recently, which tend to be more technical. This is curious, both because secured transactions have been the subject of sometimes ferocious academic debates in other journals about their distributive effects, and because TBL often includes policy-oriented scholarship in other business-law fields (e.g., corporate governance). We argue that TBL should actively seek papers on secured credit policy, in part because technologies like distributed ledgers may threaten to render all secured transactions . .. academic.
Peter Nadimi, Samuel Korver, Zach Smolinski, Lauren Steinhaeuser · 5 authors
The most disruptive technology to emerge in the past decade, blockchain technology has had an immediate impact on the legal industry to address the new issues that blockchain, cryptocurrencies, and distributed ledger technologies present. This panel discusses why it is important for lawyers to take an interest in this area, and more importantly, how lawyers of all experience levels can get involved in the blockchain space. The panel will share diverse experiences and insights from those on the ground who do blockchain legal work.
Isadora de Brida Santi, Lara Bonemer Rocha Floriani
A presente pesquisa, que se encontra em fase de desenvolvimento, tem como escopo analisar as caracteristicas dos smart contracts, advindos da tecnologia blockchain, a fim de concluir se estes podem ser considerados contratos de acordo com as disposicoes do Codigo Civil de 2002, ou se sao apenas clausula de execucao automatica. Para a realizacao do estudo sera considerada a liberdade contratual trazida pela Constituicao Federal, e confirmada pelo Codigo Civil no artigo 425, que autoriza as partes estipularem contratos atipicos, ou seja, contratos nao previstos na norma civil. O estudo se justifica na duvida acerca da legalidade dos referidos ‘contratos’, sendo necessaria a conclusao a fim de trazer seguranca juridica as partes contratantes. Para tanto, a fim de focalizar o estudo, tendo em vista que existem mais de 20 tipos de contratos no Codigo Civil e inumeros contratos atipicos, sera analisado as disposicoes da norma que tratam de contrato de seguro, previsto no Capitulo I e XV do Titulo V, em especial os elementos essenciais, regras de interpretacao e formacao do contrato de seguro, alem das disposicoes gerais de validade dos negocios juridicos, conforme o disposto no artigo 104 da referida norma. A fim de embasar o estudo, sera utilizado como fonte de informacao as doutrinas brasileiras e portuguesas que abordam os contratos civis, alem de doutrina internacional sobre smart contracts e blockchain. Para a realizacao do presente estudo, sera empregado o metodo de abordagem dedutivo, eis que se origina em uma generalizacao para uma particularizacao.
Rainer Schmidt, Michael Möhring, Barbara Keller, Fabian B. Fuchs · 6 authors
Smart contracts are highly relevant due to their support for new decentralized business models and processes. We empirically investigate the benefit of implementing smart contracts. Our approach measures the benefit by capturing the impact of implementing smart contracts on processes directly. Thus, our research supersedes previous research that uses deductive approaches for deriving beneficial effects from technical and architectural properties of smart contracts and blockchains. We conduct a systematic approach using the aspects cost, quality, time and flexibility, and their impact on the four process phases interest, agreement, fulfillment, and assessment. Our research enables decision-makers to make decisions on implementing smart contracts more precisely. Furthermore, decision-makers become able to develop more target-oriented initiatives.
Sofia Lopes Barata, Paulo Rupino da Cunha, Aguilar, José Ricardo
A contract that regulates the online sales of a fictitious wine shop. Physical form (legal contract) and its translation into digital format (smart contract) in Solidity.<br>This document is part of the paper:<br><br>Barata, S., & Cunha, P. R. (2019). Legal and Smart! An Exploratory Case Study on Understandability of Smart Contracts. In Conferência da Associação Portuguesa de Sistemas de Informação (CAPSI). Lisboa, Portugal.
Tässä tutkielmassa käsitellään automatisoidun sopimustoiminnan toimintaympäristöä, lainsäädäntöä sekä teknologian hyötyjä. Tutkimuksen avulla halutaan selvittää, tuoko sopimusautomaatio ja smart contract -teknologia yrityksille sellaista hyötyä, että teknologia otetaan käyttöön sekä tulisiko tätä sopimustoimintaa säännellä Suomessa. Tutkimuksen tavoitteena on saada kokonaisvaltainen kuva smart contract -teknologian hyödyistä ja vaikutuksista sopimustoimintaan sekä nykyisistä epäselvyyksistä, jotta voidaan antaa ehdotuksia osa-alueista, joilla on tarve selkeyttävälle ohjeistukselle, oli se laki, alalle vakiintunut käytäntö tai muu vastaava. Smart contract -prosessia verrataan perinteiseen sopimusprosessiin, jotta hyödyille ja sääntelytarpeelle saadaan vertailupohjaa. Vertailtavia osa-alueita ovat sopimuksen syntyminen, osapuolten vastuut, oikeuslähteet ja oikeussuoja. Tutkimusaineisto koostuu oikeustoimilaista, laista sähköisen viestinnän palveluista, oikeuskirjallisuudesta ja artikkeleista saaduista havainnoista. Sopimustoiminta on kehittynyt alkuperäisestä nykyiseen ominaispiirteidensä osalta, sillä siitä on tullut sisällöllistä, dynaamista, yhteistoimintaa edistävää ja kollektiivista. Teknologian kehittyessä sopimustoiminta saa uusia toteutusmuotoja, kuten smart contract eli älysopimukset. Älysopimusta ei kuitenkaan säännellä erillisellä lailla Suomessa tai kansainvälisesti, joten sen käyttöön liittyy epäselvyyksiä. Teknologia hakee muotoaan ja kehittyy koko ajan mutta yritykset eivät matalan käyttöasteen perusteella välttämättä edes tiedä sen hyödyistä ja mahdollisuuksista, sillä sitä ei osata hakeutua tutkimaan eikä sitä koeta turvalliseksi menettelyohjeiden ja avustavan toimielimen puuttuessa. Siksi teknologia tarvitsee tuekseen tunnettuutta, lisää tutkimusta ja selkeät menettelyohjeet. Suomi kuuluu EU-maiden parhaimpiin digiosaajiin ja sopimustoiminnan automatisointi on mahdollisuus, joka vie liiketoimintaa eteenpäin. Älysopimusten sääteleminen on kuitenkin varmasti hankalaa, sillä kaikki on vielä uutta ja selvittämätöntä. Tässä vaiheessa älysopimus toiminee parhaiten sopimuksentekovälineenä, jolla voidaan varmistaa osapuolten pitäytyminen velvoitteissaan, joten erillinen lainsäädäntö ei ole tarpeellista mutta jonkinlainen menettelyohjeistus sen sijaan on. Lainsäätäjien ja yritystoimijoiden on kuitenkin luotava teknologiasta kokonaisuus ymmärtääkseen sen mahdollisuuksia. Teknologian ja mahdollisen sääntelyn kehityttyä smart contract voisi useammassa tilanteessa toimia pätevänä sopimuksena ja toteuttaa kehittymisen tarkoitustaan.