In recent years, the digital economy has experienced a growing number of transactions. Traditional dispute resolution methods such as court and international arbitration are ineffective for handling a large volume of small value claims across national borders. Decentralized justice is a new approach to online dispute resolution that combines blockchain, crowdsourcing and game theory in order to produce resolution systems which are radically more efficient than existing methods. This article offers a review of the decentralized justice industry and of the key players participating in it. It presents a number of key dimensions of the industry and reviews the mechanism design choices made by these different platforms. Finally, it discusses a growth hypothesis for the industry and how it may grow in the future.
Abstract Smart contracts have been proposed as a means of revolutionizing transacting between human actors and contributing to blockchain platforms substituting for many current institutions. However, the technical nature of blockchain platforms and smart contracts requires levels of certainty and foresight sufficient for contracts to be complete. We examine the technical and economic characteristics of blockchains and smart contracts to identify sources of uncertainty that may pose challenges to the ability of these technologies to displace existing institutional arrangements, in particular, the courts and other arbitration arrangements. Despite the development of alternative automated blockchain institutions such as the Kleros dispute resolution system, the case for smart contracts and blockchain applications to supplant real-world institutions remains weak. Inherent incompleteness due to limits to information availability, human cognition, and communication means that traditional contract governance institutions will continue to complement blockchain smart contract governance arrangements. The more complex and unique the transaction, the higher the value at risk, the harder to anticipate and precisely specify contingencies and measure and observe outcomes. Furthermore, the longer the time frame between agreement and execution, the less likely it is that smart contracting will be more efficient than traditional contracting.
O escopo central do presente estudo consiste em investigar algumas perspectivas (e os correlatos riscos e dificuldades) de incorporação da inteligência artificial e dos smart contracts para a regulação convencional do risco contratual. Tal empreitada parte da investigação das perspectivas de a gestão do risco contratual por intermédio da inteligência artificial ocorrer, entre outras manifestações, ora pela sua utilização para a delimitação inicial de elementos das prestações a cargo das partes, ora para a revisão das suas prestações diante de superveniências contratuais. Analisam-se, por fim, algumas repercussões dos smart contracts sobre a execução contratual e, em especial, sobre a atuação dos remédios ao inadimplemento. Para tanto, o presente estudo adota o método lógico-dedutivo, a partir do exame bibliográfico da doutrina nacional e, a título ilustrativo, da doutrina estrangeira.
Are the technologies advanced enough to replace lawyers and the judiciary in the negotiation and enforcement process? Is it possible for a program code to be a contract that binds the parties named in it? What is a smart contract and what challenges does it pose to the law? The present study aims to clarify and show the advantages and disadvantages of using smart contracts in civil law.
Decisions concerning proof of facts in criminal law must be rational because of what is at stake, but the decision-making process must also be cognitively feasible because of cognitive limitations, and it must obey the relevant legal-procedural constraints. In this topic three approaches to rational reasoning about evidence in criminal law are compared in light of these demands: arguments, probabilities, and scenarios. This is done in six case studies in which different authors analyze a manslaughter case from different theoretical perspectives, plus four commentaries on these case studies. The aim of this topic is to obtain more insight into how the different approaches can be applied in a legal context. This will advance the discussion on rational reasoning about evidence in law and will contribute more widely to cognitive science on a number of topics, including the value of probabilistic accounts of cognition and the problem of dealing with cognitive biases in reasoning under uncertainty in practical contexts.
Block chain smart contract is the third stage of the development of smart contract, but also the second stage of the development of block chain. The discussion of the nature of the contract law of block chain intelligent contract should take the contract-based intelligent contract as the research object. On the technical level, the characteristics of decentralized, unalterable and automatic execution of intelligent contract make it different from traditional contract, but from the perspective of law, the above characteristics of intelligent contract are only relative. Therefore, there is no great difference between intelligent contract and traditional contract in essence, and the differences can be reasonably explained. In terms of law, intelligent contract is the codification of traditional contract and another name for traditional contract in the field of information code, so it should be adjusted by the contract law.
Amy J. Schmitz describes the development of contracts and the challenges in resolving disputes in this arena. She explains the need for sound dispute system design complete with an arbitration provision built into smart contracts. She is the Elwood L. Thomas Missouri Endowed Professor at the University of Missouri School of Law.
El desarrollo de tecnologías blockchain ha permitido la creación de nuevas formas de ejecución automática de obligaciones contractuales mediante los mal denominados “contratos inteligentes” (smart contracts). Las características propias de la blockchain, esto es, su lenguaje de código, la desintermediación, autonomía e inmutabilidad, crean nuevas problemáticas asociadas a la ejecución contractual mediante contratos inteligentes; y al mismo tiempo implican retos para los actores involucrados, así como para los reguladores. El presente artículo tiene como objeto servir de introducción al análisis de las problemáticas asociadas a la tecnología blockchain y a los contratos inteligentes.
ابزارهای مبادلاتی نوین در عصر حاضر نقشی غیرقابل انکار در توسعه تجارت الکترونیکی بر عهده دارند. یکی از این ابزارها قراردادهای هوشمند هستند که در مقایسه با دیگر انواع قراردادهای الکترونیکی دارای خصوصیاتی از جمله سرعت و امنیت بالا هزینه کم در تشکیل قرارداد میباشند. پژوهش حاضر به روش اسنادی به دنبال پاسخگویی به این سؤال است که سیاستگذاری قواعد عمومی تشکیل قراردادها در مرحله انعقاد قراردادهای هوشمند با چه چالشهایی مواجه است؟ بهطور کلی مهمترین چالشهای موجود مطابقت قواعد حاکم بر این قراردادها با هنجارهای موجود در جامعه، تعارض قوانین داخلی کشورها با یکدیگر و مقررات بینالمللی، اعتبارسنجی این قراردادها و ابزارهای انعقاد آنها از جمله ارزهای مجازی، سازوکار عملکرد هوش مصنوعی و ماهیت متمرکز پایگاههای اطلاعاتی و هوش مصنوعی میباشد. رفع چالشهای مذکور نیازمند برخی سیاستگذاریهای تقنینی و اجرایی از جمله تصویب قوانین کارآمد در جهت اعتبارسنجی قراردادهای هوشمند و ارزهای مجازی، اصلاح قوانین متعارض موجود، پیشبینی تشریفات تخصیص مجوز تملک ارزهای مجازی و بهرهمندی از امضائات دیجیتالی، آگاهی بخشی به مردم و تعیین نهادهای ناظر خواهد بود.
Jørgen Svennevik Notland, Jakob Svennevik Notland, Donn Morrison
Corruption is a major global financial problem with billions of dollars rendered lost or unaccountable annually. Corruption through contract fraud is often conducted by withholding and/or altering financial information. When such scandals are investigated by authorities, financial and legal documents are usually altered to conceal the paper trail. Smart contracts have emerged in recent years and appear promising for applications such as legal contracts where transparency is critical and of public interest. Transparency and auditability are inherent because smart contracts execute operations on the blockchain, a distributed public ledger. In this paper, we propose the Minimum Hybrid Contract (MHC), with the aim of introducing 1) auditability, 2) transparency, and 3) immutability to the contract's financial transactions. The MHC comprises an online smart contract and an offline traditional legal contract. where the two are immutably linked. Secure peer-to-peer financial transactions, transparency, and cost accounting are automated by the smart contract, and legal issues or disputes are carried out by civil courts. The reliance on established legal processes facilitates an appropriate adoption of smart contracts in traditional contracts.
The principles of contract law have shown continued resilience in light of constant technological developments, including the mainstream adoption of the Internet. The ability to absorb technological change may be attributable to the broad manner of their formulation. For example, the foundational proposition that ‘legal intention can be expressed in any manner’ has enabled the nearly seamless acceptance of online contracting. If intention can be manifested by a nod or a handshake, it can also take the form of a click or a swipe. Similarly, the requirement of consideration can be met not only by peppercorns or money, but also by one’s permission to share personal information in return for the provision of online content and services. While the Internet hardly creates academic excitement anymore, a number of internet- related technologies may pose a challenge to the principles of contract law and may, finally, test their flexibility. Purportedly, blockchain-based smart contracts, which are often defined as the encoding of legal terms in self-executing computer code, enable not only the automation of performance but also the delegation of enforcement to immutable code. The theory is that if both performance and enforcement are entrusted to impartial machines, breach becomes impossible. Smart contracts are also premised on the ability to translate contractual obligations into algorithms – a process aimed at the elimination of ambiguity and enhancement of legal certainty. Abstracting from technological minutiae, we must inquire whether, or to what extent, such ‘operations’ are desirable or legally permissible. The challenges of automation are further aggravated by advancements in artificial intelligence. The accompanying problems exceed those inherent in the possibility of inadvertent orders, unforeseen transactions or computer errors. We are forced to inquire whether such technological phenomena as algorithmic trading, machine learning or autonomous agents affect the existence of intention and, on a broader level, raise problems concerning the validity and enforceability of any resulting contract – if only due to the unprecedented transactional imbalances introduced by them. An additional set of difficulties concerns ubiquitous computing, loosely defined as the user-facing technologies involving the Internet-of-Things (‘IoT’). Smart objects and self-checkout terminals blur the division between online and offline environments and force a revision of our understanding of ‘online contracting.’ When the Internet spills over our computer screens and when we encounter requests for consent and contractual terms in contexts that have traditionally been non-commercial, it becomes difficult to rely on such basic principles as the objective theory of contract or on the presumption that in commercial contexts the parties intend to be legally bound. The point is not to question the continued applicability of such principles or presumptions but to illustrate the difficulty in their application. In sum, my chapter explores the legal implications of the said technologies and, while abstaining from unnecessary futurism, presents a realistic picture of their legal relevance. Particular attention is devoted to the overreaching question whether the principles of contract law, in their traditional formulation, are capable of accommodating (or withstanding ?) technological change. While it is difficult to predict technological trajectories and future legal developments, it is possible to extrapolate from existing trends and anticipate certain theoretical bottlenecks created by technological change.
One of the major current topics and one of the major innovations in the contract law, as well as in insurance law is the invention of the smart contracts. The author is basing her research on use of smart contract in insurance law and what are the main legal issues arising from the use of smart contract. In her paper, the author points out that the implementation of the smart contract in insurance law will greatly affect all participants in insurance contract and a significant step forward in improving the level of protection of insurance users (consumers), although it takes time and readiness of European and domestic legislators to create a special regulatory framework so that smart contract can reach its potential.
El autor otorga una visión adecuada de smart contract. No obstante, no se detiene en definir este tipo contractual, pues advierte ciertas características que deberán tenerse en cuenta para afinar su funcionalidad, además de identificar las ventajas del arbitraje en la solución de controversias que nazcan en la ejecución de tales actos jurídicos, siempre que se logre un empalme adecuado con este sistema heterocompositivo.
The public debate about smart contracts, meant as self-help remedies grounded on distributed ledger technology, is filled with alarms and high expectations. They have been praised by the tech community as infallible software able to carry out the whole contractual cycle, from formation to enforcement. Conversely, several legal scholars have raised concerns regarding both smart contracts’ inability to reflect relational aspects of contract governance and the augmented complexity generated by the translation of an agreement into computer code. The chapter focuses the discussion on the potential areas which could effectively benefit from implementation of smart contracts. Firstly, it argues that smart contracts might be a viable tool to tackle effectively consumers’ inertia in triggering and enforcing their rights which are standardized and easily verifiable. Secondly, smart contracts have the potential to foster commercial relationships by lowering down transaction costs arising from lack of trust between merchants. Thus, smart contracts are likely to provide better alternatives to traditional tools of business practice, such as letters of credit and escrow agreements.
It is quite likely that smart contracts, which represent a further step in formalizing contracts, will diminish the courts’ ability to intervene through interpretation. In a smart contract context, it is not obvious that the smart contract can go beyond the borders of the program to find relevant rules (off-chain elements and occurrences), limiting therefore the capacity to use blockchain technology in highly contextualized types of contracting. Courts generally come into play when complexity, doubts, and litigation around them arise. In order to assure the smooth development of automated contracts, the courts must develop the expertise to interpret them and smart contracts need to provide for parties to control real world consequences and be able to terminate the contracts if necessary during and after performance.