Error Correction Mechanisms for Transactional Script Smart Contracts

C. Christopher
{"title":"Error Correction Mechanisms for Transactional Script Smart Contracts","authors":"C. Christopher","doi":"10.17161/1808.31577","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article explores the implications of transactional script smart contracts used in situations where there is less than total trust between the parties. In particular, this Article asks the question of how parties to these next generation transactional scripts can seek redress and remedies in the event that the transactional script does not perform according to the parties’ intent. Until parties feel safe that any errors can be corrected, large-scale implementation of transactional scripts will be hobbled. Part II of this Article articulates why the term “transactional scripts” is preferable to “smart contracts” and describes the utility and potential of transactional scripts. Part III identifies several factors that hinder greater expansion of the use of transactional scripts. It goes on to identify uncertainty of enforcement as the most important barrier to transactional script innovation, finding that parties will be reluctant to entrust bigger and more complex transactions to transactional scripts until the parties are comfortable that an external mechanism is capable of correcting errors in the execution of the transaction. This lack of reliable enforcement mechanisms is a problem exacerbated by the characteristic of distributed ledger technology, which is to move only forward, preventing revisions or reversals of preexisting entries. Part IV explores and critiques possible mechanisms that may be able to provide error correction, including statutory law, private law, online dispute resolution, public/private regulatory partnership, and common law. Part V concludes the Article, noting that the expansion of transactional scripts’ utility will be tethered to the security provided by available error-correction mechanisms. Only as contracting parties become assured that the integrity of their transactional intent will be effectuated will transactional scripts be adopted for use.","PeriodicalId":129207,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17161/1808.31577","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Article explores the implications of transactional script smart contracts used in situations where there is less than total trust between the parties. In particular, this Article asks the question of how parties to these next generation transactional scripts can seek redress and remedies in the event that the transactional script does not perform according to the parties’ intent. Until parties feel safe that any errors can be corrected, large-scale implementation of transactional scripts will be hobbled. Part II of this Article articulates why the term “transactional scripts” is preferable to “smart contracts” and describes the utility and potential of transactional scripts. Part III identifies several factors that hinder greater expansion of the use of transactional scripts. It goes on to identify uncertainty of enforcement as the most important barrier to transactional script innovation, finding that parties will be reluctant to entrust bigger and more complex transactions to transactional scripts until the parties are comfortable that an external mechanism is capable of correcting errors in the execution of the transaction. This lack of reliable enforcement mechanisms is a problem exacerbated by the characteristic of distributed ledger technology, which is to move only forward, preventing revisions or reversals of preexisting entries. Part IV explores and critiques possible mechanisms that may be able to provide error correction, including statutory law, private law, online dispute resolution, public/private regulatory partnership, and common law. Part V concludes the Article, noting that the expansion of transactional scripts’ utility will be tethered to the security provided by available error-correction mechanisms. Only as contracting parties become assured that the integrity of their transactional intent will be effectuated will transactional scripts be adopted for use.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
事务性脚本智能合约的纠错机制
本文探讨了在双方之间信任不足的情况下使用事务性脚本智能合约的含义。特别是,本文提出的问题是,如果交易脚本不按照当事人的意图执行,这些下一代交易脚本的当事人如何寻求补救和救济。在各方确信任何错误都可以得到纠正之前,事务性脚本的大规模实现将受到阻碍。本文的第二部分阐述了为什么术语“事务性脚本”比“智能合约”更可取,并描述了事务性脚本的效用和潜力。第三部分确定了阻碍事务性脚本使用更大范围扩展的几个因素。它继续将执行的不确定性确定为事务性脚本创新的最重要障碍,发现各方将不愿意将更大和更复杂的事务委托给事务性脚本,直到各方确信外部机制能够纠正事务执行中的错误。这种缺乏可靠执行机制的问题因分布式账本技术的特点而加剧,该技术只向前推进,防止修改或撤销先前存在的条目。第四部分探讨并批评了可能提供错误纠正的机制,包括成文法、私法、在线争议解决、公私监管伙伴关系和普通法。第五部分总结了本文,指出事务脚本实用程序的扩展将与可用的错误纠正机制所提供的安全性联系在一起。只有当缔约方确信其交易意图的完整性将得到实现时,才会采用交易脚本进行使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
La garantía legal del Estatuto del Consumidor como mecanismo para proteger al comprador frente a vicios inmobiliarios progresivos (The Legal Guarantee of the Consumers Statute as a Mechanism to Protect Buyer Front of Progressive Real Estate Vices) Solidarismo y contratos relacionales: alternativas frente a la pandemia de covid-19 (Contractual Solidarism and Relational Contract Theory: Alternative Approaches to Contract Law in Light of the COVID-19 Pandemic) Error Correction Mechanisms for Transactional Script Smart Contracts The Shadows of Litigation Finance Malas leyes (Bad Law)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1