Smart Contracts

R. Brownsword
{"title":"Smart Contracts","authors":"R. Brownsword","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198842187.003.0018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main purpose of this chapter is to sketch two principal ways in which lawyers are likely to engage with new transactional technologies (such as smart contract applications of blockchain technologies), each form of engagement being characterized by its own questions and conversations. Whereas one form of engagement, ‘coherentism’, focuses on the fit between particular new technologies and the covering law of contract, the other, ‘regulatory-instrumentalism’, focuses on whether the law (relative to particular new technologies) is fit for regulatory purpose. The sketch is refined by drawing further distinctions between ‘transactionalist’ and ‘relationalist’ variants of ‘coherentism’ and ‘rule-based’ and ‘technocratic’ variants of regulatory-instrumentalism. With a view to decoding legal debates about emerging transactional technologies, this sketch is then applied to questions concerning smart contracts in, respectively, business-to-consumer, business-to-business, and peer-to-peer transactions.","PeriodicalId":205528,"journal":{"name":"Regulating Blockchain","volume":"106 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulating Blockchain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198842187.003.0018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

The main purpose of this chapter is to sketch two principal ways in which lawyers are likely to engage with new transactional technologies (such as smart contract applications of blockchain technologies), each form of engagement being characterized by its own questions and conversations. Whereas one form of engagement, ‘coherentism’, focuses on the fit between particular new technologies and the covering law of contract, the other, ‘regulatory-instrumentalism’, focuses on whether the law (relative to particular new technologies) is fit for regulatory purpose. The sketch is refined by drawing further distinctions between ‘transactionalist’ and ‘relationalist’ variants of ‘coherentism’ and ‘rule-based’ and ‘technocratic’ variants of regulatory-instrumentalism. With a view to decoding legal debates about emerging transactional technologies, this sketch is then applied to questions concerning smart contracts in, respectively, business-to-consumer, business-to-business, and peer-to-peer transactions.
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
聪明的合同
本章的主要目的是概述律师可能参与新交易技术(如区块链技术的智能合约应用)的两种主要方式,每种形式的参与都以其自己的问题和对话为特征。一种参与形式,“连贯性”,关注特定新技术与合同法之间的契合,另一种形式,“监管工具主义”,关注法律(相对于特定新技术)是否适合监管目的。通过进一步区分“一致性”的“交易主义”和“关系主义”变体,以及“基于规则的”和“技术官僚”的调节工具主义变体,该草图得到了完善。为了解读关于新兴交易技术的法律辩论,然后将此概述应用于分别涉及企业对消费者,企业对企业和点对点交易中的智能合约问题。
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
Regulating Blockchain Regulating the Shadow Payment System Old Utopias, New Tax Havens Blockchain, Securities Markets, and Central Banking Regulation of Blockchain Token Sales in the United States
×
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