法律和法规的冲突

Florian Möslein
{"title":"法律和法规的冲突","authors":"Florian Möslein","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198842187.003.0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Blockchain technology promises to perform tasks that have traditionally been assigned to the law and the realm of legal institutions. Smart contracts create agreements that are both automatable by computers and enforceable via the tamper-proof execution of computer codes. Based on such smart contracts, some providers of blockchain technologies offer ‘to act as a digital jurisdiction’. The promise seems to be that law of the relevant jurisdiction is entirely substituted by the rules codified in the blockchain. However, even if it has often been argued that the ‘Code Is Law’, the law is not—and arguably never will be—entirely redundant. Therefore, the challenge is to identify the boundaries of such digital jurisdictions by clarifying the relationship between law and code and to develop new principles for conflicts of laws or rather principles for the conflict of laws and codes.","PeriodicalId":205528,"journal":{"name":"Regulating Blockchain","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conflicts of Laws and Codes\",\"authors\":\"Florian Möslein\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198842187.003.0016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Blockchain technology promises to perform tasks that have traditionally been assigned to the law and the realm of legal institutions. Smart contracts create agreements that are both automatable by computers and enforceable via the tamper-proof execution of computer codes. Based on such smart contracts, some providers of blockchain technologies offer ‘to act as a digital jurisdiction’. The promise seems to be that law of the relevant jurisdiction is entirely substituted by the rules codified in the blockchain. However, even if it has often been argued that the ‘Code Is Law’, the law is not—and arguably never will be—entirely redundant. Therefore, the challenge is to identify the boundaries of such digital jurisdictions by clarifying the relationship between law and code and to develop new principles for conflicts of laws or rather principles for the conflict of laws and codes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":205528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulating Blockchain\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulating Blockchain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198842187.003.0016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulating Blockchain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198842187.003.0016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

区块链技术有望执行传统上分配给法律和法律机构领域的任务。智能合约创建的协议既可以由计算机自动执行,又可以通过计算机代码的防篡改执行来强制执行。基于这种智能合约,一些区块链技术提供商提供“充当数字司法管辖区”。其承诺似乎是,相关司法管辖区的法律完全被区块链中编纂的规则所取代。然而,即使人们经常争论“法典就是法律”,法律并不是——也永远不会是完全多余的。因此,挑战在于通过澄清法律和法典之间的关系来确定这些数字司法管辖区的边界,并制定法律冲突的新原则,或者更确切地说,是法律和法典冲突的原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Conflicts of Laws and Codes
Blockchain technology promises to perform tasks that have traditionally been assigned to the law and the realm of legal institutions. Smart contracts create agreements that are both automatable by computers and enforceable via the tamper-proof execution of computer codes. Based on such smart contracts, some providers of blockchain technologies offer ‘to act as a digital jurisdiction’. The promise seems to be that law of the relevant jurisdiction is entirely substituted by the rules codified in the blockchain. However, even if it has often been argued that the ‘Code Is Law’, the law is not—and arguably never will be—entirely redundant. Therefore, the challenge is to identify the boundaries of such digital jurisdictions by clarifying the relationship between law and code and to develop new principles for conflicts of laws or rather principles for the conflict of laws and codes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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