现行合同法下区块链技术加密代码编写的智能合同的合法性:比较研究

IF 0.4 0 RELIGION Intellectual Discourse Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI:10.31436/id.v31i2.1922
Ghassan Adhab Atiyah, Nazura ABDUL MANAP, Saidatul Abd Aziz
{"title":"现行合同法下区块链技术加密代码编写的智能合同的合法性:比较研究","authors":"Ghassan Adhab Atiyah, Nazura ABDUL MANAP, Saidatul Abd Aziz","doi":"10.31436/id.v31i2.1922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Using smart contracts as a new technology for online contracting has become the best option today when working in non-trustworthy environments to execute automated irreversible agreements. However, such contracts have issues relating to the language used for expressing the obligations of the involved parties. Additionally, smart contracts have no legal recognition of blockchain as a means of record-keeping for smart contract transactions. Parties engaged in smart contracts face difficulties in terms of incompatibilities with current legal frameworks. The objective of this article is to evaluate the legality of smart contract language and the validity of blockchain as an electronic medium from the perspectives of current laws. This article adopts a qualitative doctrinal legal research approach. The findings indicate that there is a need to enact laws that recognise the language used for smart contracts and the transactions recorded on the blockchain.","PeriodicalId":42988,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Discourse","volume":"6 15","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legitimacy of Smart Contracts Written in Encrypted Code on Blockchain Technology Under Current Contract Law: A Comparative Study\",\"authors\":\"Ghassan Adhab Atiyah, Nazura ABDUL MANAP, Saidatul Abd Aziz\",\"doi\":\"10.31436/id.v31i2.1922\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract: Using smart contracts as a new technology for online contracting has become the best option today when working in non-trustworthy environments to execute automated irreversible agreements. However, such contracts have issues relating to the language used for expressing the obligations of the involved parties. Additionally, smart contracts have no legal recognition of blockchain as a means of record-keeping for smart contract transactions. Parties engaged in smart contracts face difficulties in terms of incompatibilities with current legal frameworks. The objective of this article is to evaluate the legality of smart contract language and the validity of blockchain as an electronic medium from the perspectives of current laws. This article adopts a qualitative doctrinal legal research approach. The findings indicate that there is a need to enact laws that recognise the language used for smart contracts and the transactions recorded on the blockchain.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42988,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intellectual Discourse\",\"volume\":\"6 15\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intellectual Discourse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31436/id.v31i2.1922\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intellectual Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31436/id.v31i2.1922","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:使用智能合约作为在线签约的新技术,已成为当今在不可信环境中工作时执行自动不可逆转协议的最佳选择。然而,这类合同在表达相关方义务时使用的语言方面存在问题。此外,智能合约没有得到区块链作为智能合约交易记录保存手段的法律认可。参与智能合约的各方面临着与现行法律框架不相容的困难。本文旨在从现行法律的角度评估智能合约语言的合法性以及区块链作为电子媒介的有效性。本文采用定性理论法律研究方法。研究结果表明,有必要颁布法律,承认智能合约使用的语言和区块链上记录的交易。
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
Legitimacy of Smart Contracts Written in Encrypted Code on Blockchain Technology Under Current Contract Law: A Comparative Study
Abstract: Using smart contracts as a new technology for online contracting has become the best option today when working in non-trustworthy environments to execute automated irreversible agreements. However, such contracts have issues relating to the language used for expressing the obligations of the involved parties. Additionally, smart contracts have no legal recognition of blockchain as a means of record-keeping for smart contract transactions. Parties engaged in smart contracts face difficulties in terms of incompatibilities with current legal frameworks. The objective of this article is to evaluate the legality of smart contract language and the validity of blockchain as an electronic medium from the perspectives of current laws. This article adopts a qualitative doctrinal legal research approach. The findings indicate that there is a need to enact laws that recognise the language used for smart contracts and the transactions recorded on the blockchain.
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
25.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
Legitimacy of Smart Contracts Written in Encrypted Code on Blockchain Technology Under Current Contract Law: A Comparative Study The Philosophical Sufism of Harun Nasution: A Phenomenological-Historical Investigation of The Influence of Neo-Mu’tazilism Management Strategy and Challenges for Religious Radio Stations in Malaysia The Main Tendencies of Discourse Representation of Immigrant Workers: A Critical Discourse Analysis in Malaysian Online News Portals Objectivity Threats: Would it Jeopardise Malaysian Internal Auditors’ Risk Judgment Quality?
×
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