Smart Contracts - new role for lawyers? - page 2.

botany

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1064

Quote from: ulhaq on March 24, 2017, 10:59:05 AM

It is impossible to have truly smart contracts (unless extremely simple). With the length required to spell out the details in a major contract, it is inevitable that there will be mistakes. If millions or hundreds of millions of dollars are on the line, this cannot be risked, especially if the outcome that occurs was not wanted by both parties in a contract, due to a semantic-type error.

The resolution mechanism I was referring to is an x of y ability to modify/nullify the contract. As far as I know, this is a standard feature in the bitcoin smart contracts and Rootstock.

x of y ability? Could you please elaborate that?
On the risks involved in making smart contracts, I think the programmers (who will be well paid) are expected to underwrite this risk. If they screw up on making a smart contract, they can be sued for damages in the non-smart world.

ulhaq

sr. member

Activity: 503

Merit: 286

It is impossible to have truly smart contracts (unless extremely simple). With the length required to spell out the details in a major contract, it is inevitable that there will be mistakes. If millions or hundreds of millions of dollars are on the line, this cannot be risked, especially if the outcome that occurs was not wanted by both parties in a contract, due to a semantic-type error.

The resolution mechanism I was referring to is an x of y ability to modify/nullify the contract. As far as I know, this is a standard feature in the bitcoin smart contracts and Rootstock.

botany

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1064

Quote from: ulhaq on March 23, 2017, 07:24:45 AM

Currently lawyers and judges spend inordinate time in cases arguing over definitions of words and intended meaning of short phrases and sentences, and come up with all kinds of arguments for their side of a case. What appears to be a relatively simple case routinely results in decisions of hundreds of pages. As smart contracts become ubiquitous, and if it becomes standard practice to accept the code as law, this will radically redefine lawyers' roles, as well as impact their demand. I cannot ever see trusting code as law, because there can always be unintended consequences, especially in critical cases, but it can become standard to have a resolution mechanism built into the code, including adjudicators. Opinions?

If you have resolution mechanisms being built into the code, I wouldn't call the contract 'smart'.

Truly smart contracts would make lawyers redundant.

ulhaq

sr. member

Activity: 503

Merit: 286

Currently lawyers and judges spend inordinate time in cases arguing over definitions of words and intended meaning of short phrases and sentences, and come up with all kinds of arguments for their side of a case. What appears to be a relatively simple case routinely results in decisions of hundreds of pages. As smart contracts become ubiquitous, and if it becomes standard practice to accept the code as law, this will radically redefine lawyers' roles, as well as impact their demand. I cannot ever see trusting code as law, because there can always be unintended consequences, especially in critical cases, but it can become standard to have a resolution mechanism built into the code, including adjudicators. Opinions?

Topic: Smart Contracts - new role for lawyers? - page 2. (Read 2812 times)