智能合约:一种社会-法律方法

Q2 Social Sciences

European Business Law Review Pub Date : 2021-04-01 DOI:10.54648/eulr2021010

Leonardo Peixoto Barbosa

{"title":"智能合约:一种社会-法律方法","authors":"Leonardo Peixoto Barbosa","doi":"10.54648/eulr2021010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Smart contracts are computer protocols that self-enforce encoded terms. They arguably allow for individual freedom and increased sovereignty from inconveniences. The enthusiasm goes as far as foreseeing that smart contracts will make contractual legal oversight obsolete. However, whereas contract law theory evolved to acknowledge the importance of flexibility and relationality, smart contracts activists defend the opposite direction, arguing for contractual rigidness and denial of social norms supporting complex transactions. This paper departs from this paradox to argue that (i) smart contracts based on existing technology are unlikely to thrive in complex contractual settings, and (ii) contextual analysis is important for LawTech’s propositions.\nSmart contracts, blockchain, system’s theory, social norms, transaction cost, flexibility, relationality, trust, co-operation, contractual governance","PeriodicalId":53431,"journal":{"name":"European Business Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blockchain Smart Contracts: A Socio-Legal Approach\",\"authors\":\"Leonardo Peixoto Barbosa\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/eulr2021010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Smart contracts are computer protocols that self-enforce encoded terms. They arguably allow for individual freedom and increased sovereignty from inconveniences. The enthusiasm goes as far as foreseeing that smart contracts will make contractual legal oversight obsolete. However, whereas contract law theory evolved to acknowledge the importance of flexibility and relationality, smart contracts activists defend the opposite direction, arguing for contractual rigidness and denial of social norms supporting complex transactions. This paper departs from this paradox to argue that (i) smart contracts based on existing technology are unlikely to thrive in complex contractual settings, and (ii) contextual analysis is important for LawTech’s propositions.\\nSmart contracts, blockchain, system’s theory, social norms, transaction cost, flexibility, relationality, trust, co-operation, contractual governance\",\"PeriodicalId\":53431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Business Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Business Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2021010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Business Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2021010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

智能合约是自我执行编码条款的计算机协议。可以说，它们允许个人自由，并从不便中增加主权。这种热情甚至预见到，智能合约将使合同法律监督过时。然而，尽管合同法理论发展到承认灵活性和关联性的重要性，智能合约活动家却捍卫相反的方向，主张合同的刚性和否认支持复杂交易的社会规范。本文从这一悖论出发，认为(i)基于现有技术的智能合约不太可能在复杂的合同环境中茁壮成长，(ii)上下文分析对LawTech的主张很重要。智能合约，区块链，系统理论，社会规范，交易成本，灵活性，关系，信任，合作，契约治理

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Blockchain Smart Contracts: A Socio-Legal Approach

Smart contracts are computer protocols that self-enforce encoded terms. They arguably allow for individual freedom and increased sovereignty from inconveniences. The enthusiasm goes as far as foreseeing that smart contracts will make contractual legal oversight obsolete. However, whereas contract law theory evolved to acknowledge the importance of flexibility and relationality, smart contracts activists defend the opposite direction, arguing for contractual rigidness and denial of social norms supporting complex transactions. This paper departs from this paradox to argue that (i) smart contracts based on existing technology are unlikely to thrive in complex contractual settings, and (ii) contextual analysis is important for LawTech’s propositions. Smart contracts, blockchain, system’s theory, social norms, transaction cost, flexibility, relationality, trust, co-operation, contractual governance

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

European Business Law Review Social Sciences-Law

CiteScore

1.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The mission of the European Business Law Review is to provide a forum for analysis and discussion of business law, including European Union law and the laws of the Member States and other European countries, as well as legal frameworks and issues in international and comparative contexts. The Review moves freely over the boundaries that divide the law, and covers business law, broadly defined, in public or private law, domestic, European or international law. Our topics of interest include commercial, financial, corporate, private and regulatory laws with a broadly business dimension. The Review offers current, authoritative scholarship on a wide range of issues and developments, featuring contributors providing an international as well as a European perspective. The Review is an invaluable source of current scholarship, information, practical analysis, and expert guidance for all practising lawyers, advisers, and scholars dealing with European business law on a regular basis. The Review has over 25 years established the highest scholarly standards. It distinguishes itself as open-minded, embracing interests that appeal to the scholarly, practitioner and policy-making spheres. It practices strict routines of peer review. The Review imposes no word limit on submissions, subject to the appropriateness of the word length to the subject under discussion.