File #2633: "2019_Book_LegalTechSmartContractsAndBloc.pdf"
Testo
1|Preface|6
1|Contents|8
1|Editors and Contributors|10
1|Acronyms|13
1|Digital Technologies, Legal Design and the Future of the Legal Profession|15
2|1 Introduction|15
2|2 Blockchain and Smart Contracts|16
2|3 The Legal Design of (Smart) Contracts|20
2|4 The Future of the Legal Profession?|23
2|5 Chapters|24
2|References|28
1|Smart Contract This! An Assessment of the Contractual Landscape and the Herculean Challenges it Currently Presents for “Self-executing” Contracts|30
2|1 Introduction|31
2|2 Self-executing Contracts—How They Work|32
3|2.1 Smart Contracts|32
3|2.2 Smarter Contracts|35
2|3 Why Creating a New Book of Smarter Contracts Is Easier|36
2|4 Why Transforming an Existing Book of Contracts into Smarter Contracts Is Harder, But Still Desirable|37
3|4.1 Difficulty|37
3|4.2 Desirability|39
2|5 Cleansing the Augean Stables: The Need for Digital Contract Optimization to Prepare Existing Books of Contracts for Smarter Contracting|41
3|5.1 What Is Digital Contract Optimization?|43
3|5.2 Benefits of a Digital Contract Optimization: Resolving Inefficiencies, Eliminating Blind Spots|44
3|5.3 What a Digital Contract Optimization Might Look Like|45
3|5.4 The Potential of Semantic Computing or AI as Tools in Digital Contract Optimization|48
2|6 Twelve Herculean Challenges on the Road to Self-executing Contracts|49
3|6.1 General|50
3|6.2 External Factors|56
3|6.3 Internal Factors|61
3|6.4 Expert Mindset|63
2|7 Risks|66
3|7.1 Unravelling Existing “Agreements”/Waking Sleeping Dogs|66
3|7.2 New Black Boxes|67
3|7.3 Other Risks|68
2|8 Need for Change in the Legal Industry|68
3|8.1 Legal Education: From Fixed Mindset to Growth Mindset|68
3|8.2 Delivery Models|69
3|8.3 Resistance to Change|69
3|8.4 Renaissance Lawyers|70
2|9 Conclusion|71
2|References|72
1|Successful Contracts: Integrating Design and Technology|75
2|1 Introduction|76
2|2 Simplification, Visualization, and Codification|77
3|2.1 Contracts as Documents Written by Lawyers for Lawyers|77
3|2.2 Simplification and Visualization: Contracts as More Than Documents, Shaped by More Than Lawyers|79
3|2.3 Computer Codification and Smart Contracts: Contracts not just Written and not for Lawyers Alone|84
3|2.4 Emergent Properties of Integrating Design with Data|87
2|3 Elements of the Contracting Process: Builders, Users, Layers, and Stages|89
3|3.1 Summary of System Elements|89
3|3.2 Builders and Users|90
3|3.3 Information Layers|92
3|3.4 A “Background Repository” Layer|93
3|3.5 Stages in the Contract Process|96
2|4 Conclusion|99
2|References|100
1|Exploding the Fine Print: Designing Visual, Interactive, Consumer-Centric Contracts and Disclosures|104
2|1 Introduction|105
3|1.1 Research Question, Output, and Audience|106
3|1.2 Methodology and Initial Findings|106
3|1.3 Chapter Structure|107
2|2 Literature on User-Centered Computable Contracts|107
3|2.1 The Call for Usable, Visual Contracts|108
3|2.2 Imagining a New Generation of Tech-Enabled Consumer Contracts|109
3|2.3 Making Contracts More Modular and Machine-Readable|110
3|2.4 Behavioral Economists’ Choice Engines as One Model|112
2|3 Others’ Insights and Existing Models|113
2|4 Design Experiments to Understand Future Computable Contracts|116
3|4.1 Design Research with Privacy and Financial Terms|116
3|4.2 The Process of Design Work|117
3|4.3 The User Journey Through a Contract|118
3|4.4 Priorities, Values, and Hooks for the User|120
3|4.5 Design Models that Have Emerged|122
2|5 Survey Evaluation of Insights and Concepts|123
3|5.1 Design Insights for Future Computable Contract Tools|127
3|5.2 Do People Want Computable Contract Tools?|128
3|5.3 Guiding Principles for Computable Contract Interface Design|129
2|6 Conclusion|130
2|References|131
1|Beyond Digital Inventions—Diffusion of Technology and Organizational Capabilities to Change|134
2|1 Introduction|134
2|2 Theoretical Frame of Reference|136
3|2.1 What We Can Learn from Previous Technological Shifts|137
3|2.2 What We Can Learn from the Literature on Organizational Change|142
3|2.3 What We Know About Legal Industry Characteristics|145
2|3 Understanding the Challenges for the Legal Industry to Adapt to Digitalization|147
3|3.1 Why Law Firms Do not Change: Economic Motives and Technological Complexity|147
3|3.2 The Impact of Digitalization and the Emergence of Legal Tech|149
3|3.3 Digitalization of Intellectual Industries; Beyond Inventions|150
3|3.4 The Need for Dynamic Capabilities|151
3|3.5 Practical Implications|152
2|4 Conclusion|153
2|References|154
1|Contract Automation: Experiences from Dutch Legal Practice|158
2|1 Introduction|159
2|2 Methodology and Structure|161
2|3 Terminology, History and Digitization in Dutch Legal Practice|163
3|3.1 Terminology|163
3|3.2 History|165
3|3.3 Digitization in Dutch Legal Practice: A Brief Overview|168
2|4 Experiences with Contract Automation|170
3|4.1 Reasons for Starting with Contract Automation|170
3|4.2 Selecting the Software|171
3|4.3 Selecting the Contracts|173
3|4.4 Decomposing and Reconstructing Contracts|175
3|4.5 Personnel Implications|176
3|4.6 Challenges and Pitfalls|177
3|4.7 Future Developments|178
2|5 Conclusion|179
2|References|182
1|Legal Automation: AI and Law Revisited|183
2|1 Introduction|184
2|2 The Role of Legal Education|184
2|3 The Potential of AI Applications|187
3|3.1 Setting the Scene|187
3|3.2 The Topic in Brief|188
3|3.3 Overview of Substantive Law|190
3|3.4 Methodological Approach|192
2|4 Digital Person—A New Legal Entity?|192
2|5 Conclusion|195
2|References|196
1|Smart Contracts and Smart Disclosure: Coding a GDPR Compliance Framework|198
2|1 Introduction|199
2|2 Key Areas to Consider with Regard to the GDPR|201
2|3 Smart SLAs in the Cloud|203
2|4 Choice Architectures, Nudges and Legal Compliance|204
2|5 Smart Disclosures in Automated Smart Contracts|207
2|6 A Unified Modeling Language for Checking Legal Compliance|209
2|7 Nudging Cloud Providers Through a Pseudo-Code|211
2|8 Legal Questions for the Elaboration of a Pseudo-Code: Check Legal Compliance|213
2|9 Conclusion|223
2|References|224
1|“When People Just Click”: Addressing the Difficulties of Controller/Processor Agreements Online|230
2|1 Introduction|230
2|2 The Legal Concepts of Controllers and Processors|232
3|2.1 “Processing” and “Personal Data”|232
3|2.2 “Controller”|233
3|2.3 “Processor”|234
3|2.4 “Joint Controllers”|235
2|3 Controller/Processor Roles Online|236
3|3.1 “Classic” Dedicated Server Hosting|237
3|3.2 Distributed Computing|238
3|3.3 Listen Servers|239
3|3.4 Peer-to-Peer File Sharing|240
3|3.5 Blockchain|242
3|3.6 The Implications of Amateur Processors|243
2|4 The Contractual Approach|244
3|4.1 Entering into the Controller/Processor Agreement|244
3|4.2 Using the Controller/Processor Agreement to Promote GDPR Compliance|246
3|4.3 The Problem with the Contractual Approach|249
2|5 Beyond Conventional Contracts|250
3|5.1 Automated Measures|250
3|5.2 Other Measures for Increasing Compliance|255
2|6 The Regulatory Perspective|257
2|7 Conclusion|259
2|References|260
1|The Lawyer of the Future as “Transaction Engineer”: Digital Technologies and the Disruption of the Legal Profession|262
2|1 “Digital Revolution”|262
2|2 The Legal Profession Disrupted|263
3|2.1 “Legal Tech” and the Disruption of Legal Practice|264
3|2.2 Smart Contracts and the Disruption of Transactions and Organizations|266
3|2.3 “Net-Widening” and Expanding Transnational Legal Risk|268
2|3 The Lawyer of the Future as “Transaction Engineer”|270
3|3.1 “State-Managed” Deployment of Disruptive Technologies|270
3|3.2 The “Digital Revolution”|273
3|3.3 The Lawyer of the Future as “Transaction Engineer”|277
2|4 Conclusion|279
2|References|280
1|Index|282
1|Contents|8
1|Editors and Contributors|10
1|Acronyms|13
1|Digital Technologies, Legal Design and the Future of the Legal Profession|15
2|1 Introduction|15
2|2 Blockchain and Smart Contracts|16
2|3 The Legal Design of (Smart) Contracts|20
2|4 The Future of the Legal Profession?|23
2|5 Chapters|24
2|References|28
1|Smart Contract This! An Assessment of the Contractual Landscape and the Herculean Challenges it Currently Presents for “Self-executing” Contracts|30
2|1 Introduction|31
2|2 Self-executing Contracts—How They Work|32
3|2.1 Smart Contracts|32
3|2.2 Smarter Contracts|35
2|3 Why Creating a New Book of Smarter Contracts Is Easier|36
2|4 Why Transforming an Existing Book of Contracts into Smarter Contracts Is Harder, But Still Desirable|37
3|4.1 Difficulty|37
3|4.2 Desirability|39
2|5 Cleansing the Augean Stables: The Need for Digital Contract Optimization to Prepare Existing Books of Contracts for Smarter Contracting|41
3|5.1 What Is Digital Contract Optimization?|43
3|5.2 Benefits of a Digital Contract Optimization: Resolving Inefficiencies, Eliminating Blind Spots|44
3|5.3 What a Digital Contract Optimization Might Look Like|45
3|5.4 The Potential of Semantic Computing or AI as Tools in Digital Contract Optimization|48
2|6 Twelve Herculean Challenges on the Road to Self-executing Contracts|49
3|6.1 General|50
3|6.2 External Factors|56
3|6.3 Internal Factors|61
3|6.4 Expert Mindset|63
2|7 Risks|66
3|7.1 Unravelling Existing “Agreements”/Waking Sleeping Dogs|66
3|7.2 New Black Boxes|67
3|7.3 Other Risks|68
2|8 Need for Change in the Legal Industry|68
3|8.1 Legal Education: From Fixed Mindset to Growth Mindset|68
3|8.2 Delivery Models|69
3|8.3 Resistance to Change|69
3|8.4 Renaissance Lawyers|70
2|9 Conclusion|71
2|References|72
1|Successful Contracts: Integrating Design and Technology|75
2|1 Introduction|76
2|2 Simplification, Visualization, and Codification|77
3|2.1 Contracts as Documents Written by Lawyers for Lawyers|77
3|2.2 Simplification and Visualization: Contracts as More Than Documents, Shaped by More Than Lawyers|79
3|2.3 Computer Codification and Smart Contracts: Contracts not just Written and not for Lawyers Alone|84
3|2.4 Emergent Properties of Integrating Design with Data|87
2|3 Elements of the Contracting Process: Builders, Users, Layers, and Stages|89
3|3.1 Summary of System Elements|89
3|3.2 Builders and Users|90
3|3.3 Information Layers|92
3|3.4 A “Background Repository” Layer|93
3|3.5 Stages in the Contract Process|96
2|4 Conclusion|99
2|References|100
1|Exploding the Fine Print: Designing Visual, Interactive, Consumer-Centric Contracts and Disclosures|104
2|1 Introduction|105
3|1.1 Research Question, Output, and Audience|106
3|1.2 Methodology and Initial Findings|106
3|1.3 Chapter Structure|107
2|2 Literature on User-Centered Computable Contracts|107
3|2.1 The Call for Usable, Visual Contracts|108
3|2.2 Imagining a New Generation of Tech-Enabled Consumer Contracts|109
3|2.3 Making Contracts More Modular and Machine-Readable|110
3|2.4 Behavioral Economists’ Choice Engines as One Model|112
2|3 Others’ Insights and Existing Models|113
2|4 Design Experiments to Understand Future Computable Contracts|116
3|4.1 Design Research with Privacy and Financial Terms|116
3|4.2 The Process of Design Work|117
3|4.3 The User Journey Through a Contract|118
3|4.4 Priorities, Values, and Hooks for the User|120
3|4.5 Design Models that Have Emerged|122
2|5 Survey Evaluation of Insights and Concepts|123
3|5.1 Design Insights for Future Computable Contract Tools|127
3|5.2 Do People Want Computable Contract Tools?|128
3|5.3 Guiding Principles for Computable Contract Interface Design|129
2|6 Conclusion|130
2|References|131
1|Beyond Digital Inventions—Diffusion of Technology and Organizational Capabilities to Change|134
2|1 Introduction|134
2|2 Theoretical Frame of Reference|136
3|2.1 What We Can Learn from Previous Technological Shifts|137
3|2.2 What We Can Learn from the Literature on Organizational Change|142
3|2.3 What We Know About Legal Industry Characteristics|145
2|3 Understanding the Challenges for the Legal Industry to Adapt to Digitalization|147
3|3.1 Why Law Firms Do not Change: Economic Motives and Technological Complexity|147
3|3.2 The Impact of Digitalization and the Emergence of Legal Tech|149
3|3.3 Digitalization of Intellectual Industries; Beyond Inventions|150
3|3.4 The Need for Dynamic Capabilities|151
3|3.5 Practical Implications|152
2|4 Conclusion|153
2|References|154
1|Contract Automation: Experiences from Dutch Legal Practice|158
2|1 Introduction|159
2|2 Methodology and Structure|161
2|3 Terminology, History and Digitization in Dutch Legal Practice|163
3|3.1 Terminology|163
3|3.2 History|165
3|3.3 Digitization in Dutch Legal Practice: A Brief Overview|168
2|4 Experiences with Contract Automation|170
3|4.1 Reasons for Starting with Contract Automation|170
3|4.2 Selecting the Software|171
3|4.3 Selecting the Contracts|173
3|4.4 Decomposing and Reconstructing Contracts|175
3|4.5 Personnel Implications|176
3|4.6 Challenges and Pitfalls|177
3|4.7 Future Developments|178
2|5 Conclusion|179
2|References|182
1|Legal Automation: AI and Law Revisited|183
2|1 Introduction|184
2|2 The Role of Legal Education|184
2|3 The Potential of AI Applications|187
3|3.1 Setting the Scene|187
3|3.2 The Topic in Brief|188
3|3.3 Overview of Substantive Law|190
3|3.4 Methodological Approach|192
2|4 Digital Person—A New Legal Entity?|192
2|5 Conclusion|195
2|References|196
1|Smart Contracts and Smart Disclosure: Coding a GDPR Compliance Framework|198
2|1 Introduction|199
2|2 Key Areas to Consider with Regard to the GDPR|201
2|3 Smart SLAs in the Cloud|203
2|4 Choice Architectures, Nudges and Legal Compliance|204
2|5 Smart Disclosures in Automated Smart Contracts|207
2|6 A Unified Modeling Language for Checking Legal Compliance|209
2|7 Nudging Cloud Providers Through a Pseudo-Code|211
2|8 Legal Questions for the Elaboration of a Pseudo-Code: Check Legal Compliance|213
2|9 Conclusion|223
2|References|224
1|“When People Just Click”: Addressing the Difficulties of Controller/Processor Agreements Online|230
2|1 Introduction|230
2|2 The Legal Concepts of Controllers and Processors|232
3|2.1 “Processing” and “Personal Data”|232
3|2.2 “Controller”|233
3|2.3 “Processor”|234
3|2.4 “Joint Controllers”|235
2|3 Controller/Processor Roles Online|236
3|3.1 “Classic” Dedicated Server Hosting|237
3|3.2 Distributed Computing|238
3|3.3 Listen Servers|239
3|3.4 Peer-to-Peer File Sharing|240
3|3.5 Blockchain|242
3|3.6 The Implications of Amateur Processors|243
2|4 The Contractual Approach|244
3|4.1 Entering into the Controller/Processor Agreement|244
3|4.2 Using the Controller/Processor Agreement to Promote GDPR Compliance|246
3|4.3 The Problem with the Contractual Approach|249
2|5 Beyond Conventional Contracts|250
3|5.1 Automated Measures|250
3|5.2 Other Measures for Increasing Compliance|255
2|6 The Regulatory Perspective|257
2|7 Conclusion|259
2|References|260
1|The Lawyer of the Future as “Transaction Engineer”: Digital Technologies and the Disruption of the Legal Profession|262
2|1 “Digital Revolution”|262
2|2 The Legal Profession Disrupted|263
3|2.1 “Legal Tech” and the Disruption of Legal Practice|264
3|2.2 Smart Contracts and the Disruption of Transactions and Organizations|266
3|2.3 “Net-Widening” and Expanding Transnational Legal Risk|268
2|3 The Lawyer of the Future as “Transaction Engineer”|270
3|3.1 “State-Managed” Deployment of Disruptive Technologies|270
3|3.2 The “Digital Revolution”|273
3|3.3 The Lawyer of the Future as “Transaction Engineer”|277
2|4 Conclusion|279
2|References|280
1|Index|282