IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v45y2021i2s0308596120301713.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulating smart contracts: Legal revolution or simply evolution?

Author

Listed:
  • Ferreira, Agata

Abstract

Blockchain-based smart contracts have triggered polarised discussions. They have been applauded as a significant technological achievement, but also criticised as a dumb idea. Their application is rapidly expanding in the financial sector, public sector, supply chain management, and the automobile, real estate, insurance, and health care industries. With the growing use of smart contracts and an increasing variety of smart contracts applications, the debate over the legal implications of this phenomenon has intensified and many legal issues related to smart contracts are being examined. Legal scholars have highlighted potential legal pitfalls, controversies and incompatibilities with existing legal frameworks. Blockchain technology and smart contracts have also been fuelling an interest of legislators, who have begun to recognise regulatory uncertainties and are making the first attempts to introduce legislative solutions to address them. This paper aims to highlight the fervour of the scholarly debate surrounding smart contracts and contrast it with a rather modest response from the legislators thus far. The paper reiterates that smart contracts represent the future. Even though they challenge practitioners, scholars, and legislators, current legislative initiatives indicate that under most legal systems there are no major obstacles for smart contracts and to accommodate smart contracts within the existing legal frameworks we should expect legal evolution rather than revolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Ferreira, Agata, 2021. "Regulating smart contracts: Legal revolution or simply evolution?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:45:y:2021:i:2:s0308596120301713
    DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2020.102081
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596120301713
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.102081?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grimmelmann, James & Library, Cornell, 2019. "All Smart Contracts Are Ambiguous," LawArXiv v37zd, Center for Open Science.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eduard Hartwich & Alexander Rieger & Johannes Sedlmeir & Dominik Jurek & Gilbert Fridgen, 2023. "Machine economies," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-13, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lauren Haaften-Schick & Amy Whitaker, 2022. "From the Artist’s Contract to the blockchain ledger: new forms of artists’ funding using equity and resale royalties," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 46(2), pages 287-315, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:45:y:2021:i:2:s0308596120301713. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30471/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.