Abstract
Smart contracts are computer programs that self-execute the simple instructions necessary to carry out a transaction. Currently, this technology is most often used to manipulate cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin or Ethereum that are implemented by means of a public blockchain. Supporters believe ideally this automation has the potential to remove the need for third-party oversight entirely such as that currently provided by financial, legal, regulatory, professional practice, and enforcement. Yet, conflating all of these institutions and their roles as a singular target of disruption is a mistake as the motivations and mechanisms of each type of institution varies. This project proposes a call for research on blockchain technology, and smart contracts in particular, as they relate to two types of oversight practices. The first study considers how legal discourse provides (or fails to provide) the proper oversight for digitized contracts and how smart contracts, rather than replace it, might only serve to exacerbate some of its failures. The second study looks at the investigation and prosecution of criminal activity and the creation of standards and regulations by corresponding institutions that force companies to produce records that stand as evidence in these investigations. The analysis draws on previous interpretations of digitized contracts and a series of interviews with two IRS Special Agents who investigate blockchain or related crime.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
References
Anderson T, Twining W (1991) Analysis of evidence: how to do things with facts based on Wigmore’s Science of Judicial Proof. Northwestern University Press, Evanston
Bartoletti M, Pompianu L (2017) An empirical analysis of smart contracts: platforms, applications, and design patterns. ArXiv:1703.06322 [Cs]. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1703.06322
Ben-Shahar O, Schneider CE (2014) More than you wanted to know: the failure of mandated disclosure. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Cassano J (2014) What are smart contracts? Cryptocurrency’s killer app. Fast Company. Accessed https://www.fastcompany.com/3035723/app-economy/smart-contracts-could-be-cryptocurrencys-killer-app
Castells M (1996) The rise of the network society. In: The information age: economy, society, and culture, vol I. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford
Castells M (2007) Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. Int J Commun 1:238–266
Clack CD, Bakshi VA, Braine L (2016) Smart contract templates: foundations, design landscape and research directions. ArXiv:1608.00771 [Cs]. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00771
De Filippi P, Wright A (2018) Blockchain and the law: the rule of code. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Deming SH (2005–2006) The potent and broad-ranging implications of the accounting and record-keeping provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. J Crim Law Criminol 96:465
Duranti L (1994) Reliability and authenticity: the concepts and their implications. Archivaria 39:5–10
Duranti L (2009) Diplomatics. In: Bates M, Maack MN, Drake M (eds) Encyclopedia of library and information science. Marcel Dekker, New York/Basel/Hong Kong
Duranti L (2015) Digital records and archives in the commercial cloud. In: Yoo CS, Blanchette J-F (eds) Regulating the cloud: policy for computing infrastructure. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 197–213
Duranti L, Franks PC (eds) (2015) Evidence. In: Encyclopedia of archival science. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham
Ethereum Team (2017) Byzantium HF Announcement. Ethereum Blog. Retrieved from https://blog.ethereum.org/2017/10/12/byzantium-hf-announcement/
Faife C (2017) A decentralized mixer for Ethereum? Zcoin is working on it. Coindesk. Accessed https://www.coindesk.com/a-decentralized-coin-mixer-for-ethereum-zcoin-is-working-on-it/
Farmer D (2017) Coinbase obtains partial victory over IRS. The Coinbase blog. Accessed https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-obtains-partial-victory-over-irs-dac041db59a3
Fidler B (2017) Eternal October and the end of cyberspace. IEEE Ann Hist Comput 39(1):6–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2017.9
Foley MJ (2017) Microsoft, Intel, banks form Enterprise Ethereum blockchain alliance. ZD Net. Accessed http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-intel-banks-form-enterprise-ethereum-blockchain-alliance/
Frisby D (2016) How blockchain will revolutionise far more than money. Aeon Essays. Accessed https://aeon.co/essays/how-blockchain-will-revolutionise-far-more-than-money
Furner J (2004) Conceptual analysis: a method for understanding information as evidence and evidence as information. Arch Sci 4:233–265
Furner J, Gilliland AJ (2016) Chapter 20, Archival IR: applying and adapting information retrieval approaches in archival and recordkeeping research. In: Gilliland AJ, McKemmish S, Lau AJ (eds) Research in the archival multiverse. Monash University Publishing, Melbourne, pp. 581–631
Gilliland-Swetland A (2000) Enduring paradigm, new opportunities: the value of the archival perspective in the digital environment. Council on Library and Information Resources, Washington, DC
Gilson C (2017) Lightning’s Elizabeth stark: 2017 will be the year of smart contracts. The Cointelegraph. Accessed https://cointelegraph.com/news/lightnings-elizabeth-stark-2017-will-be-the-year-of-smart-contracts
Kerr O (2009) The case for the third-party doctrine. Mich L Rev 107:561. https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol107/iss4/1
Kerr O (2017) Four thoughts on the briefing of carpenter v. United States. Lawfare blog
Lemieux VL (2016a) Blockchain for recordkeeping: help or hype? Technical report, University of British Columbia, Vancouver
Lemieux VL (2016b) Trusting records: is blockchain technology the answer? Rec Manag J 26(2):110–139
Lemieux V, Sporny M (2017) Preserving the archival bond in distributed ledgers: a data model and syntax. https://doi.org/10.1145/3041021.3053896
Levy KC (2017) Book-smart, not street-smart: blockchain-based smart contracts and the social workings of law. Engag Sci Technol Soc 3:1–15
Lichtblau E (2018) The FBI is in crisis. It’s worse than you think. Time Magazine. Accessed http://time.com/5264153/the-fbi-is-in-crisis-and-america-is-paying-the-price/
Lujan S (2017) Nevada senate bill 398 becomes law, Prohibiting Tax on Blockchain Technology Bitcoin.com. Accessed https://news.bitcoin.com/nevada-senate-opts-to-prohibit-tax-and-regulations-on-blockchain-technology/
Mills D, Wang K, Malone B, Ravi A, Marquardt J, Chen C, Badev A, Brezinski T, Fahy L, Liao K, Kargenian V, Ellithorpe M, Ng W, Baird M (2016) Distributed ledger technology in payments, clearing, and settlement. Finance and economics discussion series 2016–095. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2016.095
Oard DW (2013) Information retrieval for E-discovery. Found Trends Inf Retr 7:99–237. https://doi.org/10.1561/1500000025
Olszewicz J (2017) Ethereum price analysis – network slowdown precedes fork. Brave New Coin. Accessed https://bravenewcoin.com/news/ethereum-price-analysis-network-slowdown-precedes-fork/
Pasquale F (2015) The Black Box Society: the secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Raskin M (2017) The law and legality of smart contracts. Georgetown Law Technol Rev 1(2)
Sills K (2018) The promise of smart contracts. Libertarianism.org. Accessed https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/promise-smart-contracts
Spode EJ (2017) The great cryptocurrency heist. Aeon Essays. Accessed https://aeon.co/essays/how-blockchain-will-revolutionise-far-more-than-money
Szabo N (1996) Smart contracts: building blocks for digital markets. Alamut. Accessed http://www.alamut.com/subj/economics/nick_szabo/smartContracts.html
Title 3: Civil Rules (2007) California courts. Accessed http://www.courts.ca.gov/rules.htm
Tufecki Z (2015) Algorithmic harms beyond Facebook and Google: emergent challenges of computational agency. Colorado Technol Law J
Varadarajan T (2017) The Blockchain is the internet of money silicon valley. Wall St J. Accessed https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-blockchain-is-the-internet-of-money-1506119424?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter
Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Floridi L (2017) Why a right to explanation of automated decisionmaking does not exist in the general data protection regulation. Int Data Privacy Law 7(2):76–99
Wall L (2016) ‘Smart contracts’ in a complex world. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Accessed https://www.frbatlanta.org/cenfis/publications/Notesfromthevault/1607
Werbach K, Cornell N (2017) Contracts ex Machina. Duke Law J 67:313
Wittie RA, Winn JK (2001) Electronic records and signatures under the federal E-SIGN legislation and the UETA. Bus Lawyer 56:293
Yeo G (2007) Concepts of record (1): evidence, information, and persistent representations. Am Arch 70(2):315–343
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
Cornelius, K.B. (2018). Smart Contracts as Evidence: Trust, Records, and the Future of Decentralized Transactions. In: Hunsinger, J., Klastrup, L., Allen, M. (eds) Second International Handbook of Internet Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1202-4_28-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1202-4_28-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-024-1202-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-024-1202-4
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Biomedicine and Life SciencesReference Module Biomedical and Life Sciences