By: H Luce

H Luce — Wed, 24 Dec 2014 09:02:36 +0000

I’m not sure most courts would buy into this, if the contracted-for payments/duties/performances were significant. Software shrink-wrap contracts are enforceable – and the sums involved make resort to the court system much more costly than the contracts are worth. Most contracts formed on this basis would be adhesion contracts – “take it or leave it” – with gross disparity in bargaining power between the parties, if in fact the counterparty has *any* bargaining power at all, but they might embody severely unconscionable clauses, which need to be held unenforceable by the courts – or by legislation which makes them unenforceable. And quite frankly, the software/IT industry seems to do its best to invite legislative restrictions – which might differ by state and nation. “Self-enforcement” might land the party which drafts the language into criminal or civil court on charges of fraud as well, if the service is cancelled or modified without reference to statutory limitations on the power to do so. This may not be as simple as simply writing computer code, no matter how much this may be desired. In addition, mutual subjective agreement is also required for contract formation, and this does not seem to be addressed – or would even be addressable under this scheme.

Comments on: Essay of the Day: Towards a Legal Framework for Crypto-Ledger Transactions

By: H Luce