# kaal:claim:2740477-008

**Claim.** Disruptive innovative technology frequently does not fit the legal categories created by recalcitrant regulatory structures, so the classification problem itself is a source of regulatory failure.

**Type.** failure  **Support.** argued

**Source quote.**

> Disruptive innovative technology often does not fit into existing legal categories created by recalcitrant regulatory structures.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, Erik P.M. Vermeulen, *Venture Capital as Dynamic Regulation of Disruptive Innovation* (2016), IV. Disruptive Innovation as a Regulatory Challenge, page 15

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Erik P.M. Vermeulen, Venture Capital as Dynamic Regulation of Disruptive Innovation (2016). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2740477

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `c72871b76fa2ad5a8a69ee8d3defc8f64e624be9052ce763e79cf6c58883f726` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Vermeulen%20-%202016%20-%20Venture%20Capital%20as%20Dynamic%20Regulation%20of%20Disruptive%20Innovation.pdf

**Failure mode.** Category mismatch between technology and law  (family: rule-obsolescence-and-ossification)

**Topics.** law-and-legal-systems, innovation, systemic-risk

**Keywords.** legal-categories, disruptive-innovation, regulatory-gap, classification

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.