# kaal:claim:2834531-029

**Claim.** The response to contested facts should not be to abandon facts, but to identify alternative grounds for regulation that would make the regulation of innovative products and services more effective and more legitimate.

**Type.** normative  **Support.** argued

**Source quote.**

> And yet, rather than abandoning facts, we should be thinking about some alternative grounds for regulation that would allow the regulation of innovative products and services to be more effective and legitimate.

**From.** Mark Fenwick, Wulf A. Kaal, Erik P. M. Vermeulen, *Regulation Tomorrow What Happens When Technology Is Faster Than the Law* (2017), B. A Post-Fact Society?, page 24

**Cite as.** Mark Fenwick, Wulf A. Kaal, Erik P. M. Vermeulen, Regulation Tomorrow What Happens When Technology Is Faster Than the Law (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2834531

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `9cd875ebdb0266febbdcdabfca5b9b9f0de1b7ad9e3d5a8a5971bdbe469323b7` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Fenwick%20et%20al.%20-%202017%20-%20Regulation%20Tomorrow%20What%20Happens%20When%20Technology%20Is%20Faster%20Than%20the%20Law.pdf

**Topics.** dynamic-regulation

**Keywords.** post-fact-society, regulatory-legitimacy, data-driven-regulation, regulatory-design

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