# kaal:claim:2992962-011

**Claim.** Uniform Law Commission style registration of virtual currency businesses may give courts more information about registered businesses, but jurisdiction over the parties to a smart contract remains largely elusive because smart contracting is distributed and global.

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

**Holds when.**

- the draft Uniform Regulation of Virtual Currency Business Act as released in July 2017

**Source quote.**

> Courts may be able to obtain more information about registered businesses under the uniform laws but jurisdiction over the parties to a smart contract will still largely be elusive given the distributed and global nature of smart contracting.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, *Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution* (2017), b) Uniform Law Commission Regulating Digital Currency Businesses, page 34

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `80b92e67594394e38af41b769327936833de8e25d6cf3def966a6ba13bc83d17` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Calcaterra%20-%202017%20-%20Crypto%20Transaction%20Dispute%20Resolution.pdf

**Failure mode.** registration-does-not-yield-jurisdiction  (family: jurisdictional-conflict)

**Topics.** law-and-legal-systems, smart-contracts

**Keywords.** uniform-law-commission, virtual-currency-regulation, jurisdiction, smart-contracts

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