# kaal:claim:2992962-017

**Claim.** Because smart contracts are coded for computer programming rather than for a human observer, courts may not be able to hypothesize a reasonable human's interpretation of a given smart contract.

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

**Holds when.**

- contract interpretation disputes over coded smart contracts

**Source quote.**

> Because of the emphasis on code for computer programming (and artificial intelligence), courts may not be able to hypothesize a reasonable human's interpretation of a given smart contract.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, *Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution* (2017), b) Enforcement of Smart Contracts, page 39

**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.** code-not-interpretable-by-courts  (family: enforcement-gap)

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

**Keywords.** contract-interpretation, courts, code-as-law, smart-contracts

**Related claims.**

- extended_by: https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5554218-031
- supports: https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2939127-027

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