# kaal:claim:3652481-016

**Claim.** Applying a common legal anchor and traditional jurisdictional principles to cybernetic systems is near impossible, because the status of a cybernetic system is constantly changing.

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

**Holds when.**

- the system is cybernetic, meaning the community continually chooses which protocol version to adopt

**Source quote.**

> Applying a common legal anchor and traditional jurisdictional principles to cybernetic systems is near impossible because the status of the cybernetic system is constantly changing.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, *Decentralized Autonomous Organizations – Internal Governance and External Legal Design* (2020), III.2 Regulatory Uncertainty, page 27

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Decentralized Autonomous Organizations – Internal Governance and External Legal Design (2020). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3652481

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `530b3a40c244aeca2eb4c53f4c9b4d6b2962bd6be9f92b4ebe17139c17f4c0e0` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20-%202020%20-%20Decentralized%20Autonomous%20Organizations%20%E2%80%93%20Internal%20Governance%20and%20External%20Legal%20Design.pdf

**Failure mode.** cybernetic jurisdictional escape  (family: jurisdictional-conflict)

**Topics.** law-and-legal-systems, dao

**Keywords.** cybernetic-systems, jurisdiction, legal-anchor, dao-legal-design

**Related claims.**

- restated_by: https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3799320-011

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