# Breach

`kaal:entity:breach`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 4 claims that carry the concept tag `breach`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

4 claims across 3 works, 2017 to 2025.

**2017**

- [2992962-016](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-016) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Breach of a smart contract is arguably not even possible, because the contract simply will not execute if a parameter is not fulfilled.
  > Arguably, breach of a smart contract is not even possible, the contract simply will not execute if a parameter is not fulfilled.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962

**2021**

- [3782216-017](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3782216-017) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- In the Underwriting DAO a breach occurs only when the market values the encumbered reputation tokens at less than the payout, which requires minting additional tokens to meet the claim.
  > We would consider the need to mint more reputation tokens to meet a policy claim to be a breach. Under what circumstances would a breach occur? It would occur only if the market values the encumbered reputation tokens as less than the payout.
  Craig Calcaterra, Wulf A. Kaal, Decentralized Finance (DeFi) (2021). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3782216

**2025**

- [5554218-006](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5554218-006) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Physical goods cannot be fully governed by code, so contracts requiring tangible performance need external mechanisms to verify compliance, and smart contracts may therefore fail to satisfy the consideration requirement in such contexts.
  > Unlike digital assets, physical goods cannot be fully governed by code, requiring external mechanisms to verify compliance with contractual terms. This limitation suggests that smart contracts may struggle to fulfill the consideration requirement in contexts requiring tangible performance,
  Furrer Andreas, Wulf A. Kaal, Universal Digital Law Codex (UDLC) Building the Legal Infrastructure for the Digital Era (2025). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5554218
- [5554218-007](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5554218-007) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Because blockchain based contracts are immutable, they cannot be altered by judicial order, which creates enforceability problems whenever a dispute arises outside the scope of the code, such as defective performance or unforeseen circumstances.
  > The immutability of blockchain-based contracts means they cannot be altered by judicial order, creating enforceability challenges when disputes arise outside the code's scope, such as defective performance or unforeseen circumstances.
  Furrer Andreas, Wulf A. Kaal, Universal Digital Law Codex (UDLC) Building the Legal Infrastructure for the Digital Era (2025). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5554218

## Verify

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/breach.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.