entity · derived

Distributed jurisdiction

6 claims across 1 works, 2017–2017.

Derived node: assembled mechanically from the claims carrying distributed-jurisdiction. A roster, not an adjudicated definition.

Every claim under this term

2992962-002 2017 definitional: The authors stipulate distributed jurisdiction as a regulatory alternative in which conflict resolution for blockchain transactions is supplied by governance solutions inherent in the blockchain techn
2992962-006 2017 normative: Because the challenges crypto transactions pose to the existing legal and jurisdictional infrastructure are severe, including good governance in crypto transactions requires instituting governance sol
2992962-012 2017 mechanism: Regulating blockchain through the non anonymous application of the technology creates large inefficiencies that will be bypassed by the more efficient anonymous applications, and it is for those more
2992962-021 2017 normative: Because courts cannot effectuate resolutions to disputes arising from blockchain based smart contracts, blockchain based resolution mechanisms are the only possible recourse for smart contract dispute
2992962-028 2017 condition: The first of the two core requirements the authors set for distributed jurisdiction is that the anonymity of blockchain based smart contracting be maintained as the technology evolves.
2992962-029 2017 condition: The second core requirement of distributed jurisdiction is governance from within the blockchain technology itself, which is what allows the problems inherent in blockchain based smart contracts to be