# Distributed jurisdiction

`kaal:entity:distributed-jurisdiction`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 6 claims that carry the concept tag `distributed-jurisdiction`. 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

6 claims across 1 works, 2017 to 2017.

**2017**

- [2992962-002](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-002) [definitional/asserted] -- 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 technology itself rather than by external legal authorities.
  > We suggest a regulatory alternative for blockchain-based conflict resolution by way of governance solutions inherent in the blockchain technology itself. We call this alternative "distributed jurisdiction".
  Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962
- [2992962-006](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-006) [normative/argued] -- Because the challenges crypto transactions pose to the existing legal and jurisdictional infrastructure are severe, including good governance in crypto transactions requires instituting governance solutions inherent in the blockchain technology itself.
  > Because of the severity of these challenges for the existing legal and jurisdictional infrastructure, we conclude that the sensible approach for including good governance in crypto transactions necessitates instituting governance solutions inherent in the blockchain technology itself.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962
- [2992962-012](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-012) [mechanism/argued] -- 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 advanced applications that a system of distributed jurisdiction will be needed.
  > However, that application of the technology creates large inefficiencies that will be bypassed by the more efficient applications of the technology in an anonymous setting. It is for this more advanced application of blockchain technology that a system of distributed jurisdiction will be needed.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962
- [2992962-021](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-021) [normative/argued] -- 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 disputes.
  > Therefore, blockchain-based resolution mechanisms are the only possible recourse for smart contract disputes.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962
- [2992962-028](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-028) [condition/asserted] -- 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.
  > Our proposal in this paper for a distributed jurisdiction over blockchains has to fulfill two core requirements: 1. The anonymity of blockchain-based smart contracting has to be maintained as the technology evolves.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962
- [2992962-029](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-029) [condition/argued] -- 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 effectively addressed.
  > Distributed Jurisdictional means necessitate governance from within the blockchain technology itself to effectively address the problems inherent in blockchain-based smart contracts.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962

## 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/distributed-jurisdiction.md | sha256sum

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