failure family

legal personality and liability gap

34 claims across 22 works.

• AI liability gap: Because artificial intelligence is not recognized as a subject of law in national or international law, it has no legal personality and therefore cann
• AI liability gap from absent legal personality: Artificial intelligence cannot be held personally liable for damage it causes because national and international law do not currently recognize it as
• smart-contract-unenforceability: Smart contracts face a legal enforceability risk: they may be attacked as void and unenforceable, because contract law rules on formation, interpretat
• false-judgment-proof-assumption: Managers of funds that exist only as smart contracts in cyberspace, with no foreign or domestic domicile, cannot assume they are judgment proof; the m
• smart-contract-unenforceability: Even where a smart contract reflects the underlying bargain between the parties, lawyers may argue that smart contracts are void and unenforceable und
• party-identification-impossibility: The existing legal infrastructure cannot address the legal challenges presented by crypto transaction disputes, because it is impossible to consistent
• smart-contract-unenforceability: Because the legal origin of smart contracting is unsettled, lawyers may argue that smart contracts are void and unenforceable under the law even where
• liability gap for autonomous systems: Because neither national nor international law recognizes artificial intelligence as a subject of law, AI has no legal personality and therefore canno
• non-unanimous-agreement-falls-outside-7-32: MBCA Section 7.32 requires unanimity, so agreements that bind only a block of shareholders rather than all of them cannot rely on that section and mus
• non-self-executing-voting-arrangement: Voting arrangements are not self executing: their existence does not relieve the corporation of observing the legal formalities of director and shareh
• legacy-underwriting-mismatch: Legacy insurers will not underwrite smart contracts that sit outside the traditional legal framework, and even if they eventually enter the DApp marke
• legacy-insurer-refusal: Most legacy insurance companies will not consider underwriting a smart contract that is not subject to the traditional legal framework, which leaves s
• no-recourse-after-disintermediation: Because the smart contract removes centralized guarantors and self regulates, only limited legal recourse remains available when execution of the cont
• Unenforceability of smart contracts under existing contract law: Smart contracts face a legal origin problem: lawyers may argue that they are void and unenforceable, and contract law rules on formation, interpretati
• court imposed structure: If DAO members do not formalize a structure for their human created entity, courts are very likely to impose one on them, which is a serious risk of D
• default partnership liability: Where no legal entity is involved, partnership rules operate as the default rules that apply to all interactions between parties trying to achieve a c
• unenforceable remedy limitation: Parties may try to limit remedies to DAO assets through private agreements, but if the DAO faces a tort suit such an agreement is unlikely to be uphel
• consumer protection blocks DAO limited liability: Because consumer protection is a core mandate of any legislature, legislatures are unlikely to surrender control and jurisdiction over a DAO, which wo
• jurisdictional seed requirement: Because a Swiss Association is a legal entity, a DAA must have a seed in Switzerland and be run in Switzerland even though its members can be located
• unwrapped DAO liability exposure: Without a legal wrapper, DAOs face potential regulatory enforcement actions and civil liability not only at the organization level but against individ
• no accountable party and no recovery mechanism: Accountability is a structural concern in DeFi: without a central entity it can become unclear who is responsible for wrongdoing, and when problems ar
• Court-imposed entity form: If DAO members do not formalize a legal structure for their entity, courts are very likely to impose one on them, which is a serious risk of DAO membe
• Unlimited partner liability: Default general partnership treatment would hold every stakeholder of a DAO liable for any debts or legal actions the DAO faces, exposing known partic
• Contractual remedy cap fails in tort: Private agreements that limit remedies to DAO assets are unlikely to be upheld if the DAO faces a tort suit.
• legacy insurance market forecloses the underwriting remedy: Even if code review and audit firms did engage in thorough insurance underwriting and guarantees for their clients, the remedy would still fail becaus
• Unlimited joint and several DAO liability: A VC DAO needs a legal wrapper in order to interact with the real world, because otherwise everyone involved in the DAO may be jointly and severally l
• legal-wrapper-paradox: Decentralized organizations carry inherent risks that require establishing a legal entity, and establishing that legal entity inherently contradicts t
• No Recourse for Flawed Reviews: Because a limited number of players control the code review market and its outputs, the quality of code review is often suboptimal, and clients have l
• No client recourse: Clients have little or no recourse when reviewed code turns out to be flawed even after a functionality and quality review has been performed and paid
• partnership by estoppel exposure: A DAO operating without a legal wrapper risks being deemed a partnership by estoppel in legal disputes, exposing its members to liability, as scored f
• anonymity as substitute for legal registration: Some DAOs substitute anonymity for legal structure: without any legal registration, Olympus DAO relies on anonymity to avoid legal action, which the a
• jurisdictional non recognition of DAOs: Adopting a conventional corporate form in a jurisdiction that does not recognize DAOs yields only partial legal protection; Silo Finance is registered
• default partnership classification: A DAO registered in a jurisdiction without DAO legislation risks default treatment as a partnership under existing law, as recorded for Klima DAO in C
• DAO accountability gap: DAO-based governance introduces unresolved uncertainty about liability and legal accountability when personal data crosses international boundaries, a