4 ms·

One day, two companies who have a blockchain contract between them, will end up in a lawsuit. While the contract gives right to one company, the court disagree

by zaarn 8y ago

One day, two companies who have a blockchain contract between them, will end up in a lawsuit. While the contract gives right to one company, the court disagrees and says the other party is right because of the law of the state. The court orders the company to give back the money the contract gave them. They refuse. What happens now? Which side will win? I'm not putting my bets on the blockchain contract.

JadeNB 8y ago
> The court orders the company to give back the money the contract gave them. They refuse. This seems to have nothing to do with blockchains; the same situation could occur (and its consequences are important to investigate!) no matter what the circumstances that led up the court order.
- zaarn 8y ago
  Yes but with the difference that without blockchain the corporations bank will then do the deed and push the money back on court order. And if not possible the company will (to my knowledge in german legal code) be dissolved, assets sold and the profits go to the other side until the damage is covered, which is usually not the case and the winning party still looses money. With blockchain there is no bank and if the company doesn't want to, the next option is nuclear as above. With blockchain there is no way for the party to obtain what is rightfully theirs other than to nuclearize the other party. Without there are options because banks and other intermediaries can intervene and correct.
  - mcguire 8y ago
    Well, the blockchain computors could fork the blockchain, no? Not that that is much better or more likely. And if the ownership of the assets is recorded on the blockchain...
    - zaarn 8y ago
      But if you just fork the blockchain over legal disputes... what have you gained over not having a blockchain? Blockchain removes all the nice stuff we have in our legal system to deal with disputes. Why put it back in? What does that gain us?

by zaarn 8y ago

JadeNB 8y ago

> The court orders the company to give back the money the contract gave them. They refuse. This seems to have nothing to do with blockchains; the same situation could occur (and its consequences are important to investigate!) no matter what the circumstances that led up the court order.

zaarn 8y ago
Yes but with the difference that without blockchain the corporations bank will then do the deed and push the money back on court order. And if not possible the company will (to my knowledge in german legal code) be dissolved, assets sold and the profits go to the other side until the damage is covered, which is usually not the case and the winning party still looses money. With blockchain there is no bank and if the company doesn't want to, the next option is nuclear as above. With blockchain there is no way for the party to obtain what is rightfully theirs other than to nuclearize the other party. Without there are options because banks and other intermediaries can intervene and correct.
- mcguire 8y ago
  Well, the blockchain computors could fork the blockchain, no? Not that that is much better or more likely. And if the ownership of the assets is recorded on the blockchain...
  - zaarn 8y ago
    But if you just fork the blockchain over legal disputes... what have you gained over not having a blockchain? Blockchain removes all the nice stuff we have in our legal system to deal with disputes. Why put it back in? What does that gain us?