Wednesday, July 13, 2016

IBM Launches Blockchain Development, But is Legal Too Eager for the Tech?

, Legaltech News

As legacy tech firms look at bringing blockchain technology to the market, legal tech experts caution against a "one size fits all" attitude.

The move to develop blockchain technology—which uses cryptographic hashing to "timestamp" and validate transactions—for a host of financial, legal and security processes received yet another boost this year when a major tech player entered the innovation fold.

IBM recently announced plans to open a blockchain innovation center in Singapore to foster collaboration between government, academic and industry officials in creating blockchain and artificial intelligence-focused enterprise solutions.


The move comes just months after Deloitte announced a partnership with blockchain technology providers to develop 20 blockchains for processes such as digital identity, digital banking, and international payments.

In a statement announcing the center, Robert Morris, vice president of Global Labs, IBM Research, noted that "this is IBM's first collaboration with the private sector and multiple government agencies within the same country to explore the use of blockchain and cognitive technologies to improve business transactions across several different industries."

He added that "with new cloud services that make these technologies more accessible, leaders from all industries are beginning to take note of the resulting profound and disruptive implications in a range of settings including finance, banking, IoT, health care, supply chains, manufacturing, technology, government, the legal system, and more."

For its first few years, the center's staff, which includes Singaporean experts and researchers from IBM Research Labs worldwide, will engage with small and medium-sized companies to create blockchains applications for use in finance and trade. The effort will build on IBM's work in the Linux Foundation Hyperledger platform.

While many of those applications, such as blockchain contract tools, can be easily transferred and applied to the legal field, Peter Hunn and professor Houman Shadab, co-founders of Clause, cautioned that the legal industry should not take a "one sizes fits all" approach with the technology.

"In the contracting space, there is a lot of good work being done by startups. But it is an area that is blighted by a lack of semantic clarity," Hunn and Shadab jointly said in an email. "As an industry, there is a real need to address what we mean by the term 'smart contract.' It is a term that has been appropriated to a degree by blockchain technologies. Whilst these scripts on the blockchain certainly have contractual features, the term itself is something of a misnomer, at least to lawyers."

While "legal contracts will likely increasingly interface with blockchain technology, what that will look like is not clear—that is why interoperability and modularity are key," they said, adding, "The importance of modularity is the ability to use the blockchain where it makes sense and not where it doesn't."

At Clause, Hunn and Shadab's team "are building an infrastructure that provides the core benefits of smart contract functionalities and blockchain technology to legal contracts in a truly innovative way. We are completely open and modular without relying on a mined blockchain or, indeed any distributed ledger technology, to function. I think it is a mistake to become wholly wedded to blockchain technology unless that technology itself is the inherent solution to a given problem."

While contracts will be changed by blockchain technology, they believe "that this may not be as radically impacted as some think. The executionary functionalities of blockchain will most likely find their way into contracts—and most immediately through a hybrid structure in which a portion of the terms are represented in natural language and the portion amenable to representation in code will be represented through blockchain-based smart contract scripts."

How much blockchain technology will comes to define legal tech, Hunn and Shadab added, depends on how much it is able to demonstrate benefit, either through "instances where the technology provides an obvious and inherent functional benefit," or through "instances where it is driven by the adoption and maturity of the technology in other areas.

One area that blockchain provides obvious benefit, they noted, is regulation. But adoption of "regtech" solutions that use the technology, "will be driven by the ease of which new solutions can be integrated into enterprise. This will take time, but will be accelerated by the manner and speed at which public institutions adopt the technology."

Yet, "we should not be trying to shoehorn blockchain into applications where it just does not fit or does not provide an appreciable benefit," Hunn and Shadab added. "Those may come in time if, and in many instances when, distributed applications become the status quo. I think blockchain or a blockchain-inspired technology will play a significant part in the tech infrastructure of tomorrow. What part and how is part of the excitement that, naturally, is liable to hype."

But while "adoption of innovation always takes time," they said, "Legaltech has lagged behind other areas of technology so the benefits blockchain will likely bring—where appropriate—are overdue."





No comments:

Post a Comment