摘要
传统合同的核心是追求法律效力的意志,且围绕该意志的执行产生了所谓的中心式架构。智能合约则相反,专注于交易方意志的自动执行,这使得意志表现为特殊的代码。同时,该意志追求的并非法律执行,而是机器软件的执行,从这一点来看,智能合约并非法律合同。智能合约由代码、代码验证与代码自动软件构成。代码表现交易方的意志,代码经过验证成为区块链上的有效代码,有效代码被合同软件自动执行。借助于三者之间的无缝衔接,智能合约弱化了意志,并消解了传统合同不可缺少的中心架构。从这个角度而言,智能合约是一种高度结构性与一体化行为。基于智能合约的三个构成要件的自有风险,分别是代码瑕疵、代码漏洞、交易方丧失"悔约权",目前对风险救济的途径主要是代码之治,未来亦有建构法律之治的必要性和可能性。
The core of traditional contract is the intent pursuing for legal effect,the concentrated architecture is built for the performance of intent. On the contrary,smart contract is focusing on the auto performance of intents of parties,leading to the representation of intent is code.On the same time,the intent is pursuing for the execution by machine software,but not one from legal execution,from this respect,smart contract is not legal contract. Smart contract involving a series processing of the code,the code verification,and the software’s self-executing. Code represents the intent of parties,code become valid code in block chain through verification,valid is performed by the auto-run software. Due to the seamless connection of these three ingredients,smart contract removes the intent of parties as well as concentrated architecture. Form this aspect,the smart contract is a highly-integrated and highly-structural behavior. Smart contract itself contains risks,such as code flaw,code bug and the lost of revoking right. The means to rescue these risks currently are the self-rescue mechanism and the self-governing mechanism,in the future,there is necessity and possibility to construct the managing mechanism judicial mechanism.
出处
《法学杂志》
CSSCI
北大核心
2019年第2期43-51,共9页
Law Science Magazine
作者简介
王延川(1975—),男,汉族,陕西咸阳人,西北工业大学人文与经法学院教授。
