Arizona House Bill 2417

15 views
Skip to first unread message

Tony Bellan

unread,
Feb 20, 2018, 10:53:20 PM2/20/18
to Legalese talk
Just wanted to update y'all @ Legalese that, as of June, 2017, there is legislative precedent on the books regarding Blockchain Technology, and as far as my research is concerned, the first instance of this. 
See attachment. Appears in blue on the 1st-2nd pages.

Please let me know if there are more such instances!
-Tony

 
Smart Contracts - Arizona HB.pdf

Tony Bellan

unread,
Feb 20, 2018, 11:02:27 PM2/20/18
to ta...@lists.legalese.com
Edit: Signed into law on March 29, 2017

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Legalese talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/a/lists.legalese.com/d/topic/talk/d16S80oAjEg/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to talk+unsubscribe@lists.legalese.com.
To post to this group, send email to ta...@lists.legalese.com.



--
Tony Bellan


 

Roland Turner

unread,
Feb 21, 2018, 12:05:41 AM2/21/18
to ta...@lists.legalese.com, Tony Bellan
Strange exclusion on transfer of ownership.

- Roland
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Legalese talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to talk+uns...@lists.legalese.com.

Jason Morris

unread,
Feb 21, 2018, 6:47:11 PM2/21/18
to ta...@lists.legalese.com
My reading is that it's a general rule that "putting something on the blockchain" in and of itself, does nothing to your ownership of that thing.  So, for instance, if you submit your draft to your publisher via blockchain, it is not now public domain, it doesn't belong to the person who runs the blockchain, etc.

The exception to that rule is if you have a contract where putting something on the blockchain IS what changes the ownership of it, which is cool.  They're just saying that nothing happens to your property rights by default.

So it's not the exception that's strange to me, it's the general rule. There must be some esoteric jurisprudential reason for that clause?

Regards,

 

Jason Morris
Round Table Law LLP
ja...@roundtablelaw.ca


15C, 2016 Sherwood Drive
Sherwood Park, AB T8A 3X3 (map)
Phone: 1.855.803.1785 Ext: 100 (toll-free)
Fax: 1.855.803.1785 (toll-free)
OpenPGP signature
www.roundtablelaw.ca


On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:05 PM, 'Roland Turner' via Legalese talk <ta...@lists.legalese.com> wrote:
Strange exclusion on transfer of ownership.

- Roland



On 21/02/18 11:53, Tony Bellan wrote:
Just wanted to update y'all @ Legalese that, as of June, 2017, there is legislative precedent on the books regarding Blockchain Technology, and as far as my research is concerned, the first instance of this. 
See attachment. Appears in blue on the 1st-2nd pages.

Please let me know if there are more such instances!
-Tony

 
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Legalese talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to talk+unsubscribe@lists.legalese.com.

To post to this group, send email to ta...@lists.legalese.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Legalese talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to talk+unsubscribe@lists.legalese.com.

Tony Bellan

unread,
Feb 21, 2018, 8:38:12 PM2/21/18
to ta...@lists.legalese.com
If I am reading your question correctly, yes, the first instance of law needs to be the people's legislation; a default rule is needed. 

Basically stating what is the status quo. If a controversy/dispute arises, and it is not the status quo, the problem easy to identify.

On Feb 21, 2018 5:47 PM, "Jason Morris" <ja...@roundtablelaw.ca> wrote:
My reading is that it's a general rule that "putting something on the blockchain" in and of itself, does nothing to your ownership of that thing.  So, for instance, if you submit your draft to your publisher via blockchain, it is not now public domain, it doesn't belong to the person who runs the blockchain, etc.

The exception to that rule is if you have a contract where putting something on the blockchain IS what changes the ownership of it, which is cool.  They're just saying that nothing happens to your property rights by default.

So it's not the exception that's strange to me, it's the general rule. There must be some esoteric jurisprudential reason for that clause?


On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:05 PM, 'Roland Turner' via Legalese talk <ta...@lists.legalese.com> wrote:
Strange exclusion on transfer of ownership.

- Roland



On 21/02/18 11:53, Tony Bellan wrote:
Just wanted to update y'all @ Legalese that, as of June, 2017, there is legislative precedent on the books regarding Blockchain Technology, and as far as my research is concerned, the first instance of this. 
See attachment. Appears in blue on the 1st-2nd pages.

Please let me know if there are more such instances!
-Tony

 
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Legalese talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to talk+uns...@lists.legalese.com.

To post to this group, send email to ta...@lists.legalese.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Legalese talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to talk+uns...@lists.legalese.com.

To post to this group, send email to ta...@lists.legalese.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Legalese talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/a/lists.legalese.com/d/topic/talk/d16S80oAjEg/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to talk+unsubscribe@lists.legalese.com.

Tony Bellan

unread,
Feb 21, 2018, 8:42:51 PM2/21/18
to ta...@lists.legalese.com
Just as good programming requires consistent, defined rules to begin with, the legal profession requires consistent, defined rules as well. 

It's been said that, "judges do not make the law, they find it."

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to talk+uns...@lists.legalese.com.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages