Source: https://legalinformatics.wordpress.com/2014/06/16/surden-computable-contracts-explained-part-1/
Timestamp: 2017-04-24 05:28:52
Document Index: 235937189

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 2', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 1', 'art 2']

Surden: Computable Contracts Explained – Part 1 | Legal Informatics Blog
← 16 June 2014: GovLab legal crowdsourcing online conference: Crowdlaw in Action Part 2
Manzoli: Vignelli and legal design →
Surden: Computable Contracts Explained – Part 1	Posted on June 16, 2014	by legalinformatics [UPDATE: Part 2 of Harry Surden’s post on Computable Contracts is now available.]
Professor Harry Surden of the University of Colorado has posted Computable Contracts Explained – Part 1, at Concurring Opinions.
I had the occasion to teach “Computable Contracts” to the Stanford Class on Legal Informatics recently. [Click here for video of the presentation.] Although I have written about computable contracts here, I thought I’d explain the concept in a more accessible form.
How can computers understand contracts? […] The short answer here is that the contracts that are made computable don’t involve the abstract, difficult or relatively uncertain legal topics that tend to occupy lawyers. Rather (for the moment at least), computers are typically given contract terms and conditions with relatively well-defined subjects and determinable criteria that tend not to involve significant legal or factual uncertainty in the average case.
Importance of Computable Contracts There are a few reasons to pay attention to computable contracts. For one, they have been quietly appearing in many industries, from finance to e-commerce. Over the past 10 years, for instance, many modern contracts to purchase financial instruments (e.g. equities or derivatives) have transformed from traditional contracts, to electronic, “data-oriented” computable contracts. […]
Computable contracts also have new properties that traditional, English-language, paper contracts do not have. […] computable contracts can serve as inputs to other computer systems. These other systems can take computable contracts and do useful analysis not readily done with traditional contracts. For instance, a risk management system at a financial firm can take computable contracts as direct inputs for analysis, because, unlike traditional English contracts, computable contracts are data objects themselves. […]
Because of the length, I am splitting this explanation into two posts […]. The next post will discuss the computable contracting approach, how it actually works, its limits, and how it can be understood as a partial solution to the three problems just described.
HT @HarrySurden
Share this:FacebookTwitterRedditTumblrGoogleLinkedInEmailPrintPocketLike this:Like Loading...	This entry was posted in Applications, Others' scholarly or sophisticated blogposts, Technology developments, Technology tools, Videos and tagged Artificial intelligence and law, Computable contracts, Concurring Opinions, Contract compliance systems, Contract information systems, Contract law information systems, Contracts as data, Contractual rules as data, Digital contracts, Electronic contracts, Harry Surden, Legal compliance systems, Legal rules as data, Modeling contract provisions, Modeling contracts, Modeling contractual obligations, Modeling legal rules. Bookmark the permalink.	← 16 June 2014: GovLab legal crowdsourcing online conference: Crowdlaw in Action Part 2