Attention!
To participate in the forum of this paper and to receive the notifications, it is compulsory to activate it beforehand for your user. To do so, click on the button "subscribe". a little further down. You will be able to choose whether you want to receive all notifications in your email or only the replies to your comments.
Enjoy the Congress!
English (UK) 
Español
Good afternoon from Chile, a pleasure to greet you. Congratulations for the topic, what ethical aspects should be included when automating relevant issues such as contracts? What would happen when there are cases not covered when designing and implementing the technology? Thank you.
Good afternoon Carolina. Thank you for your congratulations and for your interest in the paper. In response to your question, I believe that when automating contracts through AI and smart contracts, it is essential to take into account ethical aspects such as the privacy of personal data, avoiding exposing those that should be most protected, as well as fairness and non-discrimination to prevent inequalities, such as in labour contracts. It is also necessary to take into account environmental sustainability, which is currently a weak point of blockchain environments due to the environmental costs involved. For uncovered cases, the approach should be proactive: anticipate the unpredictable through flexibility and interdisciplinary collaboration (developers, lawyers, philosophers). If you need to expand on any specific points or examples, let me know!
Thank you for your answer Carolina, success in your PhD.
Carolina, I congratulate you on your very interesting paper. I wonder how Spanish law and European Union (EU) law, with its deep-rooted tradition of civil-continental law that prioritises consumer protection, formal requirements of consent and judicial control, collide or adapt to the logic of the Code is Law of Smart Contracts, and how this contrasts with the technology-neutral, jurisprudence-based regulatory approach.
Good afternoon Fredick. I find your query very interesting. As you point out, automation has drawbacks because the use of this technology makes it practically impossible to stop the execution of the pact due to the immutable nature of blockchains. To counteract this rigidity, private blockchains or oracles can be used, for example, in the case of force majeure events, when unforeseen events arise that make obligations excessively burdensome for one party. If the obligation is fulfilled contrary to the real intention of the parties, recourse can be had to the courts, reversing roles: the debtor would sue if he or she is harmed by the automatic execution. However, by opting for a smart contract, the parties could be interpreted as implicitly waiving certain protective mechanisms such as effective judicial protection (as when an out-of-court settlement is reached voluntarily). The civil-continental law regime is difficult to adapt to this technology, which is why it is recommended in smart contracts to incorporate self-destructing codes or human oracles that deactivate the contract if it becomes ineffective or if the parties wish to do so. In discrepancies between what has been agreed off-chain and what has been executed, nullity could be invoked on the grounds of vitiated consent. In addition, we propose that judges could act as oracles to verify compliance or technological advances could be implemented to identify the parties, especially when one of them is considered a consumer, for example through the use of electronic signatures, thus avoiding the lack of consumer protection.
Thank you for your reply, much success in your doctorate.