There's an interesting split here: between contract validation, contract enforcement.
Both have typically been handled by courts.
Contract validation is typically very "human centric". It centers on questions such as "what is a bargain?" or "is this result acceptable to the conscience (I.e. is morally acceptable)".
Contract enforcement, however, is much more formulaic. Given a valid contract, and a series of events (leading to a breach), quantify what relief would look like.
I don't think validity can be automated. It's analogous to Dijkstra's obsession with "formal verification".
However, most contracts are valid. They typically involve genuine negotiations on reasonable terms.
Assuming validation, enforcement is easily automated.
I don't think bit coin is relevant though. For automated contract enforcement any payment API will work. Wether it's bit coin, or paypal in Estonian Kroon, the important part is automation.
Both have typically been handled by courts.
Contract validation is typically very "human centric". It centers on questions such as "what is a bargain?" or "is this result acceptable to the conscience (I.e. is morally acceptable)".
Contract enforcement, however, is much more formulaic. Given a valid contract, and a series of events (leading to a breach), quantify what relief would look like.
I don't think validity can be automated. It's analogous to Dijkstra's obsession with "formal verification".
However, most contracts are valid. They typically involve genuine negotiations on reasonable terms.
Assuming validation, enforcement is easily automated.
I don't think bit coin is relevant though. For automated contract enforcement any payment API will work. Wether it's bit coin, or paypal in Estonian Kroon, the important part is automation.