有望保障自動駕駛汽車安全的區塊鏈和智能合約的法律風險及優勢
作為一種與加密貨幣“比特幣”緊密相關的分布式數字賬本技術，區塊鏈能否減輕汽車零部件生產過程的固有風險呢？我們又是否能相信這項打著黑客烙印的技術可以保障網聯自動駕駛汽車的安全，為我們開啟交通運輸的未來呢？
如果區塊鏈和智能合約（Smart Contracts）可以在推動交通經濟的同時減輕法律風險，那么也許它們就是我們在尋找的答案。
區塊鏈推動智能合約
很多人都以為區塊鏈就是神秘的加密貨幣，但其實區塊鏈本身只是一個數字賬本系統。交易在一個去中心化的電腦網絡上開始后，系統中的協議會對交易進行驗證，并利用計算機邏輯自動跟蹤交易事件。簡而言之，區塊鏈的原理就是通過智能合約的代碼執行法律合同的邏輯，判斷是否允許金額或信息的交換和轉移，并在區塊鏈上對這些行為進行記錄。
例如法國安盛集團（AXA）就在使用智能合約管理航空保險。如果航班延誤超過兩個小時，用戶會在app上收到賠償提案。最近又有三十多家汽車企業一同發起了“交通開放區塊鏈倡議”（MOBI）（見第10頁）。MOBI的創始人兼主席Chris Ballinger表示，“區塊鏈和相關的信用度增強技術將重塑整個汽車行業，徹底改變消費者買車、上車險和用車的方式。”
MOBI已經開始評估以下幾個關鍵的區塊鏈用途：
區塊鏈、智能合約和法律
雖然智能合約和區塊鏈有望解決交通運輸的難題，但風險問題也接踵而來：
我的代碼會不會導致法律糾紛？
為智能合約編寫代碼的程序員，其實是在編譯合約的邏輯，這可能會讓技術專家陷入以下困境：
-
合約和代碼的內容不一致：如果一份合約的“四角之內”即文本之內存在相互矛盾的條款，或者兩份相互矛盾的合約發生沖突，即發生所謂的“格式之戰”，那么問題就會變得很棘手。這兩個問題都牽扯到復雜的法律糾紛。智能合約和傳統合約之間的沖突，依然是個懸而未決的問題。
-
合約無法執行。一般而言，錯誤的代碼會導致保修問題或召回事件。事實上，多達15%的汽車召回的根本原因是軟件錯誤。但是，如果因為平臺或代碼故障而導致合約失效，又會有什么樣的后果呢？答案是這取決于合約。可能沒有什么后果，但也可能導致應該發生的事情沒有發生。如果合約中的某些條款無法正常執行，則相關方可能會被視為違約，并需要承擔所有造成的損失。
區塊鏈真的能減輕安全風險和隱私風險嗎？
從安全和隱私的角度看，區塊鏈的去中心化和分布式特征使其十分具有吸引力。但是區塊鏈也并非固若金湯，不久前也發生了黑客攻擊Coincheck導致價值5億多美元的數字貨幣遭竊。此外，去中心化的數據也需要遵循適用法律，比如歐盟最新出臺的《通用數據保護條例》（GDPR）。這可能會影響數據隱私。例如，按照GDRP的規定，一家公司可能被要求刪除某些數據，但區塊鏈技術又決定了這些數據是不可更改的。
區塊鏈是一項新技術，我們需要擔心監管問題嗎？
目前美國尚未出臺監管區塊鏈的非加密貨幣用途的聯邦法律。亞利桑那州已經通過了鼓勵智能合約的立法，內布拉斯加州等其它州也在就類似的提案展開討論。區塊鏈的這種監管不確定性和自動駕駛汽車如出一轍。目前來看，區塊鏈監管的重心將放在加密貨幣的應用上，非加密貨幣用途的監管力度相對會比較薄弱。這也恰好反映了持續監督的重要性。
有了智能合約，我們就不再需要律師了嗎？
律師們經常會開玩笑地引用莎士比亞的一句名言“讓我們殺掉所有律師”。很多區塊鏈和智能合約的支持者認為這項技術可以取代律師撰寫合約。這是言過其實了。智能合約不會取代律師，因為智能合約還面臨著以下幾大法律問題：
-
合約的可執行性。一份合約必須具備合法性、約束力和可執行性。為此，合約必須滿足所有的法律要求。事實上，隨著智能合約的發展，律師的專業知識會變得更加不可替代。
-
管轄權。在去中心化的系統中，很難確定交易發生的地點，因而很難確定哪里的法院具有管轄權。要解決這個問題，可以在合約中事先約定好以哪部法律作為準據，這樣就能把風險降至最低。這也反映了律師參與的重要性。
-
有限責任和風險的分配。智能合約的代碼可能會相互矛盾，也可能會出現錯誤。鑒于目前還不能確定如何依法處理這些沖突，最好還是應該事先在紙本合約中闡明處理方法。
不管區塊鏈和智能合約將來能否成為保護自動駕駛車輛數據、實現移動交易的終極解決方案，抑或是和其它解決方案并駕齊驅，我們依然需要建立一個私密、安全、高效、簡便的新系統。如果我們勤加努力，區塊鏈和智能合約或許真的可以減輕運營和法律風險，幫助我們找到問題的答案。
Legal risk and reward of blockchain and smart contracts as a prescription for automotive applications
Can blockchain, the digital distributed ledger technology so closely associated with the cryptocurrency Bitcoin, be used to mitigate the inherent risks of manufacturing automotive components? Can a hacker-branded technology be trusted to secure our connected and autonomous systems and drive anew mobility future?
If blockchain and smart contracts can provide an avenue for expanding the mobility economy while mitigating legal risks, they may be right for you.
Smart contracts, fortified by blockchain!
Most identify blockchain with the shadowy realm of cryptocurrencies, yet blockchain is simply a digital ledger system incorporating protocols that validate transactions across a decentralized network of computers, using computer logic to automate the tracking of performance events. Simply expressed, the code in smart contracts executes the logic of the legal agreement to exchange and transfer value or information—and the results are recorded on the blockchain.
For example, the French airline AXA has a smart contract that addresses flight insurance. If a flight is more than two hours late, app users are notified with compensation options.
Recently, more than thirty automotive companies joined forces to create MOBI, the Mobility Open Blockchain Initiative. Chris Ballinger, MOBI’s founding chairman, said: “Blockchain and related trust-enhancing technologies are poised to redefine the automotive industry and how consumers purchase, insure and use vehicles.”
MOBI has started assessing key use cases including:
-
Usage-based mobility pricing and payments for vehicles, insurance, energy, congestion charging, pollution and infrastructure
Blockchain, smart contracts and the law
As smart contracts and blockchain emerge as potential solutions to mobility challenges, risk-related questions arise:
Can my code cause legal headaches?
The person coding the smart contract is creating an interpretation of the contract logic. That’s where technical professionals can run into trouble.
-
When the contract says one thing and the code says another. It’s a troublesome world when contract provisions inside the same agreement collide (conflicting clauses that fall within the “four corners” of the contract) or when two competing contracts collide (the “battle of the forms”). Each of these problems has its own complex body of law. The issues where a smart contract competes with traditional drafted form shave not yet been resolved.
-
When the contract doesn’t execute at all. Traditionally, errors in coding lead to either warranty concerns or potential recalls. In fact, as many as 15% of all automotive recalls find software as the root cause. But what happens if a contract fails because either the platform or code doesn’t work? Depending on the contract, nothing may happen or something may not have happened that should have. If you have provisions that don’t execute properly, you may be in breach of a larger contract and liable for any resulting damages.
Blockchain will mitigate security and privacyrisks—right?
Blockchain technology is seductive from security and privacy standpoints because it is decentralized and distributed. But blockchain is not invulnerable to fraud, hence the loss of over $500 million in digital coins in a hack of Coincheck. Further, this decentralization may impact data privacy by adding a requirement to comply with applicable laws, including the recently adopted EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). As an example, under the GDPR, a company may be required to remove data which may be placed on a technology designed to be immutable.
The blockchain is new. Will we have to worry about regulations?
At present, there are no federal laws regulating non-cryptocurrency uses of blockchain in the U.S. Arizona has passed legislation to promote smart contract usage and states such as Nebraska have debated similar proposals. This currently equates to a regulatory uncertainty that mirrors the autonomous-vehicle regulatory scheme. Right now, it appears the main regulatory push will be towards the currency applications, with less restriction contemplated on non-cryptocurrency uses—which stresses the importance of continued monitoring.
Finally, with smart contracts, we can avoid the lawyers… can’t we?
In lawyer humor, William Shakespeare’s quote“Let’s kill all the lawyers” often reigns supreme. Many blockchains and smart contract advocates see this technology displacing lawyers for creating contracts. Despite the hype, smart contracts will not replace your lawyer. You will still need to address:
-
Enforceability. A contract must be legal, binding and enforceable. To make it so, you must meet all requirements under the law. If anything, your lawyer’s knowledge is even more irreplaceable in the move toward smart contracts.
-
Jurisdiction. With decentralized systems, it’s challenging to determine where the transaction occurs and what courts would seek to enforce within their realms. This risk can be minimized with the use of detailed governing-law provisions in agreements, stressing the importance of involving legal professionals.
-
Limitation of Liability and AllocatingRisks. There is risk conflicting code and coding errors. With uncertainty in how these conflicts might be treated under the law, it’s best to address these considerations in the legal contract.
Whether blockchain and smart contracts become the ultimate solution for protecting autonomous vehicle data and enabling mobility transactions—orjust one of a number of solutions—the “need” remains: to create a system that is private and secure while being both effective and friendly. Blockchain and smart contracts provide a potential solution that, with proper diligence, may mitigate practical and legal risks.
Author: Jennifer Dukarski and Ashley Glime
Source: SAE Automotive Vehicle Engineering Magazine
