Connecticut Wants Blockchain Smart Contracts To Be Legalized
A good number of states in the U.S. are starting to see the advantage of utilizing blockchain technology. In an effort to do the same, the state of Connecticut is looking to legalize the use of blockchain smart contracts, particularly those that are aimed at businesses. Here is everything about it in a nutshell.
Legalizing Blockchain Smart Contracts
According to the official report, The Commerce of the Connecticut General Assembly recently filed the bill 7310. By essence, it proposes the idea of authorizing blockchain smart contracts specifically for commerce in the state. As expected, this is going to benefit tons of companies revolving around the crypto space.
As per the definition of the state’s recently filed bill, there shall be no contract relating to a certain transaction that could be denied legal effect. This even includes the possibility of validity and enforceability simply because such contract is processed or performed via smart contract.
In a nutshell, the bill is expected to give power and equal rights to businesses that are fond of utilizing smart contracts on a blockchain. The same thing can be said for those doing it via a distributed ledger. The bill, in particular, gives the same rights to those that are using the more traditional methods when it comes to securing information in relation to a transaction, so to speak.
Blockchain Popularity In The U.S.
Elsewhere in the country, Ohio also managed to pass a bill of similar qualities in August last year. Florida, on the other hand, tried treating blockchain ledgers and even smart contracts as legally-binding processes and/or methods of storing data. Unfortunately, though, the effort to pass the bill resulted in a failure in October of the same year as Ohio’s.
The Chamber of Digital Commerce, which refers to the trade association representing the blockchain industry, decided to investigate new smart contract laws last year. Upon its investigation, it found out that enactment of state legislation when it comes to smart contracts is simply unnecessary. Even more so, it reportedly undermines the potential growth of the industry.
The organization, at that time, said that existing legal frameworks are merely designed to define and provide legal effects to contracts covering smart contract technology. Also, nothing about smart contracts must be able to change any existing definitions, not to mention the application of existing contract law. To put it simply, the organization does not see the need to materialize additional laws, as they will only confuse the existing ones.