Abstract
This chapter introduces two connected arguments about the future of the legal profession . First, the ongoing “digital revolution ” will continue to disrupt legal work as it has traditionally operated. Various aspects of this disruption are outlined. Second, in contrast to previous technological revolutions, the “deployment” of disruptive innovation in the context of the digital revolution seems unlikely to be primarily “state-led.” Instead, new technologies will be deployed by a coalition of diverse private actors (entrepreneurs, technologists, consultants, and other professionals) working in collaboration. Crucial amongst these actors will be the lawyer of the future operating as “transaction engineer .” The chapter outlines this transaction engineer function and its importance in the deployment of emerging digital technologies.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Fenwick and Vermeulen (2018).
- 3.
American Bar Association (2016).
- 4.
Szabo (1994).
- 5.
Jentzsch (2016).
- 6.
Birkinshaw (2018).
- 7.
Fenwick and Vermeulen (2018).
- 8.
Fenwick (2016).
- 9.
See Slaugher and Zaring (1997).
- 10.
On the FCPA generally, see Koehler (2012).
- 11.
See Jordan (2012).
- 12.
Christensen (1997).
- 13.
See Fenwick et al. (2018a).
- 14.
- 15.
Dixon (2013).
- 16.
See Arbesman (2017) for an overview of the challenge of navigating a digital world that is too complex for human understanding.
- 17.
See Mandel (2013), p. 62: “Given the uncertainty surrounding an emerging technology’s development and risks, there will be inherent limitations concerning how specific a framework can be developed at early stages.”
- 18.
See Kaal (2013), p. 799: “Anticipation of unknown future contingencies and the pre-emption of possible future crises do not play a significant role in the current regulatory framework or in the literature on financial regulation.”
- 19.
Allenby (2011), p. 3.
- 20.
Bennett Moses (2013), p. 7.
- 21.
Butenko and Larouche (2015), p. 66.
- 22.
Marchant and Wallach (2013), p. 136.
- 23.
McGrath (2013).
- 24.
See Callon (2009).
- 25.
See Kaal (2014), p. 46: “The ‘Institutional Infrastructure’ for rule-making was geared towards the creation of rules for governing a relatively stable society with less upward mobility and relatively stable economic and market environments.”
- 26.
Calliess and Zumbansen (2010).
- 27.
- 28.
See Fenwick et al. (2018).
- 29.
See Fenwick et al. (2018b).
References
American Bar Association (2016) Commission on the future of legal services. Report on the Future of Legal Services in the United States. American Bar Association, New York
Allenby B-R (2011) Governance and technology systems: the challenge of emerging technologies. In: Marchant G-E, Allenby B-R, Herket J-R (eds) The growing gap between emerging technologies and legal-ethical oversight: the pacing problem. Springer, New York
Arbesman S (2017) Overcomplicated: technology at the limits of comprehension. Penguin, London
Bennett Moses L (2013) How to think about law, regulation and technology: problems with ‘technology’ as a regulatory target. Law, Innovation & Technol 5(1):1–20
Birkinshaw J (2018) What’s the purpose of companies in the age of AI. Harvard Business Rev, August 2013
Butenko A, Larouche P (2015) Regulation for innovativeness or regulation of innovation? Law, Innovation & Technol 7(1):52–82
Calliess G-P, Zumbansen P (2010) Rough consensus and running code: a theory of transnational private law. Hart, London
Callon M, Lasoumes P, Barthe Y (2009) Acting in an uncertain world: an essay on technical democracy. MIT Press, Cambridge
Chandler A (2014) How law made silicon valley. Emory Law Rev 63(3):639–94
Christensen C (1997) The innovator’s dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business Review Press, Boston
Dixon C (2013) The computing deployment phase. http://cdixon.org/2013/02/10/the-computing-deployment-phase/. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
Fenwick M (2016) The new corporate criminal law and transnational legal risk. In: Fenwick M, Wrbka S (eds) Flexibility in modern business law: a comparative assessment. Springer, London
Fenwick M, Kaal W-A, Vermeulen E-P-M (2018a) Regulation tomorrow: what happens when technology is faster than the law. Am Univ Bus Law Rev 6(3):561–84
Fenwick M, Kaal W-A, Vermeulen E-P-M (2018b) Legal education in a digital age: why coding for lawyers matters. University of St. Thomas (Minnesota) Legal Studies Research Paper No. 18–21 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3227967. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
Fenwick M, McCahery J-A, Vermeulen E-P-M (2018) The end of “corporate” governance: Hello new world of platform governance https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3232663. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
Fenwick M, Vermeulen E-P-M (2018) Technology and corporate governance: blockchain, crypto and artificial intelligence. Lex Research Topics in Corporate Law and Economics Working Paper No. 2018-7 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3263222. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
Freeman C, Louca F (2002) As time goes by: from the industrial revolutions to the information revolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Friedman L-M et al (1989) Law, lawyers and legal practice in silicon valley. Indiana Law Rev 64(3):555–67
Jentzsch C (2016) Decentralized autonomous organization to automate governance https://download.slock.it/public/DAO/WhitePaper.pdf. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
Jordan J (2012) The need for a comprehensive international bribery compliance program, covering A to Z, in an expanding global anti-bribery environment. PA State Law Rev 117(1):89–136
Kaal W-A (2013) Dynamic regulation of the financial services industry. Wake For Law Rev 48:791–828
Kaal W-A (2014) Evolution of law: dynamic regulation in a new institutional economics framework. In: Kaal W-A, Schmidt M, Schartze A (eds) Festchrift Zu Ehren von Christian Kirchner. Mohr Siebeck, Tubingen
Koehler M (2012) The story of the foreign corrupt practices act. Ohio State Law J 73(5):929–1013
Lessig L (2006) Code: Version 2.0. Creative Commons, New York
Mandel G-N (2013) Emerging technology governance. In: Marchant G-E, Abbot K-W, Allenby B (eds) Innovative governance models for emerging technologies. Edward Elgar, London
Marchant G-W, Wallach W (2013) Governing the governance of emerging technologies. In: Marchant G-E, Abbot K-W, Allenby B (eds) Innovative governance models for emerging technologies. Edward Elgar, London
McGrath R (2013) The pace of technology adoption is speeding up. Harvard Bus Rev https://perma.cc/DA8M-7QQV/. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
Mitchell W (1995) City of bits: space. MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), Place and the Infobahn
Perez C (2003) Technological revolutions and financial capital: the dynamics of bubbles and golden ages. Edward Elgar, London
Slaughter A-M, Zaring D (1997) Extra-territoriality in a globalized world http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=39380. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
Szabo N (1994) Smart contracts http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/rob/Courses/InformationInSpeech/CDROM/Literature/LOTwinterschool2006/szabo.best.vwh.net/smart.contracts.html. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fenwick, M., Vermeulen, E.P.M. (2019). The Lawyer of the Future as “Transaction Engineer”: Digital Technologies and the Disruption of the Legal Profession. In: Corrales, M., Fenwick, M., Haapio, H. (eds) Legal Tech, Smart Contracts and Blockchain. Perspectives in Law, Business and Innovation. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6086-2_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6086-2_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-6085-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-6086-2
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)