# Legal Tech Academy - Vol. 4 Notes
> *https://contractbook.com/events/legal-tech-academy-vol-4*


### *What is Computational Law?*
The idea of *Computational Law* really emanates from this broader notion that law is an algorithm.

The algorithm of law in its current form is executed by people and in government buildings and in board rooms and places like this, but it is an algorithm.

This week, for example, I had to go to the DMV to renew my driver's license so that I could vote. That whole process was one large algorithm -- I needed a certain set of documents, I needed some personal information to verify/authenticate that I am who I say I am, I pay some money in order to get the license, and then they send it to me in the mail. Whether this is on a blockchain with DIDs and a PDS or in your local DMV, this process is an algorithm.

The role of computation, here, becomes important because computation has been woven into the fabric of broader society in a pretty deep level. Areas like supplychain management are a good example. And as we begin to think about what the legal algorithms look like in areas like supplychain management, for example, we need to think in a computational perspective.

### *Why is Computational Law relevant?*
The notion of Computational Law is actually much bigger than the existing sort of thinking that we have done because there is so much opportunity that comes along with this type of thinking

In one level, if we think about law as computation, there is a need to think about law as an algorithm that can be tuned to achieve certain outcomes.

This requires setting goals and measurement criteria, developing standards for auditing and evaluating these goals, and finding ways to adapt and respond to emergent phenomena.

If we apply this sort of thinking to the legal systems in place now, we can see that this has huge implications for transparency in law, efficiency in law, scalability in law, and especially in access to justice.

### *What are some good sources for an introduction to Computational Law?*

There are a number of good sources out there. Some of my favorite include

* Bill Mitchell's - *[City of Bits](https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/city-bits)*
* Gillian Hadfield's - *[Rules for a Flat World](https://gillianhadfield.com/rules-for-a-flat-world/)*
* Larry Lessig's - *[Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace](http://codev2.cc/)*
* Mirielle Hildebrandt's - *[Law for Computer Scientists](https://lawforcomputerscientists.pubpub.org/)*
* Michael Genesereth - *[Computational Law: The Cop in the Backseat](https://law.stanford.edu/2016/01/13/michael-genesereths-computational-law-the-cop-in-the-backseat/)*
* Sandy Pentland's - *[A Perspective on Legal Algorithms](https://law.mit.edu/pub/aperspectiveonlegalalgorithms)*
* Anthony Casey and Anthony Niblett - *[The Death of Rules and Standards](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2693826)*

### *How do people learn about Computational Law*
I would say learning about computational law is really going to be based on used-cases

Learning about computational law is a bit like the famous law of the horse. There are lots of foundational skills that are generally required in order to practice computational law. Obviously a healthy knowledge of law and legal systems is good.

In addition to that, though. I think that the foundations of computational law are focused on process management and being able to look at an analog process, find where it can be supplemented with technology in a positive way, and accounting for any impediments that may result from using new technology.

Going from these sorts of static processes to dynamic processes can generally be accomplished by designating roles, rules, and responsibilities for anyone involved in a process, breaking down the functions of a process into Business/Legal/Technical components, and then experimenting around in an effort to find something that works in a measurable sort of way.

### *Do lawyers need to know how to code?*

Computational Law is actually very inclusive of lots of different disciplines. So while it may be helpful it isn't mandatory.

I forget who came up with this notion, I think it may have been Cory Doctorow or Douglas Rushkoff, but I think that there's an increasing need for lots of professions to look at coding as a liberal art and not exclusively as a computer science. As a liberal art, you can learn the sort of basic literacy about how to communicate with people actually doing the coding and even begin to think about code from a strategic point of view, like lawyers frequently do with paper documents and contracts.

It's funny, as I've been at MIT and working on the Computational Law stuff, I find that I am actually doing less coding than I would before becuase I am around so many people that do it. Now, I basically use code exclusively as a way to demonstrate how something could work and then leaving it off to others to decide how to build something that is more production-grade and less prototypey.