Quantum Computing - Quantum Leaps in Legal Method, Nick Sherigian PDF

Nick Sherigian
Quantum Computing
Quantum Leaps in the Legal Method

Prologue
The idea that started my journey towards writing the book is the way
Valuer.ai is designed as a business.
Valuer.ai made me aware of how we can initiate innovative thought patterns

and fundamentally change the way we operate the symbiosis between
human and technology. Not just in the IT-industry, but in a wide range of
industries.
This book illustrates in concrete terms how to innovate the legal method by
applying and understanding technology and physics.
At first sight this book is about quantum computers etc. Behind the surface,
however, this book is not about quantum-anything. It’s the codification of
self esteem, through the actions I took by writing this book.
Keep trying extreme things you never thought you would do, to achieve
things you never thought were possible. As my idol Max Martin, the greatest
music producer of all time states:
”It’s music. It’s supposed to be fun and inspirational. You have to be inspired.
If I did it because it was my “job”, and I only did it to make money, I don’t
think I’d still be doing it.”
The true motivation behind this book was the hope of inspiring people to
take the chance of believing in them selves and expressing who they are
inside, no matter how much resistance they meet. Every experience whether
a success or failure is something that builds towards a better long term
future, as long as you never give up.
I also believe making and using technology are just ways to be creative and
enhancing the outlet of our core values as humans, which defines the future.
We can only live up to our responsibility of making sure that our overall
reflection of the core values is positive by supporting and not judging each
other, but instead admiring our differences.
2nd of June 2019, Valby, Denmark
Nick Sherigian
2
This edition contains minor text corrections of the original as of 2nd of June
2019.
Mechanical, photographic or other reproduction of this book or parts of it is

not permitted under the current copyright law in Danish law. All rights are
reserved to the author of the book Nick Sherigian.
To cite this book:
Quantum Computing – A Quantum Leap in the Legal Method,

Nick Sherigian, July 2019.
3
Table of Contents
Prologue
Part 1: Demarcations and technological explanations
1.1 Introduction 7
1.2 Description of the Technology 10

1.2.1 The Physics 10
1.2.2 The Classical Computer 12
1.2.3 The Quantum Computer 12
1.2.4 The Quantum Computer’s Technological Advantages Over
the Classical Computer 13
Part 2: Legal Methodological Subjects
2.1 Initial Remarks 16
2.2 Law and Logic 16

2.2.1 Petitio Principii Seu Quaesiti and Onthology 17
2.2.2 Circulus in Probando and Infinite Regress 18
2.3 Quantum Mechanics and Qubits in Relation to

the Legal Method 20
2.3.1 Probability Distribution Approximation Based on
Data-Driven Decision Making(Superposition†) 22
2.3.1.1 Artificial Intelligence(AI) 23
2.3.1.2 Issues with AI and Legal Method 27
2.3.1.2.1 Finding All the Relevant Input
in the Case That Needs to be Solved 27
2.3.1.2.2 Training Data and Hypothetical Cases 28
2.3.1.2.3 The “Black Box” Issue 30
2.3.1.2.4 Sequential Data Processing 32
2.3.1.2.5 Error Margin 34
2.3.2 Probability Distribution Approximation Without

Using Data-Driven Decision Making (Superposition†) 34
2.3.3 Probability Distribution Approximation in Contracts

(Superposition* and Superposition†) 36
4
2.3.3.1 Economical considerations and RNG (Superposition†) 36
2.3.4 Testimonies as a General Uncertainty Factor in

the Probability Distribution Approximation 37
2.4 Ab Initio 39
2.4.1 The legal definition of virtual currency
and the use of ab initio 41
2.4.1.1 The Performance 43
2.4.1.2 The System 44
2.4.1.3 Overall Definition 45
2.5 Conclusive Remarks 46
Part 3: Practical Subjects
3.1 Personal Data and the Quantum Computer 49

3.1.1 Quantum Information and Anonymisation 49
3.2 Contracts on Quantum-Computing-as-a-Service(QCaaS) 54

3.2.1 NIS-Directive 55
3.2.2 Unlawful Use 56
3.2.3 Lex Cryptographia, Lex Quantum and Digital Arbitration 57
3.2.4 Decoherence 61
3.2.5 The Use of Digital Contracts as Contract Form of
QCaaS-Contracts 62
3.2.6 The development of industry standards and
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) 64
3.3 Quantum Encryption 66

3.3.1 Quantum Computing’s Impact on Cryptography 68
3.3.2 Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) 70
Epilogue
Appendix A: Sources of Law
5
Part 1: Demarcations and Technological
Explanations
6
1.1 Introduction
Wednesday the 19th of December 2018 the House of Representatives in USA
passed ”H.R.6227 - National Quantum Initiative Act” with the votes 348-11.
Similarly, EU has considered how improvements can be made to the EU
quantum industry.1
According to the National Quantum Initiative Act, section 3 the purpose of

the act is to ”ensure the continued leadership of the United States in
quantum information science and its technology applications”.
The means, by which this goal is to be achieved, is a 10-years plan,

concerning the acceleration of the development of the quantum information
science and the application of the technology based on two sub-plans of
respective 5-years duration.
According to the act, section 2, no. 6 quantum information science is defined

as:
”The term “quantum information science” means the use of the laws of
quantum physics for the storage, transmission, manipulation, computing, or
measurement of information.”
This includes the quantum computer, which can rightly be assumed to lead
to a crucial paradigm shift in computer science in this century, cf. section
1.2.4.
It is therefore of relevance to clarify the relationship between the quantum

computer and the legislation, as there is not yet a detailed regulation of the
quantum computer.
Detailed regulation is hampered, among other things, by the increased

complexity that technology entails, whereby it becomes more difficult for the
legislator to create laws on the issues on an informed basis. The legislator
must also, through its legislative proposals, try to take into account increased
flexibility in the legislation in the light of future technological developments,
which the legislator cannot necessarily foresee in advance.
As a result, there will also be time periods, where the legal professional is
required to consider legal issues relating to a variety of technologies that are
constantly evolving and which are not yet detail regulated.
1COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT on QUANTUM TECHNOLOGIES Accompanying the

document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE
COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE
REGIONS European Cloud Initiative Building a competitive data and knowledge economy in Europe.
SWD/2016/0107 final.
7
According to the legal literature, the legal method may seem to fall short in
this context, since there is no legal future research that goes beyond
contemporary history, which not only constitutes extrapolation or guesswork
on a more or less qualified and enlightened basis.2 This type of legal literary
work has instead been referred to as being legal policy.3 Depending on the
content, this term is probably sufficiently accurate.
It should therefore be emphasized that this book’s part 3 is not futuristic, but
rather contemporary use of the legal method.
Part 2 of this book is also not a legal philosophical anti-metaphysical

representation of a scientific approach to the legal method4 or a description
of an expert system.5
In contrast, the legal method is applied and augmented (lat.: Augmentare)6

by the principles of quantum mechanics, which are exemplified by the
quantum computer and the application of data-driven decision making.
The term augmentare should not solely be understood in accordance with

the Latin perception of the term, but should be viewed in the light of how
human intelligence is progressively augmented by technology due to the
interaction between the human brain, "intelligence amplification" (IA)7 8 and
“artificial intelligence” (AI).9 This technological evolution moves towards bio-
inspired computing and nanotechnological hardware. 10
The reasoning behind the current application of augmentare is that quantum

mechanics and Einstein's general theory of relativity are used to solve the
most difficult problems humanity has yet been exposed to when The Theory
of Everything will be fully discovered. The notion that “the greater includes
2 Compared with Bernhard Gomard in UfR 1993B.385 ”Juraen under forandring og udvikling”
3 Henrik Udsen and Peter Blume in UfR 2011B.42/1 ”Persondataretten – nu og i fremtiden”
4 Alf Ross, Om ret og retfærdighed – en indførelse i den analytiske retsfilosofi, April 1953, pp. 2-3.
5 Peter Blume in UfR 1987B.67 ”Ekspertsystemer”
6 Inspired by the way “augmentation” is described in a computer historical perspective in: Thinking
with machines: Intelligence augmentation, evolutionary epistemology, and semiotic, Peter Skagestad,
Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, Volume 16, Issue 2, 1993, pp. 157-180. The early pioneers
of the computer focused on the essence of the human thinking and wanted to adapt the computer’s
functionality to improve the ways humans were thinking, cf. p. 157.
7 An Introduction to Cybernetics, W. Ross Ashby, Chapman & Hall Ltd., London, 1956, 2 nd Impression of
1957, Chapter 14.

8 Computational Intelligence: The Experts Speak, David B. Fogel, Charles J. Robinson, John Wiley &
Sons, 16th of June 2003, Chapter 3.

9 See sections 2.3.1.1 and 2.3.1.2 for a further explanation of AI.
10 Bio-Inspired and Nanoscale Integrated Computing, Dr. Mary Mehrnoosh Eshaghian-Wilner, John
Wiley & Sons, 22nd of September 2009, p. vii.
8
the lesser”11 hereby leads to the potentially viable reasoning that quantum
mechanics contains principles that are useful in solving legal issues which are
of a substantially more simple character, cf. section 1.2.3 compared with
section 2.2. Similarly, the transition towards the use of IA and AI in legal
disciplines would become more streamlined.
This approach is a step towards a bionic light on the legal method.12 It should
be stressed that since augmentare is used, the approach does not ignore the
legal method as a guarantee of the fundamental values of the judicial
system.13
The application of a practical approach is supplemented by the conclusive

remarks on the economic benefits of augmentare, which, however, falls
outside the application of the legal method, but emphasizes a calculated
approach to solving legal issues in order to maximize the economic return on
strategic decisions based on legal reasoning.
It should be noted that there will also be a number of ethical and political
issues that may be relevant, but falls outside the scope of this book.
This is particularly because legal professionals are not extraordinarily

competent in terms of defining material justice and solving legal policy
issues. Therefore, it is my opinion that the legal professional must neither
pretend, attempt on nor actually take a role, which is suitable for giving the
outside world the impression that the legal professional should have
competencies beyond the legal method and formal justice.14
11 Justice Byron White and the Argument that the Greater Includes the Lesser, Michael Herz, BYU Law
Review, Volume 1994, Issue 2, Article 2.
12 The word originates from the Greek word “βίον” which means “unit of life” with the suffix “-ικος”(in
English “ίc”) whereby the meaning becomes “like life”, cf. Bio-Inspired and Nanoscale Integrated
Computing, Dr. Mary Mehrnoosh Eshaghian-Wilner, John Wiley & Sons, 22. sep. 2009, p. ix. However
“life” is a subset of the Greek word “φύσις” also known in english as “physis” which is every physical
phenomenon. Thereby it is more appropriate to describe the bionic light on the legal method as being
“like every physical phenomenon”, compared with the remarks concerning The Theory of Everything in
section 1.2.1.
13 See in continuation hereof Peter Blume in UfR 1992B.193, with related reference in note 25 to Jon
Bing in Peter Seipel, p. 225.

14 See instead as an example European Commission’s Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI, 8th of April
2019 as a part of EU’s digital single market strategy.
9
1.2 Description of the Technology
The quantum computer and quantum information technologies are based on
quantum physics, which is also called quantum mechanics (the term used
from now on). A brief description of quantum mechanics and the quantum
computer is therefore initially provided. The purpose of the descriptions is
not to be exhaustive and comprehensive, but to be able to impart to the
uninitiated reader in the necessary knowledge of physics as well as the
technology to fully understand the legal rationale of the following sections of
this book.
Furthermore there will be further descriptions of the principles etc. along the
book when it becomes relevant.
1.2.1 The Physics

Quantum mechanics is a discipline in physics dealing with the properties of
an element at an atomic as well as subatomic level.
Among the pioneers in quantum mechanics are James Clerk Maxwell15 and
Ludwig Boltzman16 with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution17 and, in
particular, Max Planck who suggested that the energy of a particle can be
quantized. Planck's theory was supported by experiments, whereby Planck
found that the energy of an energy quantity was proportional to the
frequency of the radiation types and that the fractional ratio between the
energy and the frequency was a constant.18 19 Planck's fundamental natural
15Illustrations of the dynamical theory of gases, part I, On the motions and collisions of perfectly elastic
spheres, J.C. Maxwell, The London, Edinburgh and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of
Science, 4th Series, vol. 19(1860 A), pp. 19-32.
Illustrations of the dynamical theory of gases, part II, on the process of diffusion of two or more kinds
of moving particles among one another, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine
and Journal of Science, 4th Series, vol. 20(1860 B), pp. 21 -37.
See namely Proposition IV.

16 On the Relationship between the Second Fundamental Theorem of the Mechanical Theory of Heat
and Probability Calculations Regarding the Conditions for Thermal Equilibrium, Ludwig Boltzmann,
Sitzungberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mathematisch-Naturwissen Classe.
Abt. II, LXXVI 1877, pp. 373-435 (Wien. Ber. 1877, 76:373-435). Reprinted in Wiss. Abhandlungen, Vol.
II, reprint 42, pp. 164-223, Barth, Leipzig, 1909.
17 Maxwell and the normal distribution: A colored story of probability, independence, and tendency
toward equilibrium, Balázs Gyenis, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in
History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, vol. 57, 5th of February 2017, pp. 53-65.
18 Ueber eine Verbesserung der Wien’schen Spectralgleichung; von M. Planck, Verhandlung der
Deutschen Physikal. Gesellschaft [No. 13], Vorgetragen in der Sitzung vom 19. october 1900, pp. 202-
204.
Zur Theorie des Gesetzes der Energieverteilung im Normalspectrum; von M. Planck, Verhandlung der
Deutschen Physikal. Gesellschaft [No. 17], Vorgetragen in der Sitzung vom 14. december 1900, pp. 237-
245.
10
constant has the value h = 6,626070040·10-34 J∙s (Joule times second), where
Joule is an expression of energy.
Within quantum mechanics it is also possible that a particle is in a

superposition whereby the particle is in several of the particle's theoretical
states at the same time, which has given rise to a paradox about
Schrödinger's cat.20
In 1926, Max Born then found that the Greek letter phi (ɸ) expresses the
probability that an electron ends up in a direction given by the angles alpha
(α), beta (β) and gamma (γ), which is thus a vector. The probability is
proportional to the square of phi (ɸ).21
One of the future challenges for quantum mechanics, however, is that we

have not yet been able to reconcile it with Einstein's general theory of
relativity (E = m ∙ c2) neither via the standard model nor the super-string
theory.
Some of the newest research suggests that such unification is possible.
An important contribution, when it comes to uniting quantum mechanics

with Einstein's general relativity theory, has been the discovery of the Higgs-
Boson particle22 by CERN with the Large Hadron Collider (LHC).23
Furthermore, because the energy contributing to the mass is given by a

Hamiltonian operator in quantum mechanics, a quantum expression of the
EEP—equivalence between the rest, inertial and gravitational internal
energy operators might be possible.24 Other recent research suggests that
19 Da vor viden om naturen blev »hakket i småstykker« – 100 år med Max Plancks kvante-teori, Louis
Nielsen, cand. scient. in physics and astronomy, lecturer at Herlufsholm, 3rd of January 2001.
20 Schrödinger, Erwin "Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik”, Die Naturwissenschaften,
29. november 1935, 23(48), pp. 807–812.
Schrödinger, Erwin "Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik”, Die Naturwissenschaften, 6.

december 1935, 23(49), pp. 823–828.
Schrödinger, Erwin "Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik”, Die Naturwissenschaften,

december 1935, 23(50), pp. 844–849.
21 On the quantum mechanics of collisions(preliminary communication), Max Born, 1926, s. 54, namely
note *
22 Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons, Higgs, Peter W., AA(Tait Institute of
Mathematical Physics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland), 10/1964, Physical Review Letters,
vol. 13, Issue 16, pp. 508-509.
23 https://atlas.cern/updates/atlas-feature/higgs-boson
24 Quantum Formulation of the Einstein Equivalence Principle, Magdalena Zych & Časlav Brukner,
Nature Physics 14, 1027-1031, published 13 th of August 2018.
11
spacetime is an emergent phenomenon from a prior subquantum medium. 25
When the unification of the theories becomes possible, we can better

understand the universe in a "Theory of Everything".26
1.2.2 The Classical Computer

The computer’s bits27 can be in the states ”0” and ”1” by using binary logic. 28
The information in the form of bits passes through the computer's central
processing unit (CPU), which performs computations one instruction at a
time, if the CPU is subscalar which means less than one instruction occurs per
clock cycle (IPC <1). Applying parallelism in CPUs, however makes it possible
for a single CPU to complete instructions surpassing one instruction per clock
cycle(IPC > 1).29
1.2.3 The Quantum Computer

Qubits may be in the quantum states ”0” and ”1”.
The quantum states can be described as vectors:
|0> = [0,1] and |1> = [1,0]
However, qubits can also be the superposition of 0 and 1.
In the superposition, a qubit does not have a value between 0 and 1, but can
be described as a probability of being 0 or 1 due to Max Born's law.
The probability of being the value ”0” is then the square of α, while the
probability of being the value ”1” is the square of β. α and β are both
probability amplitudes.
25 Spacetime as an Emergent Phenomenon: A Possible Way to Explain Entanglement and the Tunnel
Effect, P. Castro, M. Gatta, J.R. Croca and R. Moreira, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, Vol.
6, No. 10, published the 26th of October 2018.
26 The Theory of Everything: The Origin and Fate of the Universe, Stephen W. Hawking, Phoenix Books,
2007.
27 Instrumental Analysis, Vannevar Bush, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 42, October
1936, p. 653, however it is a portmanteu of “binary digit” suggested by John W. Turkey, cf. Between
communication and Information – Information & Behaviour, Brent D. Ruben, Routledge, volume 4, 29th
of September 2017, see the section named “Information Theory and Cryptography”.
28 Explication de l’arithmétique binaire, qui se sert des seuls caractères O et I avec des remarques sur
son utilité et sur ce qu’elle donne le sens des anciennes figures chinoises de Fohy, Godefroy-Guillaume
Leibnitz, Mémoires de mathématique et de physique de l’Académie royale des sciences, Académie
royale des sciences, 1703.
29 CPU vs. SOC – The battle for the future of computing, Nikola Zlatanov, Conference: International
System-on-Chip Conference, At UCI, Irvine, CA, October 2015, the section called: “Parallelism”.
12
Thus, since a qubit in superposition has a probability of being "0", a qubit
also has a probability of being "1", which can be expressed as:
| α |^ 2 +| β |^2 = 1
When a qubit’s quantum states are described as vectors, a qubit can be

collectively described by using sine and cosine as the following:
ɸ = α *|0> + β * |1> = sin θ|0> + cos θ|1>
ɸ = [α, β] 30 31
1.2.4 The Quantum Computer’s Technological Advantages Over

the Classical Computer
The notion that quantum computers are faster at running through a problem
than a classical computer is defined as “quantum speedup”. Recent research
(2014-2015) about the current quantum computers has not been
unambiguous as to whether the quantum speedup does occur in relation to
all algorithms, but suggests that the quantum speedup might occur in the
future.32 33
However, a study from 2018 shows that parallel quantum algorithms running
in a constant time period are provably better at solving certain linear algebra
problems associated with binary quadratic forms than the classical
computers.34
Furthermore research from 2019 shows that when it comes to identifying

causal relations, which is an essential component in the scientific method as
30 Q# , a quantum computation package for the .NET platform A. S. Tolba, M. Z. Rashad, and M. A. El-
Dosuky Dept. of Computer Science, Faculty of Computers and Information Sciences, Mansoura
University, Mansoura, Egypt, p. 1.
31 For a more in-depth presentation of the quantum computer, please refer to:
Nielsen, M.A. og Chuang, I.L. (2000). Quantum Computation and Quantum Information.
Mermin, N.D. (2007). Quantum Computer Science: An Introduction. CUP.
32 Defining and detecting quantum speedup, Troels F. Rønnow, Zhihui Wang, Joshua Job, Sergio Boixo,
Sergei V. Isakov, David Wecker, John M. Martinis, Daniel A. Lidar and Matthias Troyer, Science 25th of
July 2014, Vol. 345, Issue 6195, pp. 420-424.
33 Probing for quantum speedup in spin-glass problems with planted solutions, Itay Hen, Joshua Job,
Tameem Albash, Troels F. Rønnow, Matthias Troyer and Daniel A. Lidar, Physical Review A 92, 042325
– Published the 23rd of October 2015.
34 Quantum Advantage With Shallow Circuits, Sergey Bravyi, David Gosset, Robert König, Science,
Volume 362, Issue 6412, 19th of October 2018, pp. 308-311.
13
well as machine learning,35 classical statistics are not adequate and can be
enhanced by the application of quantum superpositions. 36 This is specifically
the circumstances, where multiple processes are combined in indefinite
order. 37 38
Some of most notorious quantum algorithms are the following:
Using Shor’s factoring algorithm it is possible to find discrete logarithms and

factoring integers on a quantum computer faster than on a classical
computer. The two problems have been used as the basis of several
cryptographic security systems which makes the quantum computer more
capable of breaking such systems on classical computers .39
By applying Grover’s search algorithm the quantum computer can speed up a

range of search applications over unsorted data.40
Furthermore, besides computational problems, the quantum computer has

been capable of demonstrating a backward time dynamic for an electron
scattered on a two-level impurity.41
In relation to scrambling of information inside a black hole physicist have

been able to simulate the scrambling using a quantum computer and that it
might be possible to resurrect the information by capturing Hawking
radiation from entangled qubits.42 43
35 For further information on machine learning, see section 2.3.1.

36 Quantum speedup in the identification of cause-effect relations, Giulio Chiribella & Daniel Ebler,
Nature Communications 10, Article number 1472 (2019).
37 Quantum computations without definite causal structure, Chiribella, G., D’Ariano, G. M., Perinotti,
P. & Valiron, B, Physical Review A 88, 022318 (2013).

38 Quantum correlations with no causal order, Oreshkov, O., Costa, F. & Brukner, Č., Nature
Communications 3, 1092 (2012).

39 Algorithms for Quantum Computation: Discrete Logarithms and Factoring, Peter W. Shor,
Proceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, IEEE, 20-22nd of November
1994
40 A Fast Quantum Mechanical Algorithm for Database Search, Lov K. Grover, Proceedings, 28th Annual
ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC), 29th of May 1996, pp. 212-219.
41Arrow of Time and its Reversal on the IBM Quantum Computer, G.B. Lesovik, I. A. Sadovskyy, M.V.
Suslov, A.V. Lebedev & V.M. Vinokur, Scientific Reports 9, Article number: 4396, 13th of March 2019.
42 Verified quantum information scrambling, K. A. Landsman, C. Figgatt, T. Schuster, N. M. Linke, B.
Yoshida, N. Y. Yao & C. Monroe, Nature, volume 567, 2019, pp 61–65.

43 Disentangling Scrambling and Decoherence via Quantum Teleportation, Beni Yoshida, Norman Y.
Yao, Physical Review X, 2019; 9 (1).
14
Part 2: Legal Methodological Subjects
15
2.1 Initial Remarks
As stated in section 1.2.3, the quantum computer has increased computing
power and thus increased possibilities for data-driven decision making. This
is also reflected in the increased applicability of AI, machine learning, etc. as
later described. Therefore, such perspectives concerning the use of AI will
also be included in this part of the book.
In certain isolated circumstances, there will also be a brief exemplary analysis

of Danish law, although this is meant as an international presentation with a
predominant focus on EU law. The reason for this approach is that it is
difficult to know about legal issues relating to specific technology, because
the individual technological solutions are not reflected in extensive case law,
which thus requires practical experience in applying international-,
supranational- or national law to find suitable specific examples.
Since I am a resident of Denmark, it is therefore most adjacent to use

examples from Danish law, where the basic principles, however, will be more
widely, if not universally, applicable with minimal modifications.
2.2 Law and Logic

As legislation is adopted by the democratic process according to the existing
governing regime, there is no requirement for the legislation to include
reasoning in the light of logical principles.44 When the democratic process is
fulfilled in connection with the creation of the law there is also no
requirement for the implementation of logic that potentially can prevent the
law from entering into force.
However, the democratic process does not prevent the law from being
logically constructed to a greater extent according to given logical principles
such as deductive syllogisms,45 which can facilitate the practical association
of the legal method and technology.46
44 Derives from the greek expression λογος(in English pronounced as logos).

45 Comparative Law, Uwe Kischel, Oxford University Press, 21st of February 2019, pp. 424-425 and Use
and Limits of Syllogistic Reasoning in Briefing Cases, Wilson R. Huhn, Akron Law Publications, January
2002, p. 50, where it is also stated that deductive logic cannot stand alone when the cases are more
complex and the terms of the rule are ambiguous. However this does not change that deductive logic is
still used in complex cases that also consist of chains of syllogisms (polysyllogisms) where conclusions
in some syllogisms are premises in the following syllogisms. See also: The Use and Limits of Deductive
Logic in Legal Reasoning, Wilson Huhn, Santa Clara Law Review, Volume 42, 1st of January 2002, pp.
813-862.
46It is also noted in this context that deontic logic is not considered sufficient, since it is recognized by
the deontic logic that norms are without truth value and thus have no logic. Instead the use of the
term deontic equivalence is appropriate, cf. Peter Blume in UfR 1992B.193 ”Kunstig intelligens og
juridisk metode”, namely note 22, 35 og 50-51 with reference to Richard Susskind. Deontic equivalence
can also be expressed in such a way that deontic logic can to a large extent be considered necessary,
16
It has also been possible to find a single example of a Danish source of law, in
which it is stated that emphasis can be placed on the obvious and logical
correlation between the transactions and their reflection as registrations in
relation to accounting. 47
Subsequently, the main principle must be that in relation to the legal

method, emphasis can be placed on logic to a larger extent than the use of
deductive syllogisms when there is a separate legal basis in the legislation,
which is extremely rare.48 49
In some instances, however, there are some general logical principles in the
legal reasoning, besides the already mentioned principle of ”the greater
includes the lesser” in section 1.1, which will be assessed in the following:
2.2.1 Petitio Principii Seu Quaesiti and Onthology

When deductive syllogisms are used, in some circumstances it is only
partially a use of logic.
The logical part is making a conclusion from some premisses. However, the
logical conclusion sometimes contains discretionary assessments50 e.g. when
the evidence assessment is free (unbound), cf. section 2.3.4, whereby the
but not sufficient to describe the legal method, and must therefore be supplemented in the light of the
nuances that the discrete assesment and social aspects of legal reasoning causes, cf. Peter Blume in
UfR 1992B.193 “Kunstig intelligens og juridisk metode” and Peter Blume in UfR 1987B.65
”Ekspertsystemer”.
See also: Law and Logic: a Review from an Argumentation Perspective, Henry Prakken and Giovanni
Sartor, 19th of August 2015, pp. 1-3 for further conditions that impede the use of deontic logic and on
the contrary points in the direction of deontic equivalence. However, it should be noted that the book
Law and Logic moreover is of a predominantly political nature due to the assumption that the law is
drafted so as to enforce a unique outcome in each case, cf. p. 3. It is unclear what ”enforce a unique
outcome” means, but such an assumption wouldn’t be needed if the law actually did enforce a unique
outcome and therefore, the presentation will not be referenced to further in this book despite the
indications of how logic could be used to write legislation, and thus is particularly suitable for digital
contract design and the use of lex cryptographia in the legislative process.
47 Bogføringsvejledning, Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsen, juni 1999, pkt. 4.2 ”Art og omfang” with my
own translation from Danish to English.

48 It can be discussed whether there really is an access to emphasize logic, as it is problematic to
emphasize a subjective interpretation of the preparatory works in Danish law when the preparatory
works hereby hides rules that cannot be seen in the text of the Act by an objective interpretation. Such
an interpretation has often been criticized especially in cases where not only a minor detail is hidden,
cf. Peter Blume, Juridisk metodelære – En indføring i rettens og juraens verden, 3rd Edition, 2004, p. 92.
However, this does not change the basics of the rationale of how a legal source should be designed
with specific reference to the use of logic before logic can be used in the subsumption.
49 It is desirable if the type of logical reasoning is defined in the source of law.
50 Compared to the principle in: The Use and Limits of Deductive Logic in Legal Reasoning, Wilson
Huhn, Santa Clara Law Review, Volume 42, pp. 813-862, 1st of January 2002(now ULDLLR), pp. 4-5.
17
content of the individual premises can be discrete, which then
colours/impacts the conclusion (lat.: petitio principii seu quaesiti).51
In addition there are considerations about the issues that arise with
ontology52 or lack thereof especially when it comes to the use of AI,53 which
also makes it unclear, whether the intended premisses have been used.
The issue with onthology is further complicated by the maxim of falsa

demonstration non nocet cum de corpore constat54 in contract law, whereby
a false description does not vitiate, which derives from a subjective
interpretation. The maxim makes it possible for the parties of a contract to
have another understanding of the words they used in a contract, than the
understanding a third party reading the contract, which would then apply.
2.2.2 Circulus in Probando and Infinite Regress

The application of deductive syllogisms makes circular reasoning (lat.:
circulus in probando) possible but inapplicable in legal reasoning. The
conclusion must therefore not follow from one of the premises leading to the
conclusion. 55 56
Closely related to circular reasoning is infinite regress which is a series of

appropriately related elements (in legal reasoning deductive syllogisms) with
a first element but no last element, but infinite references to elements.57
51 Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Dieter Schönecker & Allen W. Wood,
Harvard University Press, 5th of January 2015, see the section “The Suspicion of Circularity”.
52 Ontology can be defined as an explicit formal specification of a shared conceptualization, cf. A
Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications, Thomas R. Gruber Knowledge Systems

Laboratory, Technical Report KSL 92-71 to appear in Knowledge Acquisition, 1993, p. 1.
53 The Role of Common Ontology in Achieving Sharable, Reusable Knowledge Bases, Thomas R. Gruber
to appear in Allen, J. A., Fikes, R., and Sandewall, E. (Eds.) Principles of Know ledge Representation and
Reasoning: Proceedings of the Second International Conference. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann,
31st of January 1991. For the application in relation to law and AI see: Proceedings of LOAIT ’07 II
Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques, Pompeu Casanovas, Maria Angela
Biasiotti, Enrico Francesconi and Maria Teresa Sagri (Eds.), 2007.
54 A Dictionary of American and English Law: With Definitions of the Technical Terms of the Canon and
Civil Laws : Also, Containing a Full Collection of Latin Maxims and Citations of Upwards of Forty
Thousand Reported Cases in which Words and Phrases Have Been Judicially Defined Or Construed,
Stewart Rapalje, Robert L. Lawrence, The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd., 1997, p. 497.
55 Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Dieter Schönecker & Allen W. Wood,
Harvard University Press, 5th of January 2015, see the section “The Suspicion of Circularity”.
56 When programming algorithms for- and while loops are not hindered hereby as they simply repeats
iterations until a specified condition is met, cf. Learn Python the Hard Way – A Very Simple
Introduction to the Terrifyingly Beautiful World of Computers and Code, Zed Shaw, 3rd Edition, 2014,
pp. 102-105.
57 Infinite Regress Arguments, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, first published the 20th of July
2018, substantive revision as of 3rd of August 2018.
18
The discrete assessments in legal reasoning that does not explicitly include or
reference every relevant consideration in the discrete assessment in a
written format makes it unclear whether the discrete assessment results in
an infinite regress. The reasoning would then be closely related to circular
reasoning by default.
Extensive and exhaustive premises are therefore a must in legal reasoning

despite that infinite regress has a more withdrawn role in the legal literature
and is rarely mentioned.58
58
It is nearly impossible to mention all the books about legal method where infinite regress is not
mentioned.
19
2.3 Quantum Mechanics and Qubits in
Relation to the Legal Method
Given that the legal method in its simplest form can be described as
deductive syllogisms the legal method can be expressed as a model by the
following equation:
(1)
facts (legally relevant facts) 59 60 + source of law = conclusion
Which can be expressed with binary logic as:
(2)
0 1 01
facts (legally relevant facts) + source of law = conclusion
Related hereto a distinguishment must be made concerning the situations

where parties want to enter into an agreement. The design of an agreement
may constitute a source of law as well as a datum of evidence that an
agreement has been made between the contracting parties. 61 Likewise, there
is nothing that prevents the agreement from describing factual
circumstances, e.g.: The seller's information about the goods being sold. The
agreement can therefore be described as a superposition in the light of the
59 In relation to the factual circumstances, it is preferable that the empirical method is used instead of,
for example the rationalism’s a priori realization or other methods.
60 If extrapolation is used, it must be in accordance with the given law and its general principles, cf. the
rationale in Case C-648/16 Fontana, para. 35-36.
It should be noted that extrapolation is not on par with the legal method because it extends the factual
circumstances to find the legally relevant facts, if no other information exists at all concerning what
one want to extrapolate towards. However, extrapolation is not against the legal method if there is any
other information which then is further defined or specified by the extrapolation.
This can be exemplified by an imaginary example of a person who loves chocolate. If it can be stated
that the person has eaten a given amount of chocolate (the y-axis), in a given time interval (the x-axis),
but without information about chocolate eating at other time intervals, extrapolation cannot be used,
as the factual circumstances would hereby be extended. If, on the other hand, there is given
information that chocolate has been eaten outside the time interval while the quantity is unknown,
extrapolation can be used to further define the factual circumstances about the chocolate that has
been eaten to get closer to the amount of chocolate that has been eaten.
It should be noted, however, that if only a sample has been made and extrapolation is used to reach
the conclusion that a person has eaten more or less chocolate than within the acceptance area of
chocolate eating such a conclusion requires a thorough mathematical theoretically based discussion.
Likewise, an interpolation will be preferable to due to increased precision.

61 Retsstiftende passivitet, David Moalem, p. 4.
20
Born rule62 since the nature of the agreement as a fact or source of law
depends on an interpretation. The result of the interpretation is not given in
advance in a wide range of cases due to the complexity of the agreement and
the principles of interpretation of the agreement. The superposition can be
expressed as:
(3)
0 superposition 1
facts (legally relevant facts) agreement source of law
Furthermore, in practice, a distinction must be made between conclusions

which are in favor of an alleged claim and conclusions, which are not in
favour of an alleged claim. As the law is only binary in very few instances,
there is thus a spectrum of cases where there ex ante respectively, is a
probability of the conclusion being in favor / not in favour (or that an
agreement has the intended legal effect), which can be expressed as the
following:
(4)
0 superposition 1
not in favour the probability of either outcome in favour
Whereby:
(4.1)
1 = the probability of being in favor + the probability of not being in favor
The overall model then looks like this:
(5) 0†
0 (superposition*) 1 (superposition†) 01 = 1† or 0†
1†
facts (legally relevant facts) + source of law = conclusion
(5.1)
* 0 superposition 1
facts (legally relevant facts) agreement source of law
(5.2)
† 0 superposition 1
Not in favor probability for either outcome in favor
62 See section 1.2.1.
21
The superpositions expressed as probabilities and how these probabilities
are clarified will be elaborated in the following.
2.3.1 Probability Distribution Approximation Based on Data-

Driven Decision Making (Superposition†)
In the probability distribution assessment, the material content of the
specific case must be considered.
A distinction must be made between cases where the legislation provides

objective binary criteria, and cases where discrete assessment must be
made, whereby there may be an ex ante probability of reaching a given
conclusion.
The probability distribution can be approximated through the use of data-

driven decision making, which is based on data science and involves methods
for understanding a phenomenon by analysing data. Instead of using
intuition the analysis of data can then be used as a foundation for the
reasoning behind the decision making.63
Since the discrete assessment is not binary, the discrete assessment must not
be illusory by practically making the assessment binary. Therefore the use of
data in the discrete assessment, including processing of data as statistics, can
be described as the following:
The discrete assessment must not (or not only) to be based on abstract data,
without any further connection to the parties to the case, which, in certain
circumstances, can lead to significant variations that deviates from actual
factual circumstances of the case. Instead, the discrete assessment must be
exercised on the basis of a concrete, empirical assessment of the
circumstances as presented by the plaintiff and the defendant, to the extent
that is possible.
If abstract data is used, it must then be assessed what the probability is that
the event, which the abstract data supports, would occur in the
circumstances of the specific case.64 65
63Data Science and its Relationship to Big Data and Data-Driven Decision Making, Foster Provost and
Tom Fawcett, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., Vol.1, no.1, March 2013, p. 53.
64 See the principles in Better Regulation Toolbox, Tool #15 “Risk Assessment and Management”, pp.
94, Box 1 where the phrase “likelihood” is used instead of probability, but has the same meaning. See
also Tool # 15, note 126 with reference to SEC(2010)1360 and is written in accordance with Inter-
institutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the
European Commission on Better Law-Making, Official Journal of the European Union, L 123, volume 59,
12th of May 2016.
22
Thus, the use of data does not exclude the possibility of including
discretionary considerations in legal reasoning. The uncertainty associated
with the specific data can in these cases indicate the scope of the specific
margin of discretion that accrues to the legal professional.
2.3.1.1 Artificial Intelligence (AI)

In relation to discretionary assessments, it can be considered whether
assessments made by artificial intelligence (AI) constitute discrete
assessments in relation to the legal method. A further clarification hereof
requires a description of the technology.
AI is defined as the study of the design of intelligent agents66 67 made up of

algorithms68 which are a sequence of computational steps that transforms a
value or a set of values given as an input and produces a value or a set of
values as an output hence being a tool for solving computational problems.69
On the other hand there also exist data structures that store and organize
data, which makes it possible to access the data as well as modify and take
further computational steps with the data by using algorithms.70
Due to algorithms being more or less efficient at solving problems, and

therefore impacting the running time it takes the computer to solve a given
problem, algorithms are considered a technology.71 The algorithm’s
efficiency as growth of running time with unlimited input sizes can be
described with Θ-notation(big-O-notation) representing the asymptotic
efficiency of the algorithm. 72 However, Θ-notation can also be used to
discover other characteristics of an algorithm such as the space the
algorithms use.73
65 This is a “subset” superposition in the legal method compared to the model in section 2.3, since the
clarification of the probability does not lead to a legal conclusion in itself but the probability
constitutes a factual circumstance. Similar “subset” superposition considerations could be made about
the probability of a given interpretation of a law.
66 Computational Intelligence – A Logical Approach, David Poole, Alan Mackworth, Randy Goebel,
Oxford University Press, January 1998(now CIALA), p. 1.

67 Where agents are defined as something that acts in an environment, cf. CIALA, p. 1.
68 CIALA, p. 5.
69 Introduction to Algorithms, Thomas H. Cormen, Charles E. Leiserson, Ronald L. Rivest, Clifford Stein,
MIT Press, 3rd Edition, 2009(now IoA), p. 5.

70 IoA, p. 9.
71 IoA, p. 13. This point of view is also in accordance with the view presented by National Science Board
Subcommittee on Science & Engineering Indicators – 2002, Chapter 6: industry, Technology and the
Global Marketplace, International Patenting Trends in Two New Technology Areas, National Science
Foundation with reference to The Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit’s court decisions in State
Street bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, inc. (1998) and AT&T Corp. v. Excel
Communications (1999), the practices of the European Patent Office(EPO) and the Japanese Patent
Office (JPO) in relation to software. It is therefore clear that the National Science Foundation considers
algorithms a technology, although it might not be a patentable technology.
72 IoA, p. 43.
73 IoA, p. 44.
23
A subset of AI is Machine learning(ML), which is algorithms built as learning
procedures74(learning algorithms 75) towards making optimized decisions,
while applying the learning algorithms to input data76 based on training
data/learning data77 or past experience/input data. 78
Machine learning can be used to make the computer interpret input as

natural language through natural language processing.79
One of the fundamental problems in natural language processing is the curse

of dimensionality due to the extensive vocabulary, which is making it possible
to construct a single sentence with a vast amount of possible parameters.80
An artificial neural network inspired by the structure of the brain 81 82 can
solve this problem by using distributed representation83 where different
aspects or features of words in general are represented such as semantics or
syntax, instead of representing every single word. 84 This happens through the
use of hidden layers with hidden neurons in the artificial neural network. 85
Without hidden layers the input and output units in the artificial neural
network are connected, and a learning rule is given that iteratively adjust the
strength of the connections between the units. Adjustments happen to
reduce the difference between a given output and the desired output. The
desired states are therefore specified by the task. However with hidden
layers the artificial neural network must use an autonomic learning
procedure that decides under what circumstances, the hidden units should
be active in order to make the adjustments to reduce the difference between
74 Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers, Arthur L. Samuel, IBM Journal of
Research and Development (Volume: 44 , Issue: 1.2 , Jan. 2000), pp. 206-226 reprinted with minor
additions and corrections in Computers and Thought, edited by Feigenbaum and Feldman, McGraw-
Hill, 1963(now SSML), p. 602.
75 Introduction to Machine Learning, Ethem Alpaydin, MIT Press, 2 nd Edition, 2010, (now IML), p. 32.
76 SSML, p. 602.
77 SSML, p. 610.
78 IML, p. 31.
79 Initially suggested by Alan Turing as a premise for his imitation game, cf. Computing Machinery and
Intelligence, A. M. Turing, Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Mind 49: 433-4608(1950), p. 1.

80 A Neural Probabilistic Language Model, Yoshua Bengio, Réjean Ducharme, Pascal Vincent, Christian
Jauvin, Journal of Machine Learning Research 3, 2003, 1137-1155(now ANPLM), p. 1137.

81 A Primer on Neural Network Models for Natural Language Processing, Yoav Goldberg, Draft as of the
5th of October, 2015, p. 11.

82 The brain consists of nerve cells called neurons, that create connections to each other through axons
and dendrites connected by synapses, cf. Fine Structure of the Nervous System: Neurons and Their
Supporting Cells, Alan Peters, Sanford L. Palay, Henry deF Webster, New York: Oxford University Press,
3rd Edition, 1991.
83 For some of the recent research on the field see: Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases
and their Compositionality, Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskeyer, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, Jeffrey Dean,
Cornell University, 16th of October 2013, Multilingual Models for Compositional Distributed Semantics,
Karl Moritz Hermann and Phil Blunsom, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, 17th of
April 2014.
84 ANPLM, p. 1140.
85 ANPLM, p. 1142.
24
a given output and the desired output. The advantage with hidden layers is
therefore that a general purpose is sufficient instead of a learning rule to
achieve the desired output, which also means there is no restriction on the
input variables.86 Furthermore the application of the hidden layer makes it
possible for the artificial neural network to learn and model non-linear and
complex relationships.87
When trying to model the law scientifically, the discrete assessment can be
characterized as a complex prescriptive relationship,88 and the hidden layers
can be specialized to match with legal sub-problems89 in concept hierarchy
memory models:90 91 92
The facts can be subject to a distributed representation where the facts are
given the following features as being either: computer code, text,93 sound94
or pictures.95
The law can be subject to a distributed representation(in legal terms called

reductionism96)97 where the law is given the following features as being
86 Learning representations by back-propagating errors, David E. Rumelhart, Geoffrey E: Hinton &

Ronald J. Williams, Nature Vol. 323, 9th of October 1986, p. 533.
87 Learning hierarchical category structure in deep neural networks, Andrew M. Saxe, James L.
McClelland, Surya Ganguli, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2013,
Volume 35, p. 1271.
88 Compared to the principle in: The Use and Limits of Deductive Logic in Legal Reasoning, Wilson
Huhn, Santa Clara Law Review, Volume 42, pp. 813-862, 1st of January 2002(now ULDLLR), pp. 4-5.
89 See the principle of specialization and grouping of interests presenting a somewhat predictable
similarity with the categories developed by the judges in: Artificial Neural Networks and Legal
Categorization, Filipe Borges, Raoul Borges, Danièle Bourcier, Legal Knowledge and Information
Systems, Jurix 2003: The Sixteenth Annual Conference, IOS Press, 2003, pp. 13-14. This should make it
possible for certain hidden layers to represent each of the given distributed representations, even
though this specialization has not yet been applied to non-binary complex application of legal method
with the use of feature hierarchies.
90 Learning Concept Hierarchies from Text Corpora using Formal Concept Analysis, Philipp Cimiano,
Andreas Hotho, Steffen Staab, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 24 (2005), pp. 305-339.
91 Concept Hierarchy Memory Model: A Neural Architecture for Conceptual Knowledge
Representation, Learning, and Commonsense Reasoning, Ah-Hwee Tan, Hui-Shin Vivien Soon,
International Journal of Neural Systems, Volume 7, No. 3(July, 1996), pp. 305-319.
92 Learning hierarchical category structure in deep neural networks, Andrew M. Saxe, James L.
McClelland, Surya Ganguli, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2013,
Volume 35, pp. 1271-1276.
93 Teaching machines to read and comprehend, Karl Moritz Hermann, Tomáš Kočiský, Edward
Grefenstette, Lasse Espeholt, Will Kay, Mustafa Suleyman, Phil Blunsom, NIPS’15 Proceedings of the
28th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems – Volume 1, 2015, Pages
1693-1701.
94 Towards End-to-End Speech Recognition with Recurrent Neural Networks, Alex Graves, Navdeep
Jaitly, Proceedings of the 31 st International Conference on Machine Learning, Beijing, China, 2014.
JMLR: W&CP volume 32.
95 Computer vision, Dana Harry Ballard, Christopher M. Brown, Prentice-Hall, 1982.
96 Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning, Wesley Hohfeld, 23 Yale L. J.
16 (1913).
97 For a more “micro application”-approach of distributed representation in legal texts, see Gov2Vec:
Learning Distributed Representations of Institutions and Their Legal Text, John J. Nay, Proceedings of
the Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing Workshop on NLP and Computational Social
25
either deontic norms 98 or qualification norms,99 with the sub features of
rights, powers, privileges, or immunities.100
The legal arguments can be subject to a distributed representation as text,

intent, precedent, tradition or policy analysis.101 102
Within the complex relationship the following non-exhaustive list of factors

elaborates on the distributed representation of the legal arguments when
conflicts between the conclusions of the legal arguments arise: Reasoning by
example103 104, weighing arguments against each other in multi factor
balancing tests105 and changes expressed as new situations arising, people
wanting change and the words used having new meanings.106
The weighing of arguments happens as the specialized hidden neurons

combine their efforts when it is necessary to give more weight to the most
important criteria, where one hidden neuron remains dominating in the
combination. 107 108
It has been emphasised in the legal literature that compromise might not
equate with justice, defined as the result a court of law would reach. 109 The
Science, 49–54, Association for Computational Linguistics as well as Nay, J. J. (2017, Forthcoming).
“Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning for Legal Text.” in D. M. Katz, R. Dolin & M.
Bommarito (Eds.), Legal Informatics, Cambridge University Press and “Understanding Legal Meaning
Through Word Embeddings.”, Douglas Rice which is still under review at the current moment.
98 See also note 35.
99 Defining legal risk, Tobias Mahler, paper presented at the conference “Commercial Contracting for
Strategic Advantage – Potentials and Prospects”, Turku University of Applied Sciences 2007, published
in the Conference Proceedings on pages 10-31, p. 10 of the paper.
100 John S. Harbison, Hohfeld and Herefords: The Concept of Property and the Law of the Range, 22 N.
Mex. L. Rev. 459 (1992).

101 ULDLLR, p. 20 with a further explanation of the model’s origin in note 91. See also pp. 38-39 for the
types of attacks that can be made on the legal arguments.

102 As well as code following lex cryptographia and lex quantum in the future, or if an agreement is
made as a digital contract like a smart contract or a ricardian contract. See section 3.2.3.
103 AIRL, p. 504
104 This analogical (case-based) reasoning has been prominent in the anglo-American common law
tradition, cf. Legal Reasoning, Phoebe C. Ellsworth, The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and
Reasoning, edited by K. J. Holyoak and R. G. Morrison Jr., 685-704. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press,
2005, p. 687.
105 ULDLLR, p. 42-43 exemplified with the use of Benjamin N. Cardozo’s opinion of Justice in New York
State Court of Appeals in Jacob & Youngs, Inc. v. Kent 230 N.Y. 239, 129 N.E. 889 (1921).
106 An Introduction to Legal Reasoning, Edward H. Levi, The University of Chicago Law Review, volume
15, number 3, spring 1948(now AILR),p. 503. Concerning words having new meanings see the issue of
ontology understood as explicit formal specification of a shared conceptualization, cf. A Translation
Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications, Thomas R. Gruber Knowledge Systems Laboratory,
Technical Report KSL 92-71 to appear in Knowledge Acquisition, 1993, p. 1.
107 Artificial Neural Networks and Legal Categorization, Filipe Borges, Raoul Borges, Danièle Bourcier,
Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, Jurix 2003: The Sixteenth Annual Conference, IOS Press,
2003, p. 15.
108 The Uses and Abuses of Neural Networks in Law, Michael Aikenhead, Santa Clara High Tech.
L.J.31(1996), Volume 12, Issue 1, article 2(now UANN), p. 51.

109 UANN, p. 61, which also suggests that compromise might not equate with justice.
26
probabilistic approach in the quantum mechanics and qubit augmented legal
method solves this issue, as a definite result is not given.
Therefore it is theoretically possible for AI to make discrete assessments in

legal reasoning. However, there are some issues, which make the application
of AI in legal reasoning practically difficult:
2.3.1.2 Issues with AI and Legal Method

Besides taking into account the application of logic within legal reasoning and
the legal method, a number of issues with AI require a closer review. The list
of issues is not exhaustive and may change over time. It has been attempted
to give as wide an insight in the current issues as possible.
2.3.1.2.1 Finding all the Relevant Input in the Case That Needs to be Solved
For the artificial neural network to function optimally, it is vital for the
artificial neural network to have the correct input.
In a civil court case a substantial amount of the relevant input comes from
the plaintiff and the defendant. This input is not enough, as legal reasoning
also involves considerations about social objectives and effects, the
institutional characteristics of law, the normative system a given norm is a
part of as well as the cost-benefit- or game-theoretical analysis that the
legislator based the law on.110 Therefore it is difficult to define all the input
necessary for an artificial neural network to understand and implement all of
these principles.
However, it is not impossible to define all the input necessary, as legal

reasoning is already done by humans without having to necessarily involve
every of the considerations mentioned above. This is given that the judge
explicitly mentions every consideration the judge made in the legal
reasoning.111
As described in section 2.3.1.2.3 we can not know with certainty how the
judge was actually reasoning. Therefore we have to assume that in
accordance with the principle of legal certainty and the principle of infinite
regress, the judge does mention every consideration the judge makes in the
legal reasoning given by the premises of the case.
110 Law and Logic: a Review from an Argumentation Perspective, Henry Prakken and Giovanni Sartor,
19th of August 2015, pp. 1-3.
111 See the example with passing a law regarding infinite regress in: What is an Infinite Regress
Argument, Claude Gratton, 1996, p. 219.
27
If the judge oversees or does not explicitly mention every consideration the
judge made in the premises of a case, it is a subject of criticism. The thereby
following lack of transparency is a hindrance of the rule of law and the right
to a fair trial, which requires an independent judiciary.112 The reasoning
behind this statement is that when every consideration is not mentioned by
the judge, it is possible that the judge included considerations, which are
conflicting with these fundamental democratic principles.
The relevant input could possibly be substantial amounts of the internet

because of the incredible amounts of information on the internet about
society and the use of technologies to gather the information113 which
technology also includes web beacons 114 and later derivatives. On the other
side data protection laws at any given time will limit the use of such data,
especially when profiling is involved in the data processing.115
2.3.1.2.2 Training Data and Hypothetical Cases

The training data needed for legal reasoning by an artificial neural network
needs to have certain qualities as well as a certain quantity. 116 117 As the
training data is processed the artificial neural network creates certain
generalizations or general principles from the training data and the quality of
these principles is dependent on the cases used to train the network. 118
The training data needs to be qualitatively sufficient,119 and when the

training data does not live up to this requirement, it has been considered to
use hypothetical cases. However, when applying hypothetical cases the
artificial neural network is no longer a system that reasons solely with the
law, but also reflects the belief of the solutions presented by whoever wrote
the fake cases.120 The hypothetical cases are therefore derived from a “rule”
where cases are constructed in accordance with this “rule” to make the
112 The Rule of Law, Tom Bingham, Penguin Books, 2010, pp. 92-98.
113 Special Report: Data, Data everywhere, Clicking for Gold – How internet companies profit from data
on the web, The Economist, Feb. 27, 2010, at 9.
114 The Web Bug FAQ, Richard M. Smith, Electronic Frontier Foundation, 11th of November 1999, v. 1.0.
115 See as a current example GDPR, art. 22 and recitals 71, 72 and 91 as well as the Article 29 Working
Party, wp251.
116 D. Hunter, Looking for Law in all the Wrong Places: Legal Theory and Legal Neural Networks, in: A.
Soeteman (eds.), Legal knowledge based systems JURIX 94: The Foundation for Legal Knowledge
Systems, Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande, 1994, p. 59.
117 Commercializing Legal Neural Networks, Dan Hunter, Warwick Electronic Law Journals, Journal of
Information Law & Tehnology(JILT), 1996(2), lesson 3-7.

L.J.31(1996), Volume 12, Issue 1, article 2, p. 67.

119
Practically a part of the solution may be the use of principles related to data-driven
decision making under uncertainty, cf. Robust and Data-Driven Optimization: Modern Decision
Making Under Uncertainty, Dimitris Bertismas, Aurélie Thiele, TutORials in Operations Research, 14th of
Oct 2014, pp. 95-122.
L.J.31(1996), Volume 12, Issue 1, article 2, pp. 67-68.
28
artificial neural network reflect the “rule”, even though the “rule” might not
be actual legal reasoning that is applicable to the given legal problem. 121 In
this context it does not matter if the cases are constructed by an expert in
the given legal field,122 which also follows from the courts not having the
competence to make decisions on hypothetical questions.123 124
This also applies to constructing hypothetical facts such as applying the chi
squared test125 in mathematical calculations of the legal value of given facts.
126
No matter the amount of cases, it is important to include all cases in the

relevant area of law or all cases in general, if one is trying to make an
artificial neural network that can solve all types of cases.127
It is not sufficient to only pick cases that establish legal precedence.128
Despite the contrary written in the legal literature 129 it can not be incited to
be hesitant with using contradictory cases as training data. Not including
contradictory cases would simply be a manipulation of the complete dataset.
If a human is deeming a newer case contradictory to older cases, without the

court explicitly stating that it has been the court’s intent with the case, the
person that defines the input for the artificial neural network affects the
artificial neural network’s legal reasoning with the person’s own beliefs
about the legal reasoning by excluding the case from the dataset. If new
121 Looking for Law in all the Wrong Places: Legal Theory and Legal Neural Networks, D. Hunter in: A.
Soeteman (eds.), Legal knowledge based systems JURIX 94: The Foundation for Legal Knowledge
Systems, Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande, 1994, p. 60.
122 As suggested in: The Uses and Abuses of Neural Networks in Law, Michael Aikenhead, Santa Clara
High Tech. L.J.31(1996), Volume 12, Issue 1, Article 2, p. 68.

123 For EU-law see: Rosneft, C-72/15, para. 194, Fogalia, 244/80, para. 18, Courmet Classic, C-458/06,
para. 26, PreussenElektra, C-379/98, para. 39 and Canal Satélite Digital, C-390/99, para. 19. In US law
however it seems like the courts are somewhat more open to hypothetical questions being a part of
their legal reasoning, cf. The Supreme Court’s Use of Hypothetical Questions at Oral Argument, E.
Barrett Prettyman Jr., Catholic University Law Review, Volume 33, Issue 3, Spring 1984, article 4.
124 An exception is the anticipatory breach of contract which can be exemplified by CISG, art. 71(1)
where there needs to be objective grounds showing substantial probability of non-performance, cf.
Anticipatory Breach under the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of
Goods, Mercédeh Azeredo da Silveira, Nordic Journal of Commercial Law, Issue 2005 #2, section
II(2)(a).
125 X. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated
system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling,
Karl Pearson F.R.S., The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science,
Series 5, Volume 50, 1900, Issue, pp. 157-175.
126 Case C-82/13 Regione Abruzzo, para.14.
127 Making a neural network that can solve all types of cases also has the advantage that the neural
network is not dependent on the classification of cases made by a human, which could decrease the
error rate.
Information Law & Technology (JILT), 1996(2), lesson 5.

Information Law & Technology (JILT), 1996(2), lesson 6.
29
leading cases contradict older cases, the artificial neural network should be
able to make its own reasoning by taking into account:
- the principle of precedence, or
- find the factual circumstances that makes the cases differ(even

though a human legal expert might not immediately see the
difference in the cases before the legal reasoning made by the
artificial neural network), or
- to be able to figure out why the new or old case might be legally
wrong.
2.3.1.2.3 The “Black Box” Issue

The hidden layer in the artificial neural network has been described as a
“black box”130 which makes it considerably difficult to understand how the
specific legal conclusion is reached. Furthermore, this issue makes it difficult
to establish the legitimacy of the conclusion in terms of the law.
It has been suggested in the legal literature that articulating the network’s
knowledge base as “if-statements”131 makes it possible to combine an
artificial neural network with a rule-based expert system.132
However, it is unclear whether there even is a distinction between expert

systems and knowledge-based systems. The expert system is described as
more powerful than the knowledge-based system in the meaning of holding
expertise and not just knowledge.133 No matter whatever the vague terms
“expertise” and “knowledge” entails, this is conflicting with the application of
the artificial neural network for solving the complex issues that the expert
system can not solve.
Furthermore the application of “if-statements” reduces the application of

law to deductive syllogisms which are not representative of the legal
method, see section 2.2.
130 Possibly gaining notoriety and mass appeal as a label on the issue after release of: The Black Box
Society, The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information, Frank Pasquale, Harvard
University Press, 2015.
131 An if-statement creates a branch in the code and makes it possible for the program to chose
between one or more following computational steps for the input, cf. Learn Python the Hard Way – A
Very Simple Introduction to the Terrifyingly Beautiful World of Computers and Code, Zed Shaw, 3 rd
Edition, 2014, pp. 102-105.
132 A Neural Network-based Law Machine: The Problem of Legitimacy, David R.Warner Jr., Law,
Computers & Artificial Intelligence, Volume 2, No. 2, 1993, pp. 135 f.

133 Artificial Intelligence, Expert Systems and Law, Richard E. Susskind, The Denning Law Journal,
Volume 5, No. 1(1990), pp. 105-106.
30
Therefore the artificial neural network must be able to write its legal
arguments and conclusions as humans write legal arguments and conclusions
in a human language (natural language) like English. However, this does not
solve the “black box”-issue, because it is still unknown what happened in the
hidden layer.
Due to the notorious advantages of hidden layers making it possible to solve

complex problems, it can be questioned whether the “black box” is an issue,
when looking at the alternative of a human writing the legal argumentation
and conclusion.
Even though we can read what the person wrote, there is no way we can
know for sure what the person was thinking. As artificial neural networks are
modelled after the neurons in the brain, it is plausible to make the analogy
that there is a “black box” as well, when humans solve legal problems, which
is the brain.
We can not know with certainty, what the brain was thinking when solving
the problem, even if we ask the person. However AI has been used for mind
reading in real-time with 90% accuracy with real-time neural speech
recognition (rtNSR) on cortical recordings when repeating a sentence several
minutes in 2018.134 However the technology has not found a wide
application in courts etc. or an application without repetition of specific
sentences.
It is also possible to real-time analyze hidden layers in artificial neural

networks to clarify how each of the hidden neurons specialize when solving
legal problems 135 which can have a wider practical application than rtNSR,
because it requires less specialized equipment.
The application would be improved, if such information about the hidden

layers was available to the subjects of the legal decisions in an understand-
able format (natural language). Furthermore, improvement could be made
by raising the legally defined “industry standard”136 for the real-time analysis
134Real-time Classification of Auditory Sentences Using Evoked Cortical Activity in Humans, David A.
Moses, Matthew K. Leonard and Edward F. Chang, Journal of Neural Engineering, 27th of February
2018, Volume 15, Number 3. However the technology has not found a wide application in courts etc. or
an application without repetition of specific sentences. See in same direction with relation to imagined
objects: Generic Decoding of Seen and Imagined Objects Using Hierarchical Visual Features,
Tomoyasu Horikawa & Yukiyasu Kamitani, Nature Communications 8, Article number 15037 (2017),
published 22nd of May 2017.
135 Artificial Neural Networks and Legal Categorization, Filipe Borges, Raoul Borges, Danièle Bourcier,
Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, Jurix 2003: The Sixteenth Annual Conference, IOS Press,
2003, p. 19.
136 For a further discussion on industry standards and discrete legal phrases with a similar meaning, see
section 3.2.6.
31
of hidden layers, as future research shows that it is achievable to get a better
understanding of the process within the hidden layers.
There is therefore more clarity when using artificial neural networks to solve
legal problems than when the human brain solves legal issues, which makes
the “black box”-issue irrelevant. This is contingent on the artificial neural
network being able to write its legal arguments and conclusions in a human
(natural) language.
A more complete answer will have to await the discovery of the limits of
each of the technologies. Hereafter a well argued ethical decision has to be
made on, which pro and cons are preferable.
2.3.1.2.4 Sequential Data Processing

In the legal literature it has been proposed that the process of solving legal
problems is parallel and that many parts of the problem resolution process
happens simultaneously. The artificial neural network has been proposed as
a solution to simulate this sort of parallel reasoning.137
On the other side it has been argued in the literature that not all legal
reasoning is parallel. 138 However, reaching the conclusion that not all legal
reasoning is parallel does not eliminate that some legal reasoning is parallel.
Furthermore as the solutions to the individual units of a legal problem affect

the solution of other units of a legal problem 139 it can not be excluded, that
this process is parallel in the human brain. This is due to the principle of
multitasking through dividing attention, even though multitasking has a
negative effect on the problem solving ability due to interference.140 141
The issue is therefore valid.
Artificial neural networks can solve problems using parallel computing 142 but
the parallelization of artificial neural network’s training still takes an
unreasonable amount of computation time.143 The reduction on the training
137A Neural Network-based Law Machine: The Problem of Legitimacy, David R.Warner Jr., Law,
Computers & Artificial Intelligence, Volume 2, No. 2, 1993.
L.J.31(1996), Volume 12, Issue 1, article 2, pp. 55-56.

139 A Neural Network-based Law Machine: The Problem of Legitimacy, David R.Warner Jr., Law,
Computers & Artificial Intelligence, Volume 2, No. 2, 1993.

140 Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychological
Review, 86(3), pp. 214-255.

141 Multiple resources and performace prediction, Christopher D. Wickens, Theor. Issues in Ergon. Sci.,
2002, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 159-177.

142 Neural Networks for Optimization and Signal Processing, A. Cochoki, Rolf Ubenhauen, 1 st Edition,
1993.
143 Parallel and Distributed Deep Learning, Vishakh Hegde, Sheema Usmani, Stanford University, 2016.
32
time also seems to stagnate after a certain point even though additional
nodes/neurons are introduced.144 This issue makes parallel computing in
artificial neural networks difficult to find practical application.
The quantum computer is also capable of parallel processing due to the

qubits as described in section 1.2.3 and 1.2.4.
However, the application of artificial neural networks in quantum computing

has the challenge of combining the nonlinear, dissipative dynamics of neural
computing and the linear, unitary dynamics of quantum computing. This
makes it difficult to apply the benefits of quantum computing to artificial
neural networks145 in so called qubit neurons.146
But by using the simplest model of an artificial neuron (the perceptron),147

the quantum hardware can be encoded as m-dimensional classical input by
using N qubits. Hereby the following equation gives the amount of
dimensional classical input given by the number of qubits: m = 2N. This allows
scaling down the resources used on the quantum computation by taking
advantage of the exponential quantum information storage. 148
The quantum computer therefore makes parallel processing in artificial

neural networks more efficient and a more viable option, hence being able to
solve the issue with sequential data processing. 149 150 151 152
Thereby it is reasonable to conclude that the quantum computer makes it

possible to use parallel processing in legal reasoning to a greater extent than
the human brain. This might make the artificial neural network fit to solve
the legal issues better than a human, by duly taking into account every input
in the parallel processing.
144 Parallel Computing for Artificial Neural Network Training using Java Native Socket Programming,
Haidar Sharif & Osman Gursoy, Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, February
2018, pp.1-10.
145 The Quest for a Quantum Neural Network, Maria Schuld, Ilya Sinayskiy, Francesco Petruccione,
Quantum Information Processing, Volume 13, Issue 11, November 2014, pp. 2567-2586.
146 An Artificial Neuron Implemented on an Actual Quantum Processor, Francesco Tacchino, Chiara
Macchiavello, Dario Gerace, Daniele Bajoni, NPJ Quantum Information; London, Volume 5, Article
number: 26, 29th of March 2019, p. 1.
147 The Perceptron: A perceiving and recognizing automaton, F. Rosenblatt, Tech. Rep. Inc. Report No.
85-460-1 (Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, 1957).

148 An Artificial Neuron Implemented on an Actual Quantum Processor, Francesco Tacchino, Chiara
Macchiavello, Dario Gerace, Daniele Bajoni, NPJ Quantum Information; London, Volume 5, Article
number: 26, 29th of March 2019, p. 1.
149 Quantum computations without definite causal structure, Chiribella, G., D’Ariano, G. M.,
Perinotti, P. & Valiron, B, Physical Review A 88, 022318 (2013).

150 Quantum correlations with no causal order, Oreshkov, O., Costa, F. & Brukner, Č., Nature
Communications 3, 1092 (2012).

151 Quantum speedup in the identification of cause-effect relations, Giulio Chiribella & Daniel Ebler,
Nature Communications 10, Article number 1472 (2019).

152 See also section 1.2.4 for a summary of note 149-151.
33
2.3.1.2.5 Error Margin
When applying artificial neural networks to legal issues using back-
propagation there will be a margin of error, which is defined as the
difference between the desired and actual output.153 The margin of error in
hidden layers may in some cases be included in the margin for each discrete
assessment. When this is not the case, however, materially wrong legal
conclusions could be made.
It is stated in section 2.3.1, that the use of data driven decision making in
legal assessments does not exclude that there may also be discretionary
considerations in the assessment, and that the uncertainty associated with
the specific data in these situations may indicate the scope of the specific
margin of discretion, which accrues the legal processional. It should be made
clear that it is a condition that the margin of error can be included in the
margin of the discretionary assessment.
It can not be stressed enough that the error margin should always be
presented to the user of the AI for the user to make duly informed legal
decisions based on the legal reasoning of the AI.
2.3.2 Probability Distribution Approximation Without Using

Data-Driven Decision Making (Superposition†)
A distinction can be made between objective criteria given in the law and
criteria based on a discrete assessment. When the law presents objective
criteria, it is relatively easy to give a definite answer on the result of the legal
reasoning. Discrete assessments in the legal reasoning are not as clear when
it comes to the answer of the legal problem.
The assessment must be rooted in the legal method which has already been
described in rich detail in the legal literature 154 and seek the objective of
being as scientifically correct as possible, thus by definition being a semi
quantitative analysis due to a case law analysis not being sufficient 155 despite
being a qualitative analysis.156
153
Learning Representations by Back-Propagating Errors, David E. Rumelhart, Geoffrey E. Hinton &
Ronald J. Williams, Nature 323, 533-536(1986), p. 534.
154 See a few of many examples: Legal Method and Reasoning, Sharon Hanson, 1st Edition, 30th of June
2003. Introduction to Legal Method, John Hynes Farrar, Anthony M. Dugdale, Sweet & Maxwell, 1984.
Legal Research: how to Find and Understand the Law (LEGAL SKILL SERIES), 1st Edition, 16th of
November, 1993.
155 Using all relevant factual circumstances and applying the factual circumstances that are
differentiated from the factual circumstances in the relevant case law also plays a significant role in the
legal reasoning, which leaves a non-quantitative margin in an otherwise quantitative analysis.
156 See as an example of the analysis principles in Qualitative and Semiquantitative Analysis, Eugene P.
Bertin, Introduction to X-Ray Spectrometric Analysis, pp. 255-278.
34
Without the use of data-driven decision making the probability distribution
can be discretely assessed through a review of the relevant case law as a
main starting point. The review of the case law must have room for an
individual assessment of the factual circumstances concerning the current
legal issue, which might differentiate the current legal issue from previous
legal issues reflected in the case law.
It could be considered to also apply intuitive judgement concerning the

probability of a given outcome. This would initially be based on the
assumption that if you have expertise in a given legal discipline, you would
have a better intuition about, how the court would rule in different cases.
However the quality of the intuitive judgment is dependent on the

predictability of the environment in which the judgment is made and of the
individual's opportunity to learn the regularities of that environment.
Subjective experience is not a reliable indicator of judgment accuracy. 157
With simple legal issues it is therefore possible to use intuitive judgement

due to either objective criteria or vast amounts of case law on the given
subject. In difficult legal issues, however, there are no regularities to base the
legal reasoning on, which make the application of intuitive judgement
illusory.158 159
157 Conditions for intuitive expertise: a failure to disagree, D. Kahneman, G. Klein, The American
Psychologist, September 2009, 64(6), pp. 515-26.
158 This would also make the idea of legal experts in a given legal disciplines illusory. When it comes to
difficult legal issues the differentiation between experts and everyone else is in the ability to fully
understand and apply the legal method by also applying all the relevant factual circumstances in a
case. Learning to apply the legal method correctly is possible in any given legal discipline and can be
applied to other legal disciplines. It could even be argued that trying multiple legal disciplines improves
the understanding of the legal method compared to a legal expert in a given field that solves similar
problems over and over and therefore does not have to rely on legal method.
However this is not the same as insinuating that having expertise in given legal disciplines would not be
advantageous. The advantage would then be in being able to solve cases faster and therefore being
more cost effective for the client, given that the price policy is transparent.
The paradox in these situations is the advantage for the non-legal in-house representative of a client to
pick a legal expert because it would clear the in-house representative of any responsibility for the
result of a case by simply claiming that the best possible legal representative was chosen in order to
maximize the winning chances. This approach to legal issues would give the legal expert an incitement
to spend/bill unreasonably long time on a case to make it seem like a lot of effort went into the case
and drive prices upwards. This is despite the lack of winning probability gained by falsely assuming that
expertise is bound to working intensely with specific legal disciplines.
159 This seems contrary to the undocumented opinion that human assessment by the use of so called
“mental models” under certain undefined conditions(they seem to be personal experience which
would notoriously be subjective) dramatically can improve one’s ability to make assessments on a case,
cf. Quantitative Legal Prediction – or – How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Start Preparing for the
Data-Driven Future of the Legal Services Industry, Daniel Martin Katz, Emory Law Journal, Volume
62:909, p. 928.
35
2.3.3 Probability Distribution Approximation (Contracts)
(Superposition* and Superposition†)160
Regarding superposition* the principle of party autonomy, when it comes to
writing contracts, makes it possible for the parties to decide which parts of a
contract should be factual circumstances, and which parts should be
considered a source of law that is regulating the legal relationship.
An example of factual circumstances in a contract could be information

about the goods sold, or who wrote the contract.
Regarding superposition† it is also possible to decide whether to use

objective criteria in the contract or formulate clauses that requires discrete
assessments to interpret after the given interpretation principles, which
makes the legal conclusion more or less certain.
2.3.3.1 Economical considerations and RNG (Superposition†)

In some contract clauses it could be considered to use RNG161 after a lex
cryptographica162 principle in digital contracts instead of legal clauses to
represent the probability distribution, as this solution would create absolute
control over the probability of a given outcome. While being mathematically
optimal and economically cheap, since the solution of a contractual issue
would be free of costs, it might not be the best strategic option.
For the weak party of a contract, it might be an advantage because of the

increased transparency, but the strong party might not be interested in such
transparency. If the strong party wants to dominate the weak party, it is
more advantageous to apply clauses formulated in a way that requires
discrete assessments. The ambiguity might make it easier to convince the
weak party to give up a claim the weak party has, which would also be the
solution of an issue where the court fees and legal fees would scare the
weaker party from making a claim.
The stronger party also has the advantage of buying better legal
professionals and therefore maybe increasing the winning chances, either
due to increased professionalism or due to the time spent on the legal
reasoning by the legal professionals.
However RNG might be optimal as an alternative, when the parties do not

want to spend time on negotiating an issue and has a fully automated digital
business relationship. Such negotiations could lead to a worse relationship
160 Even though it can seem like there is a duality in the probability approximation/risk assessment
both superpositions regards legal uncertainty, cf. DLR, p. 11 of the paper.
161
See section 3.2.3 for a further explanation of RNG.
162 See section 3.2.3 for a further explanation of lex cryptographia.
36
between the parties, when the parties initially would rather want an
uncomplicated solution and continue doing business with each other. RNG
would also increase the risk predictability, which could be an advantage from
a quant point of view.163
2.3.4 Testimonies as a General Uncertainty Factor in the

Probability Distribution Approximation
Testimonies constitute a factual uncertainty concerning the factual objects
that law is materialized through164 in the probability distribution
approximation. As an opposite we have legal uncertainty which includes, but
is not limited to, exposure to fines, penalties, or punitive damages resulting
from supervisory actions, as well as private settlements.165 166 167
There is nothing that prevents the testimonies from falling out differently
than expected, even if the person has been spoken with before going to
court.
In some legal systems it can be punishable, if a witness does not speak the
truth under oath (also named perjury), which can be assumed to be a
protection against these uncertainties.168 However, this is dependent on that
the legal professional is aware of the truth on an objectively observable
basis, which in most cases is either not the circumstances or would result in
that there would be no reason to initiate a lawsuit. It is further complicated
by the fact that the person giving the testimony might be mistaken by the
legal professional listening to the testimony; the person might have
forgotten the exact facts or might be mistaken in the memory of the
incident.
When the probability distribution is approximated, one must always have

this considerable uncertainty/source of error in mind. A source of error
which, however, can be limited with proper documentation.169 Likewise, the
probability might be limited by the organization and phrasing of the
questions.
163 For further considerations about quant in legal issues see section 2.5.
164 DLR, p. 10 of the paper.
165 Basel Committee on Banking Supervision 2006, note 97.
166 Furthermore a distinction can be made between the legal and factual uncertainty concerning
deontic norms and qualification norms respectively, cf. DLR, p. 10 of the paper.
167 The legal uncertainty and the evaluation of the probability for a given outcome has already been
described in section 2.3.1, 2.3.2, 2.3.3.

168 See as examples in US. law: 26 U.S.C. § 6065 and 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1); In UK-law: Perjury act 1911,
chapter 6 1 and 2 Geo 5 with later modifications and amendments by the Criminal Justice Act 1967 (c.
80), s. 89(2), Criminal Justice Act 1948 (c. 58), s. 1(1), Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 (c. 43), s. 106(2) and
Civil Partnership Act 2004 (c. 33), ss. 80(4), 263(2); S.I. 2005/3175, art. 2(1), Sch. 1; In EU-law: Court of
Justice of the European Communities (Perjury) Act, 1975.
169 Written annexes.
37
Furthermore the person giving the testimony or the nature of the evidence
can provoke a bias in the legal professional.
One of these biases seems to be that technical evidence can merely presume
the content of the facts while a witness can create a conviction within the
judge.170 Based on the above uncertainties regarding the content of a
testimony, such a bias may seem rationally inexplicable.
It is also possible that technological developments will affect this bias
towards the judge being convinced by technical evidence, while a witness
can create a presumption. Hereby a new bias occurs, because the technical
evidence also has its weaknesses:
The technical evidence might prove a vanishingly small probability of a given

fact's occurrence. However, the technical evidence does not necessarily take
into account the likelihood that precisely this rare occurrence will be
presented to the courts, as the circumstance gives particular reason for the
parties to go to court.171
Related to technical evidence it will then be advisable not only to decide on

the concrete evidence when these must be weighed against each other, but
also to decide on the methodological basis on which the technical evidence
rests. Since this assessment must made be the light of the concrete
deductive syllogism, an assessment must be made on a technical
methodological basis as well as a legal methodological basis.
If an impartial technical professional is involved, the person or AI must also

account for the methodological basis the technical professional used, as well
as the methodical flaws. The legal professional must also make an
assessment of the legal methodological basis, as well as a clarification of
which bias the legal professional may be affected by.
Another bias is that the credibility of a witness depends on the witness's

facial features172 which, however, can be manipulated with the facial
mimicry.173 In addition, there is the physical appearance in general.174 The list
of bias is not exhaustively described.175
170 Eva Smith, Vidnebeviset, En vurdering af afhøringsmetoder og vidneforklaringer, Gads Forlag,

1986(now VB), p. 73.
171 VB, pp. 68-73.
172 Dumas, R.& B. Testé (2006). “The Influence of Criminal Facial Stereotypes on Juridic Judgements”,
Swiss Journal of Psychology 65.

173 Todorov et al. (2009), ”Evaluating Faces on Trustworthiness After Minimal Time Exposure”, Social
Cognition 27.
174 Se as an example Schwey, N.A. et al. (2013). ”The Influence of a Defendant’s Body Weight on
Perception of Guilt”. International Journal of Obesity 37.

175 For more biases, see:
38
2.4 Ab Initio
As mentioned in section 1.1, there are time periods when the legal
professional is required to consider legal issues relating to a variety of
technology constantly being developed, which are not yet fully regulated in
the law. Therefore, there is a need for a legal methodological basis that
effectively hinders precedents based facts given by old technology and fills
the gaps in existing legislation that does not explicitly include the new
technology.
The methodological basis for this can be provided by using a number of ways
to rationalize, which point in the same direction:
- The Theory of Everything as explained in section 1.2.1.
- Distributed representation in artificial neural networks as explained in

section 2.3.1.1.
- Quantum chemistry using computational quantum mechanics where

calculations are made “from first principles” which means that the
only inputs into the calculation are physical constants such as Planck’s
constant, the masses of elementary particles, the speed of light etc.
These types of calculations are also called ab initio.176 177
Similar rationale can be used in legal reasoning under the same Latin phrase
ab initio which will be defined in the following:
Where sources of law describe a given legal context, ab initio may reflect the
principles of a teleological interpretation which also takes into account the
purpose, values, and the legal, social and economic goals the law aims to
achieve. See section 3.1 for a practical example.
Ab initio thus has certain similarities to the teleological interpretation, but

does not coincide with the teleological interpretation in all situations, since
ab initio can also be used in the following circumstances:
Domstolens blinde øje – Om betydningen af ubevidste biases i retssystemet, Jesper Ryberg, Jurist- og
Økonomforbundets forlag, 1. udgave, 2016
Kahneman, D., Slavic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.) (1982}. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and
Biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
Ellsworth, Phoebe C. "Legal Reasoning." In The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, edited
by K. J. Holyoak and R. G. Morrison Jr., 685-704. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005.
176 Molecular Modelling – Principles and Applications, Andrew R. Leach, Pearson Education Limited, 2nd
Edition, p. 65.
177 Molecular Orbital Calculations of the Lower Excited Electronic Levels of Benzene, Configuration
Interaction Included, Robert G. Parr, David P. Craig and Ian G. Ross, The Journal of Chemical Physics,
Vol. 18, Issue 12, 1561(1950).
39
In situations where an analogy of the wording of the applicable law can be
used, ab initio, to a large extent, constitutes the principles of functional
equivalence as described in United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development, Dispute Settlement, International Commercial Arbitration, 5.9
Electronic Arbitration178, p. 51 hereunder namely note 101-103. A practical
example follows in section 2.4.1.1 - 2.4.1.3 about my legal definition of
virtual currency in Danish law in 2016, which has been isolated for the sake
of clarity.
In certain legal assessments there will furthermore be a smooth transition

from purpose interpretation to a description of functionality when applying
the ab initio principle, since there will be circumstances where both the
wording and the purpose of the law must be used.
Ab initio therefore also has certain similarities with functional equivalence,

but does not coincide with functional equivalence in all situations, since ab
initio correspondingly can be used in the following circumstances:
Where a teleological interpretation or functional equivalence cannot be used

because something technological has been produced with unprecedented
functionality where an application of the applicable law is not sufficient.
Here, precedent judgments can occur as the legal basis instead.
It is not only in these circumstances that ab initio has a legitimate conceptual

existence, but it is in these circumstances that ab initio shines the most. Ab
initio can therefore break the precedent judgements from years ago based
on an outdated perception of what is technically possible, and where the
courts have not used ab initio.
Overall, ab initio can be defined in a legal context as: A use of the functional
equivalence, teleological interpretation and / or the definition of the physical
functions of a physical phenomenon that relates only to the most
fundamental functions and purposes of the physical phenomenon.
Thus, any functional equivalence of the wording of the law or a teleological

interpretation cannot achieve the elevated term ab initio. However, it would
be ideal for any use of functional equivalence and teleological interpretation
to be ab initio, since it would incorporating the optimal and necessary
flexibility to enable the legal reasoning to duly meet future technological
changes.
Finally, it should be noted that ab initio is different compared to the

Aristotelian approach per genus et differentiam, which has its limitations due
178 UNCTAD/EDM/Misc.232/Add.20.
40
to a lack of common features which leads to partial and overlapping
resemblances.179 Ab initio does not have these limitations, since ab initio is
not bound by a comparison, even though comparisons can be made.
2.4.1 The Legal Definition of Virtual Currency and the Use of Ab

Initio
In 2016 when I was 24 years old, I wrote a legal definition of virtual currency
in Danish law in the thesis Virtuel valuta, Nick Sherigian, The University of
Copenhagen, Faculty of Law from the ab initio principle, even though I did
not coin it ab initio back then, as I did with this book. I just knew about
quantum mechanics and wanted to apply it to legal issues. It is originally
written in Danish so I translated it to English, and changed some of the
references in order to make the notes more accurate:
A definition of virtual currency is needed for distinguishing between the

virtual currency and other services and/or goods. There exists a technical
definition of virtual currency as being a series of digital signatures.180
However, there is no legal definition of a virtual currency in the legislation,
but there is a legal definition of currency. Based on the definition of currency,
it is possible to derive a legal definition of virtual currency if virtual currency
does not meet the requirements of the existing legal definition of currency.
Mads Bryde Andersen and Joseph Lookofsky defines currency as a monetary

standard belonging to a particular monetary system.181
Similarly seemingly follows from møntlovens §§ 3-4 and Lov om Danmarks

Nationalbank § 8 contrario, after which some kroner(the Danish currency)
issued as coins are no longer valid as a means of payment, and thus are not
part of the monetary system.
Furthermore Uniform Commercial Code(UCC) § 1-201, litra b, no. 24 define

"money" as being "a medium of exchange currently authorized or adopted by
a domestic or foreign government." Related hereto the United States
Department of the Treasury defines "currency" as money that meets the
definition in UCC § 1-201, litra b, no. 24.182
179 Defining legal risk, Tobias Mahler, Paper presented at the conference “Commercial Contracting for
Strategic Advantage – Potentials and Prospects”, Turku University of Applied Sciences 2007, published
in the Conference Proceedings on pages 10-31, pp. 5-6.
180 Bitcoin: A Peer-To-Peer Cash System, Satoshi Nakamoto, 2008(now P2PCS), p. 2.
181 Lærebog i obligationsret I - Ydelsen Beføjelser, Mads Bryde Andersen og Joseph Lookofsky, 3.
udgave, 2010(now OI), p. 124.

182 Tales from the Cryptocurrency: On Bitcoin, Square Pegs and Round Holes, [49 New Eng. L. Rev. 121
(2014)], section IV.
41
Therefore it follows that a currency must be a monetary standard used in a
monetary system belonging to a government.
The addition that the monetary system should belong to a government, is a

specification of the definition of currency by Mads Bryde Andersen and
Joseph Lookofsky, which seems appropriate in Danish law when considering
the fact that the møntloven and Lov om Danmarks Nationalbank has been
drafted by the Danish government. It is also the government, through a
minister, that can stipulate that coins are no longer a valid means of
payment, cf. møntlovens § 3.
This point of view is also consistent with the point of view presented in
Skatterådet’s decision in SKM 2014.226 SR regarding the definition of
“currency” in accordance with skattekontrolloven. 183 It can also be deduced
from SKM 2014.226 SR that virtual currency is not a foreign currency due to
the blockchain.184
A currency in the Danish national law is a monetary standard used in a

monetary system belonging to a government.
The blockchain which is the system behind virtual currencies that are known
at the moment is a peer-to-peer system and thereby decentral. A peer can
create new blocks in the blokchain, and it is inter alia in this way that Bitcoins
are created.185 Therefore Bitcoins are not in accordance with the definition of
a currency, due to the blockchain being decentral.186
(section excluded)
From the definition of currency, it must nevertheless be possible to derive a

definition of virtual currency.
Looking at the definition of currency's basic criteria, the definition includes a

criterion of a performance and a requirement that the performance is part of
a monetary system. The two criteria are dealt with individually in relation to
the virtual currency's characteristics, in order to legally define virtual
currency.
183 The decision is based on the remarks on L 422 of the 6th of June 2005 (LF 129 2004/2005 om
udarbejdelse af skattemæssigt årsregnskab i fremmed valuta) where InvesteringsForeningsRådets
consultation response regarding skattekontrollovens § 3 C, stk. 3 states, that an official exchange rate
given by a central bank is required for a currency to exist.
184 This is a wrong assessment. It is possible that a blockchain is owned by a government.
185 P2PCS, p. 4
186 See also P2PCS, p. 1 and 3
42
2.4.1.1 The Performance
The performance that a virtual currency consists of can technically be
described as a series of digital signatures.187
However, there are forms of virtual currency that are by no means

negotiable outside the virtual system.188 Examples include virtual currency in
online games, which also form series of digital signatures from individual
users such as "gold" in the game of World of Warcraft.
It happens that these virtual currencies are bought and sold for regular
currencies by third parties, who have no affiliation with the provider of the
game. However, currencies in game are not intended to serve as a means of
payment outside the game, which is generally also stated in the terms of use
of the game provider. Trading currencies in games thus takes place outside of
the gaming provider and is not allowed by the gaming provider, who will be
able to make a claim against the third party for breach of the terms of use.
A criterion must therefore be made that the virtual currency must include
the purpose of serving as a mean of payment.
Another type of virtual currency is virtual currency that can be purchased for
a regular currency but cannot be resold to the issuer. Using the example of
"gold" from World of Warcraft, this would be the case if “gold” could be
purchased by Blizzard who is the game provider, but cannot be sold back to
Blizzard for a regular currency. Thus, this kind of virtual currency acts as a
payment surrogate after Betalingstjenesteloven, Chapter 10.
Although this type of virtual currency is intended to serve as a means of

payment, it is not the purpose for the virtual currency to be widely accepted.
Thus, the virtual currency must be able to both be bought and sold for
regular currency and therefore be bidirectional, cf. the Danish translation of
case C-264/14 Hedqvist, para. 24.
A virtual currency cannot be required to be a cash payment, as virtual

currencies are not cash benefits today, cf. section 2.3.1.(not the section in
this book)
187 P2PCS, p. 2
188 Virtual Currency Schemes, European Central Bank, 2012(now ECB), section 2.1.
43
2.4.1.2 The System
Since the virtual currency is virtual, the monetary system must necessarily be
digital and must cause virtual currency to be bidirectional.
Inspired by Lov om Danmarks Nationalbank §§ 9-10 on the former gold fund,

it could be considered whether, despite the digital system, it would be
possible for a virtual currency to have its value tied to gold or another
physical good. Users would then be able to exchange the virtual currency for
this physical good.
A virtual good whose value is tied to a physical good will, however, have a
very stringent course that follows the physical good to which the virtual good
is bound.
The reason is that if the value of the virtual currency is lower than the value
of the physical good to which the currency is tied, users would buy the virtual
service and sell the virtual currency in exchange for the physical good and
gain a profit. This would increase the price due to the higher demand for the
virtual service until the price of the physical good was achieved. Visa versa,
the demand for the virtual service will fall if the virtual currency value
exceeds the value of the physical good, otherwise the physical good could be
sold for the currency and gaining a profit.
Although the users formally buy and sell a virtual good, it is actually the
physical good that is being traded, and the good is merely represented by the
virtual currency. In these situations, therefore, there is no monetary system,
but a system for exchanging this virtual representation of the physical good
and for this reason, there is no virtual currency.
Due to the decentralized systems of the existing virtual currencies, no

requirement can be made for the digital system to belong to a governmental
government.
The decentralized system also means that the virtual currency does not have
an issuer.189 However, it cannot be excluded that there will later be forms of
virtual currency that have an issuer and not a decentralized system, but still
functions in a digital system.
For the above reasons, therefore, it cannot be a definitive requirement that

the virtual currency's digital system belongs to a government.
Conversely, there is also no requirement for the virtual currency to be part of

a system that is decentralized. Thus, there is nothing to prevent a company
189
Cf. Virtuelle Valutaer, Nationalbanken, Betalingsformidlingskontoret, Anders Laursen and Jon
Hasling Kyed, Danmarks Nationalbank, Monetary Review, 1st Quarter, 2014.
44
or a group of companies from making a virtual currency on the basis of a
blockchain that they have ownership of. In these cases, there will still be a
currency whose purpose is that the virtual currency should serve as a general
means of payment.
It could be considered whether the value of the virtual currency is tied to an

issuer's liquidity in these situations. However, this will not be the case when
the issuer simply stands for updating and maintaining the system. The
exchange rate for the virtual currency will instead be an expression of the
market's highest bidding offer at any given time.190
2.4.1.3 Overall Definition

Thus, based on the specified definitions of virtual currency as a performance
and the requirements of the monetary system of which the virtual currency
is a part, it follows that virtual currency can be defined as: A two-way
convertible performance whose purpose it is to serve as general means of
payment, as part of a digital monetary system. The value of the performance
must not be tied to any physical good.
In this regard, an interpretation question arises as to what is understood by

the purpose of the performance being to serve as a means of payment. This
must be to fulfil the legal definition of a monetary performance.
190 See also section 1.4.4(not the section in this book).
45
2.5 Conclusive Remarks
In practice, the augmentation of the legal method places significantly stricter
demands on the legal professional than ever before.191 These demands are
beyond the legal professional’s core competence, which are the deductive
syllogisms with premises of predominantly non-scientific nature.192 The legal
methodological basis is not necessarily adequately described in the legal
literature due to the constantly advancing technological development and
also requires in-depth knowledge of mathematics and physics when the facts
are technical. 193
The economical advantages of augmenting the legal method becomes clear

when applying quantitative analysis (also popularly named quant) to give
qualified answers to customer questions like: Do I have a case? How much is
it going to cost? Are these documents relevant? What will happen if we leave
this particular provision out of this contract? 194
The most important question: “Is this legal professional’s efforts even
profitable or should I pick another legal professional to solve this issue?”
could also be answered using quant.
This could lead to a paradigm shift in, how we perceive who the “best” legal
professionals are; from being the best at legal reasoning to being the most
profitability efficient. 195
Whether humans have jobs in the business of legal advice might therefore
depend on, whether the efforts of a human combined with the efforts of AI
are more profitable than the sole use of AI, when the cases are only about
money.
In other types of cases, the desire to achieve a win or as correct a result as

possible could further the combination of human- and AI legal reasoning if
191 Futhermore the increased application of technology to a broader variety of every day events makes
it is questionable whether it is sufficient with a specific court like The Technology and Construction
Court that also deals with claims relating to the design, supply and installation of computers, computer
software and related network systems, cf. The UK Ministry of Justice, CPR - Rules and Directions, Part
60 – Technology and Construction Court Claims, PRACTICE DIRECTION 60 – TECHNOLOGY AND
CONSTRUCTION COURT CLAIMS, para. 2.1. “TCC claims”, litra (e) that involves issues or questions
which are technically complex, cf. The UK Ministry of Justice, CPR - Rules and Directions, Part 60 –
Technology and Construction Court Claims, 60.1(3), litra (a).
192 Evidence is not bound to be scientific, and the law is not created on a scientific basis, but originates
from the democratic process at least in the western world.
193 This is specially an issue for the countries that do not use the common law approach.
194 Quantitative Legal Prediction – or – How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Start Preparing for the
Data-Driven Future of the Legal Services Industry, Daniel Martin Katz, Emory Law Journal, Volume
62:909, pp. 928-929.
195 Compared to the comments in Quantitative Legal Prediction – or – How I Learned to Stop Worrying
and Start Preparing for the Data-Driven Future of the Legal Services Industry, Daniel Martin Katz,
Emory Law Journal, Volume 62:909, pp. 932-936.
46
the human legal reasoning increases the probability of a correct result or a
win. See also note 158.
47
Part 3: Practical Subjects
48
3.1 Personal Data and the Quantum
Computer
For an immediate consideration, it is only anonymisation that poses
distinctive challenges beyond what would be the circumstances with any
other technological innovation. Therefore, it is only anonymisation which is
described below in relation to the laws about personal data.
3.1.1 Quantum Information and Anonymisation

Quantum information,196 in qubits in an arbitrary unknown state, cannot be
converted into bits, using classic teleporting. This principle is also called ”no-
teleportation theorem”.197 198 It should be emphasized that ”no-teleportation
theorem” should not be confused with ”quantum teleportation” where the
state of a qubit can be transferred to another qubit via classic teleporting,
when the two qubits are ”entangled”.199 200
A simple explanation of classical teleportation is that, it is a transfer of

information using information technology that is not quantum information
technology. The concept of teleportation can therefore not seem to be well
chosen. The classical teleportation is not really a teleportation, but an
attempt to transfer a qubit’s state, and the transfer is not instantaneous.201
However, 2 bits of information can be sent using one qubit through

”superdense coding”.202
Because the quantum information in arbitrary qubits follows the irreversible

”no-teleportation theorem”, it may be considered whether personal data in
196For a more philosophical explanation of the quantum information concept and the demarcation of
information in general, a reference can be made to: Quantum Information Theory and the Foundations
of Quantum Mechanics, Christopher Gordon Timpson, D.Phil. thesis submitted Trinity Term 2004 at the
University of Oxford, vivaed august 2004, LaTex, 250pp.
197 “Machines, Computations, and Universality: Third International Conference”, MCU 2001 Chisinau,
Moldava, May 23-27, 2001 Proceedings, Maurice Margenstern, Yurii Rogozhin, Springer, 29th of June
2003, p. 41, namely note 6.
198
Advanced visual quantum mechanics, Bernd Thaller, Springer Science & Business Media, 6th of
December 2005(now AVQM), p. 170.
199 Quantum Information and Consciousness: A Gentle Introduction, Danko D. Georgiev, CRC Press, 6th
of December 2017, p. 139.

200 Albert Einstein has famously referred to ”entanglement” as ”spooky action at a distance” in a letter
from Albert Einstein to Max Born, Ref. 11, p. 158, cf. Speakable and unspeakable in quantum
mechanics – Collected papers on quantum philosophy, J.S. Bell, Cambridge University Press, 1987, p.
143, note 8. Einstein did not think, that ”entanglement” was possible, but as time would reveal,
Einstein was wrong.
201 AVQM, p. 170, namely note 5.
202
Communication via one- and two-particle operators on Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen states, Charles H.
Bennett and Stephen J. Wiesner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2881 – Published 16th of November 1992.
49
the form of quantum information is hereby anonymised in such a way that
the quantum information falls outside the scope of GDPR,203 cf. GDPR recital
26.
Anonymous information is not mentioned other places in GDPR,204 205 but is

referred to by the Article 29 Working Party206 in opinion 05/2014, where
anonymisation is defined as the results from processing personal data in
order to irreversibly prevent identification taking into account all the likely
reasonably means to be used for identification.207 The legal ground of the
anonymisation treatment must thus initially be found in GDPR, art. 6
concerning the lawfulness of processing.
The GDPR also does not explain how anonymisation can be done practically,
which the Article 29 group has tried to elucidate, as there is no standard of
anonymity in the legislation.208 Furthermore, a distinction is made between
two basic types of anonymisation by randomization and generalization,209
while nothing prevents making combinations of these.210
Randomization changes the personal data by removing the strong

relationship between the data and the individual. This may be by adding
noise, whereby the anonymised data is so inaccurate or leaves such a margin
of discretion that a third party will not be able to identify the individual.211 212
One particular variant of this is differential privacy, where the data controller
generates an anonymised dataset, which can be used by a third party, while
the data controller continues to have a copy of the original data. There is
203 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 (General
Data Protection Regulation - "GDPR").
204 It should also be noted that the GDPR is a regulation and Article 288 of the TFEU provides that a
regulation is applicable in every Member State.

205 In California, USA a pendant to the GDPR has been constructed by the California Consumer Privacy
Act of 2018, which comes into force the 1st of January 2020, cf. Assembly Bill No. 375, Chapter 55, An
act to add Title 1.81.5 (commencing with Section 1798.100) to Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code,
relating to privacy. See namely section 1798.198(a).
206 An independent European working group set up under article 29 in directive 95/46/EC, whose tasks
are described in article 30 of directive 95/46/EC as well as article 15 in directive 2002/58/EC. The
Article 29 Working Party only has advisory status, cf. directive 95/46/EC, art. 29(1) and art. 30(1)(c),
and only gives opinions, cf. art. 30(b).
207 ”Opinion 05/2014 on AnonymisationTechniques”, Article 29 Dataprotection Working Party, adopted
on 10 April 2014(now Opinion), p. 3. An understanding of the concept of anonymisation, which is in

line with the concept of anonymisation in ISO 29100:2011, cf. Opinion, p. 6, note 3.
208 Opinion, p. 6.
209For a comparative analysis of some of these anonymisation methods see: Connecting Randomized
Response, Post-Randomization, Differential Privacy and t-Closeness via Deniability and Permutation,
Josep Domingo-Ferrer, Jordi Soria-Comas (Submitted on 6 Mar 2018).
210 Opinion, pp. 11f.
211 Opinion, pp. 12f.
212 Utilizing Noise Addition for Data Privacy, an Overview, Kato Mivule, Proceedings of the International
Conference on Information and Knowledge Engineering (IKE 2012), 16th of September 2013, pp. 65-71.
50
then deliberately added noise without a pattern to the anonymised dataset.
The data controller can then, by comparison with the original dataset, clarify
how much noise is to be added and in what way.213
Randomization can also be done by permutation whereby the values in a

dataset are artificially linked to other data subjects.214 Although permutation
is technically an option mentioned by the Article 29 Working Party, it is
difficult to understand, how this method is compatible with the principle of
accurate data according to GDPR, Art. 5(1) (d) and thus will be applicable in
practice.
Because quantum information does not add noise or permute personal data
as a result of the ”no-teleportation theorem”, it is clear that quantum
information is not randomization, when the quantum information is intact.
By generalization, the respective scale or order of magnitude that the

personal data is related to is modified, which can be exemplified by using
month instead of day.215 However, one must be aware of any use of fractions
or decimals, since 1 / 30-31 of a month is one day.
Generalization can be done by aggregation and k-anonymity where a data

subject cannot be individualized from a group of at least "k" other individuals
216
and forms the basis of systems such as Datafly, µ-Argus and k-Similar,
which provides data protection.217
L-diversity is a variation of k-anonymity which ensures that every group of

individuals has at least “l” different values, while T-closeness indicates a
threshold for how close the distribution of the different values in the
individual group must be in relation to the total basis of data.218
Since quantum information does not divide personal data into groupings due
to the ”no-teleportation theorem”, it is clear that quantum information is not
a generalization.
213 Opinion, p. 15 f. with reference in note 14 to Dwork, C. (2006), Differential privacy. In Automata,
languages and programming (s. 1-12), Springer Berlin Heidelberg, as well as a reference in note 15 to
Ed Felten (2012), Protecting privacy by adding noise.
214 Opinion, p. 13f.
215 Opinion, p. 16
216 Opinion, p. 16
217 L. Sweeney. k-anonymity: a model for protecting privacy, International Journal on Uncertainty,
Fuzziness and Knowledge-based Systems, 10 (5), 2002; 557-570.

218 Opinion, p. 18. See also “t-Closeness: Privacy Beyond k-Anonymity and l-Diversity”, Ninghui
Li, Tiancheng Li, Suresh Venkatasubramanian, 2007 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Data
Engineering, 4th of June 2007.
51
However, it should be pointed out that the Article 29 Working Party has not
indicated that it has provided an exhaustive list of methods of
anonymisation.219
On the contrary, the Article 29 Working Party indicates, on the basis of ab

initio, three basic principles, whereby the robustness of anonymisation is
assessed: Singling out, linkability and inference.220
The anonymisation must be both in relation to the data controller and a third
party.221
It should also be pointed out that the Article 29 Working Party recognizes
that no anonymisation technique is flawless per se.222 This means that there
is a de minimis limit on, how personal data processing has been ineffective
when it comes to being irreversible, without the data processing losing its
character of being an anonymisation.
Even though ”quantum teleportation” makes it possible for a third party to

acquire personal data in the form of quantum information via another
quantum computer, the limited number of quantum computers will cause
this risk to fall within the scope of the de minimis limit. However, as there
will be more quantum computers, or QCaaS223 will be more widespread,
there will be a smooth transition towards letting these situations fall outside
the de minimis limit.
However, the data controller will still be able to identify the specific personal
data, in spite of the fact that there is only quantum information available.
However, it should be noted that concerning the quantum states in qubits,

decoherence 224 might occur whereby the data is at least temporarily lost and
hereby anonymized. The fact that anonymization has happened is more
evident when it is emphasized that it is possible to recover coherence in the
decoherent quantum states, however in a damaged condition, although it is
theoretically possible to achieve perfect coherence in certain circumstances.
225 226
219 Compared with Opinion, pp. 6 and 8.

220 Opinion, p. 11f.
221 Opinion, p. 12.
222 Opinion, p. 12.
223 See section 3.2 for further information on QCaaS.
224 On the Interpretation of Measurement in Quantum Theory, H. Dieter Zeh, Foundations of Physics,
vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 69–76, (1970).
225Recovering coherence from decoherence: A method of quantum state reconstruction, H. Moya-

Cessa, J.A. Roversi, S.M. Dutra, A. Vidiella-Barranco, Physical Review A (Atomic, Molecular, and Optical
Physics), Volume 60, Issue 5, November 1999, pp. 4029-4033.
52
The damaged coherent data will then be anonymised in cases where the
conditions of singling out, linkability and inference are met and thus covered
by the GDPR, preamble recital 26.
Thereby, speculations could be made on using decoherence as a means of

circumventing the GDPR. In relation to this situtaion, the GDPR, recital 15,
underlines that in order to prevent creating a serious risk of circumvention,
the protection of natural persons should be technologically neutral and
should not depend on the techniques used. Hereby, the circumvention
situations are considerably limited, provided that the court or supervisory
authority which makes the specific legal decision or judgment, is able to
understand the technological aspects of the actual circumvention by using
decoherence.
Similar considerations apply to the scrambling of information inside a black

hole, cf. section 1.2.4.
However, it is barely a subject of doubt that the main principle is that

personal data as quantum information, despite its peculiarity, cannot be
assumed to be anonymous solely on the basis that the information is
quantum information. Thus, the information does not fall outside the GDPR,
art. 4, no. 2 already because, the information is quantum information, cf.
GDPR, recital 26.
226
Inverting Quantum Decoherence by Classical Feedback from the Environment, Francesco Buscemi,
Giulio Chiribella, and Giacomo Mauro D’Ariano, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 090501 – Published 23rd of August
2005, p. 1.
53
3.2 Contracts on Quantum-Computing-as-a-
Service(QCaaS)
Since most people do not own a quantum computer, access to a quantum
computer can instead be acquired via a cloud solution; also referred to as
quantum-computing-as-a-service(QCaaS).227 QCaaS offer a conjunctional use
with classical computers which increases their likeliness to be used in the
time period, where the quantum computer does not have the same
commercial viability as the classical computer. 228
Specific examples on QCaaS are D-wave229, IBM’s Q Experience230 and

Rigetti.231 These should not be confused with quantum simulators such as,
for example Microsoft’s LIQUi|>232 and Google’s Quantum Playground. 233
Special programming languages are also used when using QCaaS and
quantum simulators, where for example LIQUi|> and Q#234 can be
mentioned.
In a legal context, the obvious main principle can then seem to be that one
should initiate by understanding the cloud computing contracts if one wants
to understand, how a QCaaS contract should be constructed.235
However, this is hardly the case as QCaaS contracts already exist. In addition,
knowledge of QCaaS's distinctive features is required, whereby the legal
issues that arise with these features can be duly taken into account in the
legal reasoning reflected in the clauses of the contract. However, it is not
hereby stated that cloud computing contracts are useless, they are just not
the initial starting point, and on the contrary must, methodically, constitute a
final supplement when it comes to compiling knowledge that is applied in the
final QCaaS contract.236 237
227 An Overview on Quantum Computing as a Service (QCaaS): Probability or Possibility, Mijanur

Rahaman & Md. Masudul Islam, International Journal of Mathematical Sciences and Computing
(IJMSC), Vol.2, No.1, pp.16-22, 2016 (now AOQCS), p. 16.
228 Assessment of the Future Economic Impact of Quantum Information Science, Keith W. Crane, Lance
G. Joneckis, Hannah Acheson-Field, Iain D. Boyd, Benjamin A. Corbin, Queying Han, Robert N. Rozansky,
IDA Science & Technology Policy Institute, 2017, p. 85.
229 https://www.dwavesys.com/home
230 https://quantumexperience.ng.bluemix.net/qx
231 https://rigetti.com/
232 http://stationq.github.io/Liquid/
233 http://www.quantumplayground.net/#/home
234
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/quantum/language/?view=qsharp-preview
235 A Quantum Leap?: The potential legal implications of the quantum computing revolution, Andrew
Joint, Commercial technology, 1st of October 2018.

236 See as an example ISO/IEC 19086-4:2019 and future versions.
237 Regarding the practical process of concluding cloud service agreements, please refer to Cloud
Standards Customer Council, Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements, version 2.0 of April 2015.
54
However, a number of the "terms and conditions" that can be found for
QCaaS have not been the subject of independent negotiation inter partes,
whereby these adhesion agreements are primarily for the benefit of the
service provider and thus, do not address some of the issues I address below.
However, there may be more contractual material than just the available
terms and conditions, if the strength of the contracting parties is more equal,
which, however, is not available to the public. Because I do not have more
access to these documents, I do not have the opportunity to delimit the full
contractual basis.
A number of the concrete practical issues for QCaaS that influences the
QCaaS contracts will be discussed below, as well as other key agreement
clauses in an agreement between the service provider and the customer. It
must be emphasized that the issues do not constitute an exhaustive list,
which is not practically possible as the parties to the agreement may have
specific requirements for their specific contract.
Initially, however, the NIS-directive238 is treated in relation to the contracts

concerning QCaaS.
3.2.1 NIS-Directive
The definition of a cloud computing service is given in the NIS Directive, art.
4(19) as a digital service that enables access to a scalable and elastic pool of
shareable computing resources, which is further specified in recital 17:
“Cloud computing services span a wide range of activities that can be

delivered according to different models. For the purposes of this Directive, the
term ‘cloud computing services’ covers services that allow access to a
scalable and elastic pool of shareable computing resources. Those computing
resources include resources such as networks, servers or other infrastructure,
storage, applications and services. The term ‘scalable’ refers to computing
resources that are flexibly allocated by the cloud service provider, irrespective
of the geographical location of the resources, in order to handle fluctuations
in demand. The term ‘elastic pool’ is used to describe those computing
resources that are provisioned and released according to demand in order to
rapidly increase and decrease resources available depending on workload.
The term ‘shareable’ is used to describe those computing resources that are
provided to multiple users who share a common access to the service, but
where the processing is carried out separately for each user, although the
service is provided from the same electronic equipment.” (My underlining)
238Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2016 concerning
measures for a high common level of security of network and information systems across the Union, OJ
L 194, 19.7.2016, pp. 1–30.
55
In light of this broad conceptual understanding of "cloud computing
service"239 and a dynamic interpretation, QCaaS will also be covered. The NIS-
directive must therefore be taken into account in relation to the contract
between the service provider and the customer. A clause can be made
whereby the service provider is obliged to comply with the NIS-directive and
the derived domestic legislation of the relevant member states, which must
be interpreted in conformity with the directive.240
As the NIS-directive also places particular emphasis on the work of the

European Network and Information Security Agency ("ENISA"), as set out in
recital 4, it may also be considered that there should be a quantum
cryptography clause concerning ”Quantum Key Distribution” (QKD).241
QKD, unlike traditional encryption techniques, does not depend on the

computational difficulty of the specific algorithm used, but on the physical
properties of quantum mechanics. QKD is not considered an encryption
technique by ENISA, but merely a distribution of encryption keys that are as
long or longer, than the encrypted message (One-time path encryption).242
For further details, see section 3.3.
3.2.2 Unlawful Use

Due to the quantum computer’s increased computational power, compared
to the computer, it is a potential way of committing crimes as well as actions
of warfare.243
These actions can be referred to and analyzed in a contractual matter with

the use of three different approaches:244
- The instrument-based approach; focuses on the techniques used in an

attack
- The target-based approach; focuses on the target of the attack
- The effects-based approach; focuses on the result of an action
239 The definition of cloud computing services in the NIS-directive is for the specific purpose of the
Directive, and without prejudice to any other instruments, cf. recital 55.
240 Case 14/83 Von Colson, para. 27.
241 ENISA Briefing: Quantum Key Distribution, ENISA, 27. November 2009(now EBQKD).
242 EBQKD, pp. 3f.
243 A Quantum Leap in International Law on Cyberwarfare: An Analysis of International Cooperation
with Quantum Computing on the Horizon, Dominic Rota, 8th of November 2018.
244 A Quantum Leap in International Law on Cyberwarfare: An Analysis of International Cooperation
with Quantum Computing on the Horizon, Dominic Rota, 8th of November 2018, Section IV:
Approaches to International Uniformity on Cyber Policy, litra a.
56
Instead of just listing the already known crimes and warfare acts in the law
this approach makes it possible to take into account actions, which are not
yet regulated, but might be regulated in the future hence enabling staying a
head of the evolution of the law.
One could argue that one approach is better or preferred over the others.
However in the light of contract drafting being a way of reducing the risks of
unwanted scenarios and giving the contracting parties the optimal
possibilities of taking every relevant matter into account, the optimal
solution would be to use all three approaches. They don’t have to be
reflected in the final draft, but the process towards the final draft should
reflect considerations, when it comes to all three approaches.
Another way of limiting the risk of QCaaS being unlawfully used is by having
procedures for being able to identify the customer (KYC) as well as having
requirements that the customer must meet to make sure, the customer has
taken reasonable actions towards making sure, a hacker cannot get access to
the QCaaS through the customer.
Corresponding rationales arising from the three approaches can be used

when designing trade secret- or Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) clauses245
as well as competition- and customer clauses.
3.2.3 Lex Cryptographia, Lex Quantum and Digital Arbitration
When the code in a digital system follows the lex superior derogat legi
inferiori principle, and all written interpretations must be disregarded when
describing the code etc., the code can be described as lex cryptographia.246
Then, there is the possibility of a paradigm shift: From the rule of law 247 to
the rule of code.
More generally, it can be argued that the source code is lex cryptographia,
when the code is the sole basis for the management of man-made interests.
The management can be executed by using a digital contract, but also
artificial intelligence and other algorithms in general.
As quantum processors and qubits are also the subject of programming, and
thus source code, cf. section 3.2, there is basically nothing which suggests
245 Furthermore see Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June
2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their
unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure.
246 Decentralized Blockchain Technology and the Rise of Lex Cryptographia Wright, Aaron and De
Filippi, Primavera, (March 10, 2015).

247 See section 2.3.1.2.1 for further remarks on the rule of law.
57
that it should be possible to create yet another distinction in the paradigm
shift, which could be coined lex quantum.
However, the content of such a principle, and whether there is a basis for
such a distinction, is so far unresolved, whereby this should be further
elucidated.
It can then be considered if restored coherence in decoherent quantum

states, with thereby associated damage, may result in code that is based on
something else than computer coding, which constitutes code that follows
the lex superior-princip and therefore is lex quantum, compared with section
3.1.1.
Due to the arbitrary nature of the damage and thus the arbitrary result
thereof, it seems, although theoretically possible, to be practically
inappropriate, if the law or the content of an agreement was formed on the
basis of coincidence. This is further supported by the fact that, as far as the
author is aware, there is no demonstrable data on digital contracts being
formed on the basis of the principles of random number generators (RNG)
despite the fact that RNG is used in cryptography.248 249
As it appears from section 3.3, quantum information is more secure than

classical information. In addition there is the ”no-cloning theorem” after
which, the exact state of a qubit cannot be cloned.250 Where, within the
framework of lex cryptographia, there is a divergence between quantum
information and computer code or a "battle of forms"251 in relation to digital
agreements, lex quantum will then be that quantum information takes
precedence over the source code in a computer.
Initially lex quantum can be deduced as a special variant of the principle of

subjective interpretation, because there is a strengthened presumption that
one can see the real will/intention of the parties in the quantum information,
which is more difficult to manipulate than classical computer code. But, as
seen later in this section, the definition of lex quantum has a wider basis.
Due to the ”no-teleportation theorem” lex quantum, however, can not be

enforced in relation to digital contracts, in the same way as a smart
248For example, RC4 by Ron Rivest, which was invented in 1987 and among other things used to
protect internet traffic by SSL protocols, cf. Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2008: 28th Annual
International Cryptology Conference, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 17-21, 2008, p. 297.
249 See also, section 2.3.3.1.

250 “A Single Quantum cannot be cloned”, W. K. Wootters &; W. H. Zurek. Nature, volume 299, 1982,
pp. 802–803.
251 See as an example UNIDROIT Principles 2010, art. 2.1.22 (Battle of Forms).
58
contract252 or ricardian contract253 can be enforced digitally without the use
of middlemen.
Hereafter lex quantum can either be enforced by the courts or in relation to

e.g. a smart contract as a hard- or soft fork,254 which is enforced in the
blockchain255 by a human with the legal ground in smart laws.256 Moreover, it
cannot be denied that lex quantum can be enforced by digital/electronic
arbitration.257
Particularly with regard to digital arbitration, quantum information will play a

prominent role due to the ”no-cloning theorem”, as it follows from the New
York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
Awards(New York, 10th of June 1958), art. 4(1)(a) that the party applying for
recognition and enforcement shall, at the time of application, supply a ”duly
authenticated original award”.
A document containing classical information with a digital signature will

gradually not be in terms with the above mentioned condition in the New
York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
Awards, art. 4(1)(a), compared to the principle of functional equivalence in
the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce, compared with
UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce, art. 8,258 259 260 when the
quantum computer gradually gets more commercialized.
252 Smart contracts, Nick Szabo, 1994.

253 Financial Cryptography in 7 Layers, Ian Grigg, 1998 – 2000, the section titled “Value”. It is often
described that it was Ian Grigg who invented the Ricarcian contracts, however, Ian Grigg in "The
Ricardian Contract" himself indicated that the invention was in collaboration with Gary Howland.
254 A distinction can be made between hard fork, fork, soft fork, software fork and Git fork. For a more
detailed definition of the individual concepts, see ”Mastering Ethereum: Building Smart Contracts and
DApps”, Andreas M. Antonopoulos, Gavin Wood, O'Reilly Media, Inc., 13th of November 2018, XXIX
quick glossary.
255 Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System Satoshi Nakamoto, 2008, p. 2.
256 Inspired by the idea of smart cities, cf. Understanding Smart Cities: An integrative Framework, 2012,
45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, H. Chourabi, T. Nam, Shawn Walker etc.
Smart laws can supplement the written agreement, by being accepted by the entire digital ecosystem
and thereby regulate the individual digital contracts. Furthermore, smart laws can regulate the
relationship between the digital contracts and the digital system to which the contracts are a part of.
Smart Laws works in conjunction with the existing legislation based on a “terms of service”-principle,
whereby errors in smart contracts can be corrected, and data can be returned to the rightful owners.
The management of smart laws is done by a human being assigned the authority to evaluate the code
either ex officio, or at the request of a contracting party. The most prominent advantage of smart laws
is that jurisdiction does not become problematic, as immediate enforcement can occur without the
involvement of legal systems. However, smart laws must give way to laws implemented by the
appropriate legislative procedure.
257 United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Dispute Settlement, International
Commercial Arbitration, 5.9 Electronic Arbitration (now UNCTD).

258 Compared with UNCTD, p. 51 including note 101-103, where namely note 101 concerning art.
1371(2) in the French civil code is highlighted. It can particularly be criticized, however, that only a
digital signature is mentioned, but it is not further emphasized which technical specifications such a
59
The legal arguments regarding functional equivalence, which would
otherwise be found to support the adequacy of a digital signature, can be
progressively supporting the use of quantum information, since the rationale
for the digital signature in classical information does not appear in the
wording, but rather by interpretation.261 262
The principle of functional equivalence, whereby emphasis must be placed

on the functionality of the signature in connection with the conclusion of a
contract, in that the signature entails that a document remains unchanged
and can be authenticated,263 can also support the lex quantum principle as
prior defined in this section.
In addition, in support of the lex quantum principle, the functionality of

authentication can be put forward in connection to the legislative process
concerning statutory power, cf. the 22nd paragraph of the Danish
Constitution264, according to which the bill becomes an expression of the
king's use of power in accordance with the 3rd paragraph, 1st sentence of the
Danish Constitution, and thus is also a sort of authentication.265
A similar principle must be applicable in other legal systems than the Danish
one, as well as the principle of ratification in international law, cf. Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties,266 art. 2(1)(b).267
signature must live up to. Hereby it must be clear that it is not any digital signature, which is sufficient
to fulfil the criterion in New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
Awards, art. 4.
259 The principle comparison of art. 4 with art. 8, cf. UNCTD, p. 51 is justified, although it is explicitly
stated in UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce Guide to Enactment with 1996 with additional
article 5 bis as adopted in 1998, pp. 20ff. that the functional equivalence is only used in relation to the
Model Law’s art. 6 – 8, as it is also stated that the functional equivalence relates to the term "original",
which is also used in art. 4.
260 There may be deviations from this in the individual country’s lex arbitri, as the model law may be
deviated from, cf. EU-PIL, European Union Private International Law in Contract and Tort, Joseph
Lookofsky & Ketilbjørn Hertz, 1st Edition, 2009, p. 163.
261 Compared to Quantum Safe Cryptography and Security – An introduction, benefits enablers and
challenges, ETSI World Class Standards, ETSI White Paper No. 8, June 2015 (now QSCS), section 6.4.
262 Similar considerations would apply to the principle of “authentication” in REGULATION (EU) No
910/2014 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 23 July 2014 on electronic
identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing
Directive 1999/93/EC, art. 3 (5).
263 UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce Guide to Enactment from 1996 with additional
article 5 bis as adopted in 1998, s. 20.

264 Danish Law no. 169 of 05/06/1953.
265 Compared with Henrik Zahle, Dansk forfatningsret, 1. Institutioner og regulering, 2. Regering,
forvaltning og dom, 1st Edition, 2014, p. 166.

266 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, United Nations(VCLT), Treaty Series, vol. 1155, p. 331,
Vienna, 23rd of May 1969.

267
Compared with River Oder, Permanent Court of International Justice, Collection of Judgements and
Advisory Opinions (PCIJ Series A), No. 23 (1929), p. 20 about a presumption that rules of international
law are only binding by virtue of ratification.
60
3.2.4 Decoherence
As stated in section 3.1.1 decoherence268 may occur whereby, at least
temporarily, data might be lost. In some circumstances, it is possible to
recover coherence in the decoherent quantum states, however, in a damaged
condition, although theoretically it is possible to achieve perfect coherence
under certain circumstances.269
When decoherence occurs the quantum computer merely acts as a classical

computer, and the performance properties of the service thus do not
correspond to the contracts, and is thereby a fundamental breach as a main
principle.270
It is thus of crucial importance for the customer that instances of

decoherence are regulated in the parties' agreement, which can involve the
following situations that are not exhaustive:
- The specific risk of decoherence, as well as how much of the contract

period the customer can expect that there will not be decoherence,
whereby the customer actually has access to a Quantum Processing
Unit (QPU).271
- What measures the service provider has made before the conclusion
of the agreement to prevent the occurrence of decoherence.
- Which of the parties carries the risk of lost data, respectively the loss
of the QPU or the repair costs of decoherence. This includes, in
particular, whether the service provider is aware of the type of data
used by the customer, and how the customer is using the QPU on the
basis of the legal reasoning behind the principle of casus mixtus cum
culpa at the conclusion of the contract. This must be weighed against
the service provider's knowledge of specific application methods that
increase the risk of decoherence.
The considerations must furthermore include, whether the service

provider has an obligation to store the customer's data.
268"On the Interpretation of Measurement in Quantum Theory", H. Dieter Zeh, Foundations of Physics,
vol. 1, no. 1, 1970, pp. 69–76.
269Recovering coherence from decoherence: A method of quantum state reconstruction, H. Moya-

Cessa, J.A. Roversi, S.M. Dutra, A. Vidiella-Barranco. See also Inverting Quantum Decoherence by
Classical Feedback from the Environment, Francesco Buscemi, Giulio Chiribella, and Giacomo Mauro
D’Ariano, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 090501 – Published 23rd of August 2005, p. 1
270AOQCS, p. 21
271The equivalent of a CPU in a classical computer, cf. the CPU-QPU execution model in: Keith A. Britt
and Travis S. Humble, 2017. High-Performance Computing with Quantum Processing Units ACM J.
Emerg. Technol. Comput. Syst. 1, 1, Article 1 (February 2017), 13 pages, section 2.
61
- How long the service provider has to rectify the specific breach,
before the breach is fundamental and can justify the termination of
the parties' agreement.
It should be noted that the parties should as a main principle not take into
account Heisenberg's uncertainty principle,272 after which the position and
impulse of a particle cannot be determined at exactly the same time. This
does not make it more difficult for the service provider to discover
decoherent quantum states in a qubit.273
3.2.5 The Use of Digital Contracts as Contract Form of QCaaS-

Contracts
It can be considered whether, instead of a classical contract, the service

provider can simply use a digital contract when entering into contracts
regarding QCaaS. Therefore, initially the digital contract must be defined.
A distinction can be made between 3 types of digital contracts:274
- Smart contracts where the contract is only code, see note 238.
- Ricardian contracts where the contract is both code and plain writing,
see note 239.
- Contracts which are either a ricardian contract or a smart contract,

where there are also clauses added in plain writing(natural language) which
cannot be enforced by computer code.
Max Raskin has incorrectly defined smart contracts as "an agreement whose
execution is automated".275 However, no distinguishment is thereby made
between smart contracts and ricardian contracts.
Specifically regarding smart contracts State of Arizona, HB2417 and State of

Tennessee, HB 1507 fairly similarly states that a smart contract in connection
with blockchain is:
272 Heisenberg, W., The physical content of quantum kinematics and mechanics. In Quantum Theory
and Measurement (eds Wheeler, J. A. and Zurek, W. H.), Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA,
1983, pp. 62–84 [originally published: Z. Phys., 1927, 43(3–4), 172–198], cf. Heisenberg’s original
derivation of the uncertainty principle and its universally valid reformulations, Masanao Ozawa,
current science, volume 109, no. 11, 10th of December 2015, p. 1, note 1.
273 Quantum Optical Tests of Complementarity, Berthold-Georg Englert, Marlan O. Scully & Herbert
Walther, Nature, Vol 351, 9th of May 1991, pp. 111–116.

274 For a further explanation of smart contracts and ricardian contracts, see section 3.2.3.
275 THE LAW AND LEGALITY OF SMART CONTRACTS, Max Raskin, 1 GEO. L. TECH. REV. 305 (2017), p.
309.
62
“An event-driven program, with state, that runs on a distributed,
decentralized, shared and replicated ledge and that can take custody over
and instruct transfer of assets on that ledger.”
Smart contracts can, however, also be programmed as a state machine

(FSA/FSM),276 which, in addition to being dependent on an input, also
depends on the specific state.
It is impossible to say anything unambiguous as to whether smart contracts,

which constitutes state machines, would be included in the term "event-
driven program", when the term is incorporated into the definition of smart
contracts. The preparatory work of the law and circumvention considerations
must be weighed against the circumstances of the specific case.
A smart contract can then optimally be defined as a digital code, which

constitutes a legally binding agreement that is automatically executed, when
the code does not also constitute plain writing (natural language).
Digital contracts, which are linked to the blockchain system, are, contrary to
classical contracts, not an expression of the will or trust between the parties,
but rather the mistrust of the parties to intermediaries.277 By translating the
contract into code, the result can be triggered automatically when the
conditions are met by using if-statements like the following pseudo code: "If
X happens - then Y is the result".
This ex ante input/output communication is also the method used by

virtually any information system that processes data.278
The decisive factor as to whether a digital contract exists is then the

processing's relation to the legal method.
A digital contract can then be defined as a digital code that constitutes a

legally binding agreement, which is automatically executed.
Unlike digital contracts there are also digital codes, which constitute the
legally relevant facts in relation to the legal method or agreements that are
not automatically executed.
Digital contracts can also be used in a number of digital systems and not just
blockchain, tangle (DAG)279 or similar future systems. Therefore, it is most
276 Finite State Machines, David R. Wright, CSC216, 2005.

277 Compared with Bitcoin: A Peer-To-Peer Cash System, Satoshi Nakamoto, 2008.
278 In computer science referred to as conditional statements, conditional expressions or conditional
constructs.
279 The Tangle, Serguei Popov, 30th of April 2018, version 1.4.3, pp. 1-7. Also notice section 5 regarding
resistance to quantum computers, where it is stated that a quantum computer would be 17 billion
times more efficient at mining than a classical computer, but tangle is better protected against a
63
appropriate not to define digital contracts in relation to a specific system
type.
When using digital contracts in relation to QCaaS, it should be noted that the
”no teleport theorem” is irrelevant, because one can make time recordings in
order to determine the price the customer has to pay in the classic
computer’s Application Programming Interface (API).280
However, it is most appropriate that the parties to the agreement also make
an agreement in writing. Hereby it is ensured that the digital contract gets
the content that the parties have intended, and the parties' subjective
circumstances at the conclusion of the digital contract are clarified. The
written agreement also allows for the use of clauses that cannot be
converted into computer code such as arbitration clauses, etc.
3.2.6 The Development of Industry Standards and Corporate

Social Responsibility (CSR)
QCaaS might be used by online content-sharing service providers after article
17 of the Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 26
March 2019 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2019/… of the
European Parliament and of the Council on copyright and related rights in
the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC.
Regarding the situation where an online content-sharing service provider
does not get the authorisation after article 17(1), the online content-sharing
service providers shall be liable for unauthorised acts of communication to
the public, including making available to the public, of copyright-protected
works and other subject matter, unless the service providers demonstrate
that they have inter alia made, in accordance with high industry standards of
professional diligence, best efforts to ensure the unavailability of specific
works and other subject matter for which the right holders have provided the
service providers with the relevant and necessary information, cf. art.
17(4)(b).
It is difficult to give an answer as to when QCaaS would be the high industry

standard of professional diligence, and which requirements the QCaaS would
have to live up to in order to provide a service that would make the online
content-sharing service providers able to comply with art. 17(4)(b).
Due to the few QCaaS service providers, however, the service providers are
able to impact the industry standard not only with their technological
quantum computer than blockchain. However section 5, note 34 makes it clear that the premise about
the quantum computer’s computational power is hypothetically constructed as of 30th of April 2018.
280 In pseudo code the solution would be something along the lines of: ”If X amounts of time units are
registered in the API, then Y amount of money will be paid from the costumer to the service provider.”
64
advances, but also with their contracts and the way they make the QCaaS
accessible to their costumers.
The contracts should reflect these considerations from a Corporate Social

Responsibility (CSR)281-point-of-view, even if the contracts are not made for
online content-sharing service providers, as these contracts will indirectly
contribute to the development of the understanding of industry standards in
a legal perspective.
It is definitely more than possible that the principle of “high industry

standards” or its equivalent will be used in a variety of other legal contexts
concerning technology, cf. section 3.3. Therefore being able to impact the
way this term is interpreted with the writing of contracts due to the
contract’s description of the service can be beneficial for the QCaaS service
provider as well as the global society. This is dependent on the service
provider’s ability to make long term considerations concerning all of the
service provider’s contracts during the quantum computing era, instead of
having an isolated view on each of the contracts. See section 3.3 for the
impact on the “high industry standards”/ “state of the art” concerning the
technological aspect of the legal terms.
Such long term macro perspective on the contracts enables the emergence
of more durable business models as well and might reduce the challenges for
quantum safety.282
In this relation it should be noted that aims of purely economic nature

cannot justify a barrier to the fundamental principles behind the single
market.283 Not living up to “high industry standards” or “state of the art” can
therefore not be justified merely by the reasoning that it is too expensive for
the service provider.
281 Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategy, Communication, Governance, Rasche, A., Morsing, M., &
Moon, J. (red.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press(2017), 529 p.
282QSCS, section 6.2 where it is deemed a challenge for quantum safety.
283 Case C-398/95, SETTG v Ypourgos Ergasias [1997] ECR I-3091, para. 23 and Case C-158/96, Kohll,
[1998] ECR I-1931, para. 41, as commented on by Advocate General Jacobs in his Opinion in Case C-
147/03, Commission v Austria, [2005] ECR I-5969, para. 31.
65
3.3 Quantum Encryption
Encryption plays a prominent role in data protection 284 as well as in relation
to human rights, where the right to communication privacy is given by Article
12 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Article 8
of the European Convention on Human Rights.285
In GDPR, recital 83 it is stated that in order to maintain security and to

prevent processing in infringement of this Regulation, the controller or
processor should evaluate the risks inherent in the processing and
implement measures to mitigate those risks, such as encryption. Those
measures should ensure an appropriate level of security, including
confidentiality, taking into account the “state of the art” and the costs of
implementation in relation to the risks and the nature of the personal data to
be protected.
It follows that there will be a smooth transition, after which quantum

encryption will be "state of the art" when it comes to encryption within
several practical applications.286 This evolution will be assisted by the
gradually extended use of QCaaS.
This viewpoint is further confirmed by the fact that the European

Commission expressed regarding their digital single market strategy for
Europe that the rules will be formulated in the light of the digital revolution
thus enhancing the use of digital technologies.287 EU also wants to maximize
the growth potential of the digital economy as well and has stated that only
1.7% of EU enterprises make full use of so called advanced digital
technologies, which includes cloud computing.288 Therefore QCaaS will
definitely be included in EU’s perspectives on the digital single market
strategy for Europe. See section 3.2.1.
The European Commission also wants Europe’s global leadership in research

to turn into a future world-class European Quantum Industry289, and
284 Encryption is expressedly mentioned in GDPR, art. 6, stk. 4, litra e, GDPR, art. 32, stk. 1, litra a, GDPR
art. 34, stk. 3, litra a, as well as recital 83 where it is expressedly mentioned that
285 For further information of this perspective on quantum encryption see: The Impact of Quantum
Technologies on the EU’s Future Policies, Part 2 Quantum communications: from science to policies,
Adam M. Lewis, Martino Travagnin, JRC Science for Policy Report, 2018, section 4.5.
286 QSCS, p. 5 and section 6.4.
287 European Commission, COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe, Brussels, 6.5.2015,
COM(2015) 192 final(now DSMSE), p. 2 and p. 16.
288 DSMSE, p. 13, note 15.
289 COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT on QUANTUM TECHNOLOGIES Accompanying the
document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE

COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE
REGIONS, European Cloud Initiative, Building a competitive data and knowledge economy in Europe,
European Commission, {COM(2016) 178 final}, Brussels, 19.4.2016, SWD(2016) 107 final(now SWDQT).
66
acknowledges that quantum computing is the top of high-end of computing
technology, including exascale high-performance computing. Furthermore
the European Commission states that data security and safety will be
changed by the quantum computer as widely used data-encryption
techniques will be vulnerable to attacks from the quantum computer.
Meanwhile the quantum computer can protect data in a completely secure
way that makes eavesdropping fundamentally impossible. 290
However this is dependent on the quantum cryptographic protocols

implementation to not deviate significantly from the idealised models used
for the security analysis given by ETSI e.g. due to the legitimate user’s local
equipment. 291 This can be enforced using privacy amplification and
modifications to hardware and protocols.292
By fundamentally impossible the European Commission probably means

impossible in theory given the ideal human variables. When it comes to the
breach of data security “treachery is the primary way”,293 and quantum
technology doesn’t reduce this risk. This also includes the use of social
engineering 294 based on the 6 fundamental principles of cognitive bias 295 or
psychographic analysis.296
Specifically highlighted by the European Commission is the European

Telecommunications Standards Institute working group(ETSI) when it comes
to initiative on international standardisation regarding quantum key
distribution and quantum safe cryptography. 297
The use of quantum encryption as being “state of the art” or “high industry
standards”, cf. section 3.2, will therefore with predominant likeliness be
interpreted somewhat in accordance with the standards given by ETSI as well
290 SWDQT, section 1 ”What are quantum technologies?”

291 ETSI White Paper No. 27, Implementation Security of Quantum Cryptography Introduction,
challenges, solutions, First edition – July 2018(now WP27), p. 7. See the specific examples of attacks
and typical counter measures in WP27 p. 14 and forward which are listed as Trojan-horse attack, multi-
photon emission, imperfect coding, phase correlation between signal pulses, bright-light attack,
efficiency mismatch and time-shift attack, back-flash attack, manipulation of local oscillator reference.
292 WP27, p. 7.
293 As Seth Lloyd, Professor of Mechanical Engineering at MIT and Director of the W.M. Keck Center for
Extreme Quantum Information Theory (xQIT) stated in Stix, Gary. “Best-Kept Secrets”, Scientific
American, 20 December 2004, p. 83.
294 Edward L. Bernays, The Engineering of Consent, The Annals of the American Academy of Political
and Social Science, Volume 250, Issue 1, 1st of March 1947, p. 114.
295 Robert B. Cialdini, “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion”, 1984.
296 Psychographics: A Critical Review, William D. Wells, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 12, No. 2
(May, 1975), pp. 196-213.
297 SWDQT, section 4 “Innovation in Quantum Technologies: Now or Never?” as well as SWDQT, note
17.
67
as in accordance with possible certifications of quantum cryptographic
products.298
The current standards will be reviewed below as an overview to provide

insight into the legal interpretation of what “state of the art” or “high
industry standards” entails, when it comes to the use quantum encryption.
3.3.1 Quantum Computing’s Impact on Cryptography

Classical cryptography relies on certain computational problems like
factoring that are difficult to solve. Because quantum computers are able to
perform these computational tasks faster than classical computers using
Shor’s algorithm and Grover’s algorithm, quantum computing jeopardizes
the security of the information that is encrypted. 299 The quantum computing
algorithms either uses reverse calculating or brute force. 300 See section 1.2.4.
Some encryptions however are qualified as “quantum safe” which means the
encryptions are well studied and resists attacks using all known quantum
algorithms at a given time301 as well as future algorithmic and computational
advances including the emergence of quantum computers.302 This can be
achieved when the cipher can adapt to a quantum attack by increasing its
key size to prevent the vulnerability hence outstripping Moore’s Law 303 or by
offering security guaranteed by physical laws.304 The physical laws are the
Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, the “no-cloning theorem” as well as
entanglement based Quantum Key Distribution(QKD).305 See also section 3.2.
Usually variants of RSA, ECC, Diffie-Hellman and DSA security protocols are
used for secure e-mail(S/MIME), Virtual Private Networks(VPN), Secure Web
Browsing(SSL/TLS) etc., which means they can be broken by Shor’s algorithm,
since they are based on integer factorisation and discrete logarithms. 306
298 WP27, p. 8.
299 QSCS, p. 10.
300 QSCS, p. 11. It is not explicitly called brute force, but ”guessing”. However brute force would
probably be the appropriate term, since its qualified guesses trying all the possible solutions.
301 QSCS, p. 13-14 and p. 17 with the examples of AES(Advanced Encryption Standard)-128 and AES-256
first time announced in “Announcing the ADVANCED ENCRYPTION STANDARD (AES)”, Federal
Information Processing Standards Publication 197, 26th of November, 2001 issued by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) after approval by the Secretary of Commerce pursuant to
Section 5131 of the Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-106)
and the Computer Security Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-235). Along with AES-128 and AES-256, AES-
192 is also included.
302 WP27, p. 7.
303 Cramming more components onto integrated circuits, Gordon E. Moore, Electronics, Volume 38,
Number 8, 19th of April 19, 1965, p. 3.

304 QSCS, p. 13-14 and p. 17.
305 QSCS, p. 18.
306 QSCS, pp. 16-17.
68
However in some cases it is possible to upgrade these security protocols to
make them quantum safe.307
State of the art as of June 2015 was Vernam’s One Time Pad308 309, Wegman-
Carter Authentication310, AES-128, AES-192 and AES-256 as well as methods
implementing Quantum Key Distribution(QKD) that offers security
guaranteed by physical laws.311 The security guaranteed by physical laws was
revised as of June 2018 to include312 quantum random number generation313,
closed group digital signatures314, long-term secure data storage315 and
multi-party secure computation316, which are robust against future
algorithmic and computational advances, including the emergence of
quantum computers.317 This exemplifies the speed of technological advances
and how fast the state of the art principle changes which makes an expansive
dynamic interpretation a must.318
Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle makes it physically impossible for an

eavesdropper to breach the security of QKD invisibly and the breach can be
detected with the exact timing as well as the information the eavesdropper
got about the shared key.319
Due to the “no-cloning theorem” an eavesdropper must attack in real time as

the information can’t be duplicated and saved for later decryption taking
advantage of the extra time the eavesdropper gets at his disposal. 320
307 QSCS, section 4.

308Communication Theory of Secrecy Systems, C. Shannon, Bell System Technical Journal 28 (4), 656
(1949).
309 OTP was specified for the first time by Miller, Frank, cf. Telegraphic code to insure privacy and
secrecy in the transmission of telegrams, C.M. Cornwell, 1882. Later OTP was patented as U.S. Patent
1,310,719A issued 22nd of July 22 1919 to Gilbert S. Vernam.
310 Universal classes of hash functions, J. L. Carter, M. N. Wegman, Journal of Computer and System
Sciences, 18 (2), 1979, pp. 143-154.

311 QSCS, p. 18.
312 It is unclear if Vernam’s One Time Pad, Wegman-Carter Authentication, AES-128, AES-192 and AES-
256 are excluded from being state of the art as of june 2018, however I don’t find that is the case, since
the use of computational complexity as a cryptographic method is mentioned in WP27, p. 7.
313 Quantum random number generators, X. Ma, X. Yuan, Z. Cao, B. Qi. and Z. Zhang, Npj Quantum
Information 2, 16021 (2016).

314 Experimental demonstration of quantum digital signatures using phase-encoded coherent states of
light, P.J. Clarke et al., Nat. Commun. 3, 1174 (2012).

315 LINCOS: A Storage System Providing Long-Term Integrity, Authenticity and Confidentiality, J. Braun,
J. A. Buchmann, D. Demirel, M. Geihs, M. Fujiwara, S. Moriai, M. Sasaki and A. Waseda, AsiaCCS, 2017,
pp. 461-468.
316 D. Unruh, “Universally composable quantum multi-party computation”, In Advances in Cryptology—
EUROCRYPT 2010, 486 (2010).

317 WP27, p. 7.
318 For an analysis of the future evolution of the quantum computer until 2050 see ETSI Group Report
“Quantum-Safe Cryptography (QSC); Limits to Quantum Computing applied to symmetric key sizes”,
ETSI GR QSC 006 V1.1.1 (2017-02).
319 QSCS, pp. 18-19.
320 QSCS, p. 19.
69
3.3.2 Quantum Key Distribution (QKD)
Understanding the best practices in a simplified manner is possible with the
use of the principles of QKD which are widely applicable to other quantum
cryptographic methods. 321 322
QKD relies on sending and detecting quantum light signals(photons)

interpreted as conventional data and the probability of leakage or partial
leakage to an eavesdropper can be determined for each QK.
As an example the BB84 protocol323 has a failure probability which is: < 10 to
the power of -10 and will be used in the following to explain QKD. 324
The BB84 protocol encodes the information in non-orthogonal325 quantum

states, such as single photons with polarization directions 0, 45, 90, and 135
degrees.326 This is also referred to as conjugate coding based on Heisenberg’s
uncertainty principle, where classical information can be encoded into
conjugate quantum bases where the polarizations are either rectilinear or
diagonal and can be used to encode classical bits.327
The effect hereof is that the transmissions cannot be read or copied reliably
by an eavesdropper ignorant of certain key information used in forming the
transmission. The leakage can’t even happen partially without it being likely
to be detected by the channel’s legitimate users.328
When QKD is performed between the parties A and B, the party A chooses a
random bit string and a random sequence of polarisation bases that will be
sent to B as photons. A horizontal or 45-degree photon is a binary 0 and
vertical or 135-degree photon is a binary 1. 329
When B receives the photons B randomly tries to measure the polarization

independent of A whether to interpret the sent photon as a binary 0 or 1. All
information in the photon is lost every time B tries to measure the
321 WP27, p. 9.
322 See also the other ETSI GR QSC 001 V1.1.1 (2016-07), ETSI GR QSC 003 V1.1.1 (2017-02), ETSI GR
QSC 004 V1.1.1 (2017-03), ETSI TR 103 570 V1.1.1 (2017-10), ETSI TR 103 617 V1.1.1 (2018-09) for a
more detailed explanation of the use of quantum encryption to more specific technologies and its
various applications.
323 C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard. Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing. In
Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing, volume
175, page 8. New York, 1984 (now PKDCT).
324 WP27, p. 11.
325 Meaning not 90 degrees when perceiving the qubit as a vector.
326 PKDCT, p. 7.
327 Quantum Cryptography Beyond Quantum Key Distribution, Anne Broadbent and Christian
Schaffner, Cornell University, Designs, Codes and Cryptography (2015), last revised 18 Dec 2015 (v2),
pp. 10-11, as well as S. Wiesner, Conjugate coding, SCM SIGACT News, 15(1), 1983, pp. 78-88.
328 PKDCT, p. 7.
329 PKDCT, p. 9.
70
polarization. Therefore B will only obtain meaningful data from half of the
photons that reaches B that B measures correct330 while some photons will
be lost during the transition.331
After this process has occurred, another process begins using a public
communication channel, which is susceptible to eavesdropping, but not
injection or alteration of the messages between A and B. In this following
process A and B determines:
1) which photons were successfully received by B thus not lost during

the transition and afterwards,
2) which photons were then received by B with the correct basis and
therefore had their polarization measured correctly by B, without
expressing that the photon is representing a binary 0 or 1.*
Given that the quantum transmission was undisturbed A and B should agree
on the bits encoded by the photons. 332
Due to the mix of rectilinear and diagonal photons during the quantum
transmission the eavesdropper is carrying the risk of altering the
transmission which would lead to the transmission not being agreed on
between A and B. The eavesdropper can only get up to ½ bits of information
(b ≤ ½) from trying to measure the polarization.333
*A and B can therefore test for eavesdropping by publicly comparing some of

the bits on which they think they should agree on. 334
If all the comparisons are agreed upon, A and B concludes that the quantum
transmission has at least been free of significant eavesdropping. The
quantum transmission can hereafter be used as a one-time pad (OTP) for
subsequent secure communication over the public channel. After the use of
the OTP the process is repeated. 335
330 There is a 50% chance of getting the binary 1 or 0 correct.

331 PKDCT, p. 9.
332 PKDCT, p. 9.
333 PKDCT, p. 9.
334 PKDCT, p. 9. It is proposed that 1/3 of the bits positions should be used in this comparison, so that
eavesdropping on more than a few photons is unlikely to escape. Whether this would be statistically
correct however is not verified.
335 PKDCT, p. 9.
71
Epilogue
I want to thank all of my friends, who wanted to remain anonymous, for the
support and for showing me how fascinating computer science and physics
are.
Furthermore, I want to thank all of the people, who did not think it was
possible for me to write this book. If most people thought it was possible, it
would not be something I would be interested in doing. I definitely needed
that indicator to make sure, what I wanted to achieve had the right altitude
and could actually make other people believe that they can achieve things,
they and their surroundings think are impossible.
I also want to thank everyone, who had the sort of success I wanted and
made resources to help me and many others. Some of you even answered a
lot of my questions and gave me opportunities, when I was trying to figure
out how to do better. I hope in some way I paid all of you back by writing this
book and continuing that legacy of trying to help other people, who want to
improve themselves.
Last, but definitely not least, I want to thank you for reading this book. I am
definitely grateful for creating something you would enjoy reading. It is not
something I take for granted at all.
If you have any comments, questions, maybe you created something or you
have other reasons for wanting to reach out to me, I am sure you will be able
to figure out how to write me. I will do my best to reply in a respectful
manner.
72
Appendix A: Sources of Law
73
U.S. Law
Laws
26 U.S.C. § 6065
26 U.S.C. § 7206(1)
Computer Security Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-235)
California Consumer Privacy Act, Bill No. 375, Chapter 55, An act to add Title
1.81.5 (commencing with Section 1798.100) to Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil
Code, relating to privacy
H.R.6227 - National Quantum Initiative Act
Uniform Commercial Code(UCC)
Legal Literature
Announcing the ADVANCED ENCRYPTION STANDARD (AES), Federal
Information Processing Standards Publication 197, 26th of November, 2001
issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) after
approval by the Secretary of Commerce pursuant to Section 5131 of the
Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-
106).
Justice Byron White and the Argument that the Greater Includes the Lesser,
Michael Herz, BYU Law Review, Volume 1994, Issue 2, Article 2
Legal Reasoning, Phoebe C. Ellsworth, The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking

and Reasoning, edited by K. J. Holyoak and R. G. Morrison Jr., 685-704. New
York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005.
Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning,

Wesley Hohfeld, 23 Yale L. J. 16 (1913).
The Supreme Court’s Use of Hypothetical Questions at Oral Argument, E.

Barrett Prettyman Jr., Catholic University Law Review, Volume 33, Issue 3,
Spring 1984, article 4.
Tales from the Cryptocurrency: On Bitcoin, Square Pegs and Round Holes, [49
New Eng. L. Rev. 121 (2014)], section IV.
74
Use and Limits of Syllogistic Reasoning in Briefing Cases, Wilson R. Huhn,
Akron Law Publications, January 2002.
Case Law
The Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit’s court decision in State Street
bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, inc. (1998)
The Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit’s court decision in AT&T Corp. v.
Excel Communications (1999)
E.U. Law
Laws, Working Documents, Guidelines etc.
Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on
the Functioning of the European Union 2012/C 326/01.
Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24

October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing
of personal data and on the free movement of such data.
Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12

July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of
privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and
electronic communications).
REGULATION (EU) No 910/2014 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF

THE COUNCIL of 23 July 2014 on electronic identification and trust services
for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive
1999/93/EC
Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8

June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business
information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and
disclosure.
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of

27 April 2016 (General Data Protection Regulation - "GDPR").
Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6

July 2016 concerning measures for a high common level of security of
75
network and information systems across the Union, OJ L 194, 19.7.2016, pp.
1–30.
Directive (EU) 2019/… of the European Parliament and of the Council on

copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending
Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC
Better Regulation Toolbox, Tool #15 “Risk Assessment and Management” as

a result of Inter-institutional Agreement between the European Parliament,
the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better
Law-Making, Official Journal of the European Union, L 123, volume 59, 12th of
May 2016.
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT on QUANTUM TECHNOLOGIES

Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC
AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS European
Cloud Initiative Building a competitive data and knowledge economy in
Europe. SWD/2016/0107 final.
European Commission’s Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI, 8th of April 2019
as a part of EU’s digital single market strategy.
European Commission, COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND
SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, A Digital Single
Market Strategy for Europe, Brussels, 6.5.2015, COM(2015) 192 final.
”Opinion 05/2014 on Anonymisation Techniques”, Article 29 Dataprotection

Working Party, adopted on 10 April 2014.
Case Law
Case 244/80, Fogalia
Case 14/83, Von Colson
Case C-398/95, SETTG v Ypourgos Ergasias
Case C-158/96, Kohll, [1998] ECR I-1931, para. 41, as commented on by

Advocate General Jacobs in his Opinion in Case C-147/03, Commission v
Austria, [2005] ECR I-5969, para. 31.
Case C-379/98, PreussenElektra
76
Case C-390/99, Canal Satélite Digital
Case C-458/06, Courmet Classic
Case C-82/13, Regione Abruzzo
Case C-264/14, Hedqvist
Case C-72/15, Rosneft
Case C-648/16, Fontana
U.K. Law
Perjury act 1911, chapter 6 1 and 2 Geo 5 with later modifications and
amendments by the Criminal Justice Act 1967 (c. 80), s. 89(2), Criminal
Justice Act 1948 (c. 58), s. 1(1), Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 (c. 43), s. 106(2)
and Civil Partnership Act 2004 (c. 33), ss. 80(4), 263(2); S.I. 2005/3175, art.
2(1), Sch. 1.
The UK Ministry of Justice, CPR - Rules and Directions, Part 60 – Technology

and Construction Court Claims, PRACTICE DIRECTION 60 – TECHNOLOGY AND
CONSTRUCTION COURT CLAIMS
Danish Law
Laws, Legal Literature etc.
LOV nr 169 af 05/06/1953 Danmarks Riges Grundlov (Grundloven), lov nr.

169 af 05. juni 1953
Møntloven, lov nr. 817 af 21. december 1988
L 422 af den 6. juni 2005 (LF 129 2004/2005 om udarbejdelse af

skattemæssigt årsregnskab i fremmed valuta)
Bogføringsvejledning, Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsen, juni 1999
77
Legal Literature
Alf Ross, Om ret og retfærdighed – en indførelse i den analytiske retsfilosofi,

April 1953
Eva Smith, Vidnebeviset, En vurdering af afhøringsmetoder og

vidneforklaringer, Gads Forlag, 1986
Peter Blume in UfR 1987B.67 ”Ekspertsystemer”
Peter Blume in UfR 1992B.193 ”Kunstig intelligens og juridisk metode”
Bernhard Gomard in UfR 1993B.385 ”Juraen under forandring og udvikling”
Peter Blume, Juridisk metodelære – En indføring i rettens og juraens verden,

3rd Edition, 2004
Lærebog i obligationsret I - Ydelsen Beføjelser, Mads Bryde Andersen og

Joseph Lookofsky, 3. udgave, 2010
Henrik Udsen and Peter Blume in UfR 2011B.42/1 ”Persondataretten – nu og i

fremtiden”
Retsstiftende passivitet, David Moalem
Case Law
SKM2014.226.SR
International law
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, United Nations(VCLT), Treaty
Series, vol. 1155, p. 331, Vienna, 23rd of May 1969.
UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce Guide to Enactment from

1996 with additional article 5 bis as adopted in 1998.
Anticipatory Breach under the United Nations Convention on Contracts for

the International Sale of Goods, Mercédeh Azeredo da Silveira, Nordic
Journal of Commercial Law, Issue 2005 #2.
78
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Dispute Settlement,
International Commercial Arbitration, 5.9 Electronic Arbitration,
UNCTAD/EDM/Misc.232/Add.20.
EU-PIL, European Union Private International Law in Contract and Tort,

Joseph Lookofsky & Ketilbjørn Hertz, 1st Edition, 2009.
United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of

Goods(CISG), UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE
LAW, United Nations, New York, November 2010.
Other Legal Literature

A Neural Network-based Law Machine: The Problem of Legitimacy, David
R.Warner Jr., Law, Computers & Artificial Intelligence, Volume 2, No. 2, 1993.
A Quantum Leap in International Law on Cyberwarfare: An Analysis of

International Cooperation with Quantum Computing on the Horizon, Dominic
Rota, 8th of November 2018.
A Quantum Leap?: The potential legal implications of the quantum

computing revolution, Andrew Joint, Commercial technology, 1st of October
2018.
An Introduction to Legal Reasoning, Edward H. Levi, The University of

Chicago Law Review, volume 15, number 3, spring 1948.
Artificial Intelligence, Expert Systems and Law, Richard E. Susskind, The

Denning Law Journal, Volume 5, No. 1(1990).
Artificial Neural Networks and Legal Categorization, Filipe Borges, Raoul

Borges, Danièle Bourcier, Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, Jurix
2003: The Sixteenth Annual Conference, IOS Press, 2003.
Cloud Standards Customer Council, Practical Guide to Cloud Service

Agreements, version 2.0 of April 2015.
Commercializing Legal Neural Networks, Dan Hunter, Warwick Electronic Law

Journals, Journal of Information Law & Tehnology(JILT), 1996(2).
Comparative Law, Uwe Kischel, Oxford University Press, 21st of February

2019, pp. 424-425 and Use and Limits of Syllogistic Reasoning in Briefing
Cases, Wilson R. Huhn, Akron Law Publications, January 2002.
79
Decentralized Blockchain Technology and the Rise of Lex Cryptographia
Wright, Aaron and De Filippi, Primavera, (March 10, 2015).
Defining legal risk, Tobias Mahler, paper presented at the conference

“Commercial Contracting for Strategic Advantage – Potentials and
Prospects”, Turku University of Applied Sciences 2007, published in the
Conference Proceedings on pages 10-31.
Gov2Vec: Learning Distributed Representations of Institutions and Their

Legal Text, John J. Nay, Proceedings of the Empirical Methods in Natural
Language Processing Workshop on NLP and Computational Social
Science, 49–54, Association for Computational Linguistics as well as Nay, J. J.
(2017, Forthcoming). “Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning
for Legal Text.” in D. M. Katz, R. Dolin & M. Bommarito (Eds.), Legal
Informatics, Cambridge University Press and “Understanding Legal Meaning
Through Word Embeddings.”, Douglas Rice which is still under review at the
current moment.
Introduction to Legal Method, John Hynes Farrar, Anthony M. Dugdale,

Sweet & Maxwell, 1984.
Justice Byron White and the Argument that the Greater Includes the Lesser,
Michael Herz, BYU Law Review, Volume 1994, Issue 2, Article 2.
Law and Logic: a Review from an Argumentation Perspective, Henry Prakken

and Giovanni Sartor, 19th of August 2015.
Legal knowledge based systems JURIX 94: The Foundation for Legal
Knowledge Systems, Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande, 1994.
Legal Method and Reasoning, Sharon Hanson, 1st Edition, 30th of June 2003.
Ellsworth, Phoebe C. "Legal Reasoning." In The Cambridge Handbook of

Thinking and Reasoning, edited by K. J. Holyoak and R. G. Morrison Jr., 685-
704. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005.
Legal Research: how to Find and Understand the Law (LEGAL SKILL SERIES),
1st Edition, 16th of November, 1993.
D. Hunter, Looking for Law in all the Wrong Places: Legal Theory and Legal
Neural Networks, in: A. Soeteman (eds.).
Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning,

Wesley Hohfeld, 23 Yale L. J. 16 (1913).
80
THE LAW AND LEGALITY OF SMART CONTRACTS, Max Raskin, 1 GEO. L. TECH.
REV. 305 (2017).
The Rule of Law, Tom Bingham, Penguin Books, 2010.
The Use and Limits of Deductive Logic in Legal Reasoning, Wilson Huhn,
Santa Clara Law Review, Volume 42, 1st of January 2002, pp. 813-862.
The Uses and Abuses of Neural Networks in Law, Michael Aikenhead, Santa
Clara High Tech. L.J.31(1996), Volume 12, Issue 1, article 2.
Understanding Smart Cities: An integrative Framework, 2012, 45th Hawaii

International Conference on System Sciences, H. Chourabi, T. Nam, Shawn
Walker etc.
81

Quantum Computing - Quantum Leaps in Legal Method, Nick Sherigian PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Quantum Computing - Quantum Leaps in Legal Method, Nick Sherigian PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Nick Sherigian

Quantum Leaps in the Legal Method

Valuer.ai made me aware of how we can initiate innovative thought patterns

2nd of June 2019, Valby, Denmark

Mechanical, photographic or other reproduction of this book or parts of it is

To cite this book:

Quantum Computing – A Quantum Leap in the Legal Method,

Part 1: Demarcations and technological explanations

1.2 Description of the Technology 10

Part 2: Legal Methodological Subjects

2.1 Initial Remarks 16

2.2 Law and Logic 16

2.3 Quantum Mechanics and Qubits in Relation to

2.3.2 Probability Distribution Approximation Without

2.3.3 Probability Distribution Approximation in Contracts

2.3.4 Testimonies as a General Uncertainty Factor in

2.5 Conclusive Remarks 46

Part 3: Practical Subjects

3.1 Personal Data and the Quantum Computer 49

3.2 Contracts on Quantum-Computing-as-a-Service(QCaaS) 54

3.3 Quantum Encryption 66

Appendix A: Sources of Law

According to the National Quantum Initiative Act, section 3 the purpose of

The means, by which this goal is to be achieved, is a 10-years plan,

According to the act, section 2, no. 6 quantum information science is defined

It is therefore of relevance to clarify the relationship between the quantum

Detailed regulation is hampered, among other things, by the increased

1COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT on QUANTUM TECHNOLOGIES Accompanying the

Part 2 of this book is also not a legal philosophical anti-metaphysical

In contrast, the legal method is applied and augmented (lat.: Augmentare)6

The term augmentare should not solely be understood in accordance with

The reasoning behind the current application of augmentare is that quantum

1957, Chapter 14.

Sons, 16th of June 2003, Chapter 3.

Wiley & Sons, 22nd of September 2009, p. vii.

The application of a practical approach is supplemented by the conclusive

This is particularly because legal professionals are not extraordinarily

Bing in Peter Seipel, p. 225.

2019 as a part of EU’s digital single market strategy.

1.2.1 The Physics

See namely Proposition IV.

Within quantum mechanics it is also possible that a particle is in a

One of the future challenges for quantum mechanics, however, is that we

Some of the newest research suggests that such unification is possible.

An important contribution, when it comes to uniting quantum mechanics

Furthermore, because the energy contributing to the mass is given by a

29. november 1935, 23(48), pp. 807–812.

Schrödinger, Erwin "Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik”, Die Naturwissenschaften, 6.

Schrödinger, Erwin "Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik”, Die Naturwissenschaften,

Nature Physics 14, 1027-1031, published 13 th of August 2018.

When the unification of the theories becomes possible, we can better

1.2.2 The Classical Computer

1.2.3 The Quantum Computer

The quantum states can be described as vectors:

|0> = [0,1] and |1> = [1,0]

However, qubits can also be the superposition of 0 and 1.

When a qubit’s quantum states are described as vectors, a qubit can be

ɸ = α *|0> + β * |1> = sin θ|0> + cos θ|1>

1.2.4 The Quantum Computer’s Technological Advantages Over

Furthermore research from 2019 shows that when it comes to identifying

Mermin, N.D. (2007). Quantum Computer Science: An Introduction. CUP.

Volume 362, Issue 6412, 19th of October 2018, pp. 308-311.

Some of most notorious quantum algorithms are the following:

ɸ = α |0> + β |1> = sin θ|0> + cos θ|1>