A Lawful Framework for Distributed Electronic Markets

  • Michael Conrad
  • Christian Funk
  • Oliver Raabe
  • Oliver Waldhorst
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 243)


While decentralized peer-to-peer market platforms are more suited for trading short-lived or non-material goods (e.g., electrical power, bandwidth-on-demand) due to reduced transaction cost, robustness and scalability, they lack the legal certainty provided by centralized electronic market places operated by a trusted third party. This paper presents a technical framework that, conforming to European regulations, provides legal certainty for distributed market platforms. The framework includes a market-consistent data model representing the facts for the legal subsumption process, maps the European framework for electronic signatures to a distributed system, and comprises solutions for both adducing the reception of electronic documents and their distributed long-time storage. Moreover, it includes an electronic legal adviser for an automatic verification of contracts.


Electronic Market Legal Certainty Rule Engine Automatic Verification Contract Negotiation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Bohrer, A.: Entwicklung eines internetgestützten Expertensystems zur Prüfung des Anwendungsbereiches urheberrechtlicher Abkommen, 2003Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Conrad, M., Dinger, J., Hartenstein, H., Rolli, D., Schöller, M, Zitterbart, M.: A Peer-to-Peer Framework for Electronic Markets, in: R. Steinmetz, K. Wehrle (Ed.), Peer-to-Peer Systems and Applications, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3485, p. 509–525, Springer, Sep 2005.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Conrad, M: Non-repudiation mechanisms for Peer-to-Peer networks, in: CoNext 2006, 2nd Conference on Future Networking Technologies, 4 -7 December 2006, Lisboa, Portugal, p. 249–250, Dec. 2006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dinger, J., Raabe O., Hartenstein, H.: A Techno-Legal Perspective on Peer-to-Peer-Based Bandwidth on Demand Management, Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Workshop on Bandwidth on Demand (BoD 2006) in conjunction with IEEE GLOBECOM 2006, p. 73-80, San Francisco, CA, USA, November 2006.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eßer, A., Raabe, O., Rolli, D., Schöller, M.: Eine sichere verteilte Marktplattform für zukunftsfähige Energiesysteme. it-Information Technology, p. 187–192, Aug 2006Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Larenz, K.: Methodenlehre der Rechtswissenschaft, Springer 1991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maedche, A., Motik, B., Stojanovic, L.: Managing Multiple and Distributed Ontologies in the Semantic Web. The VLDB Journal 12:4 p. 286–302, 2003Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Senn, A., Schweighofer, E., Liebwald, D., Geist, A., Drachsler, M.: LOIS: Erfahrungen und Herausforderungen bei die Weiterentwicklung mutilingualer Rechtsontologien. In: Schweighofer et al. (Hrsg.): e-Staat und e-Wirtschaft aus rechtlicher Sicht. Boorberg, p. 290–195, 2006Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Conrad
    • 1
  • Christian Funk
    • 2
  • Oliver Raabe
    • 2
  • Oliver Waldhorst
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für TelematikUniversität KarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.Institut für InformationsrechtUniversität KarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations