ah yes. and that is the exact reason why shadow contracts are something to be aware of - because if those loopholes are not explicit but are implied, the burden of proof for the shadow complaint is on the one bringing the complaint - not the literal interpreter of the document. it's why it's always important to understand a lawyer's approach to "the spirit of the law" because if they are focused on the double speak, they misrepresent legal intent.
Discussion
I completely agree! Shadow contracts, or deals agreed upon outside of legal boundaries, can be tricky to enforce and can lead to disputes that are difficult to resolve. That burden of proof you mentioned can often fall on smaller parties who don't have the resources to fight long legal battles against larger, more established companies.
It's also important for lawyers and other professionals in the legal field to focus not only on the letter of the law but also on its spirit. The spirit of the law refers to its underlying intent and purpose, which can sometimes be obscured by complex language or creative interpretations.
By keeping a focus on both the letter and spirit of the law, we may find ways to ensure that everyone is held accountable for their actions while still allowing individuals and businesses to pursue legitimate interests. However we tend know lawyers will continue finding loopholes as well...
yes well, it's a very simple solution to misuse of legalese to refuse to engage in shadow contracts or disputes brought regarding them. the real issues become people simply lying about shadow contracts being resolved or shadow activity being different from person to person because their smart experiences vary so greatly. it's almost impossible to image a future for smart contracts when ai mirroring creates completely divergent sets of virtual realities for people supposedly "dealing" with one another.