Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Legal Interpretation of Choreography Models

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Business Process Management Workshops (BPM 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 362))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Model/driven smart contract development approaches are gaining in importance since one of the most popular realizations, blockchain/based smart contracts, are prone to coding errors. However, these modeling approaches predominantly focus on operational aspects of smart contracts, neglecting the legal perspective as manifested by deontic concepts such as obligations or permissions. In this paper, we explore an approach at connecting existing models to Legal Ontologies (LOs) on the example of choreography models, effectively interpreting them as legal contracts. We show how the execution of a choreography imposes sequences of legal states, and discuss consequences and limitations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Adamo, G., Borgo, S., Francescomarino, C.D., Ghidini, C., Rospocher, M.: BPMN 2.0 choreography language: interface or business contract? In: Proceedings of the Joint Ontology Workshops 2017 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Berry, A., Milosevic, Z.: Extending choreography with business contract constraints. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 14, 131–179 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Breaux, T.D., Vail, M.W., Antón, A.I.: Towards regulatory compliance: extracting rights and obligations to align requirements with regulations. In: IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE), pp. 46–55 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2006.68

  4. Casellas, N.: Legal Ontology Engineering: Methodologies, Modelling Trends, and the Ontology of Professional Judicial Knowledge, Law, Governance and Technology, vol. 3. Springer, Cham (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1497-7

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Clack, C.D., Bakshi, V.A., Braine, L.: Smart contract templates: foundations, design landscape and research directions. CoRR (2016). http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00771

  6. Goedertier, S., Vanthienen, J.: Designing compliant business processes with obligations and permissions. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 5–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11837862_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Governatori, G., Idelberger, F., Milosevic, Z., Riveret, R., Sartor, G., Xu, X.: On legal contracts, imperative and declarative smart contracts, and blockchain systems. Artif. Intell. Law 26(4), 377–409 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-018-9223-3. ISSN 1572-8382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Governatori, G., Milosevic, Z., Sadiq, S.: Compliance checking between business processes and business contracts. In: IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC, pp. 221–232 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Griffo, C., Almeida, J.P.A., Guizzardi, G.: Conceptual modeling of legal relations. In: Trujillo, J.C., et al. (eds.) ER 2018. LNCS, vol. 11157, pp. 169–183. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00847-5_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Hoekstra, R., Breuker, J., Di Bello, M., Boer, A.: The LKIF core ontology of basic legal concepts. Int. J. High Perform. Comput. Appl. 321, 43–63 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hohfeld, W.N.: Fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning. Yale Law J. 26(8), 710–770 (1917)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kabilan, V.: Contract workflow model patterns using BPMN. In: Proceedings of CAiSE 2005 Workshops, CEUR-WS.org, vol. 363 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kabilan, V., Johannesson, P.: Semantic representation of contract knowledge using multi/tier ontology. In: First International Conference on Semantic Web and Databases, pp. 378–397, CEUR-WS.org (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kõlvart, M., Poola, M., Rull, A.: Smart contracts. In: Kerikmäe, T., Rull, A. (eds.) The Future of Law and eTechnologies, pp. 133–147. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26896-5_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Ladleif, J., Weske, M., Weber, I.: Modeling and enforcing blockchain-based choreographies. In: Hildebrandt, T., van Dongen, B.F., Röglinger, M., Mendling, J. (eds.) BPM 2019. LNCS, vol. 11675, pp. 69–85. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26619-6_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Mendling, J., Weber, I., et al.: Blockchains for business process management - challenges and opportunities. ACM Trans. Manag. Inf. Syst. (TMIS) 9(1), 4:1–4:16 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3183367. ISSN 2158–656X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Milosevic, Z., Sadiq, S., Orlowska, M.: Translating business contract into compliant business processes. In: IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC, pp. 211–220 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), Version 2.0.2 (December 2013). http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0.2/

  19. Plotkin, G.D.: A Structural Approach to Operational Semantics. Aarhus University Denmark, Computer Science Department (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Weber, I., Xu, X., Riveret, R., Governatori, G., Ponomarev, A., Mendling, J.: Untrusted business process monitoring and execution using blockchain. In: La Rosa, M., Loos, P., Pastor, O. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9850, pp. 329–347. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45348-4_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Weske, M.: Business Process Management, 2nd edn. Springer, Cham (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28616-2

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hasso Plattner Institute, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

    Jan Ladleif & Mathias Weske

Authors
  1. Jan Ladleif
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mathias Weske
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Ladleif .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Fondazione Bruno Kessler, Trento, Italy

    Chiara Di Francescomarino

  2. Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Remco Dijkman

  3. University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Uwe Zdun

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Ladleif, J., Weske, M. (2019). A Legal Interpretation of Choreography Models. In: Di Francescomarino, C., Dijkman, R., Zdun, U. (eds) Business Process Management Workshops. BPM 2019. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 362. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37453-2_52

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37453-2_52

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-37452-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-37453-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation