[LINK] itN/NIST: 'Don't bother with blockchain'

David dlochrin at key.net.au
Wed Oct 17 12:23:23 AEDT 2018

On Wednesday, 17 October 2018 11:35:32 AEDT Roger Clarke wrote:
> The key point about Torrens Title is that the legal authority is a register entry, and hence the chain is of no more than historical interest.

But what sort of "register entry" is legally acceptable?  Would an item in a blockchain qualify as things stand, or would that require legislation?

My lay understanding is that paper records currently held in the Land Titles Office constitute the primary source of title, but a certified paper copy held by an owner's solicitor would constitute good backup evidence in the event of a problem.  What _independent_ backup would exist with a blockchain system?

Also, a paper copy is likely to reveal tampering, but a blockchain hacked out of business hours when activity was low certainly wouldn't.

David L.

More information about the Link mailing list