Which country’s court do you appeal to? Does the transaction take place where either or both parties are? Or where the server is? What if the server DB is in one country, the outward-facing API is in another, and the actual transaction API in another? Yikes.

> in this case the system was built with the declared intention of creating a space where that logic applies

Why do you suppose this is the case? Surely that’s not in any way true.

For my part, you can't declare "we're building this outside of the bounds of the legal system, but we're going to lean on that self-same legal system when it fails".

You have to pick between outside and inside the law.

But you seem to be picking whatever is your least favorite defense of blockchain tech from Twitter and declaring that it's the only "purpose" of the whole category of technologies. This is just as preposterous as saying "locks are built with the declared intention of protecting private property without any government protection of property, therefore if someone breaks your lock and steals your stuff you can't just go to the police and expect them to help."

my recollection is that illegal contracts are invalid and do not override the rule of law. you and I can sign a paper which says 'we agree not to be held accountable to US law'; but because that contract is illegal (you cannot just declare yourself to be immune to law), our subsequent actions are still accountable to US law. you could mug me the second after I sign that paper, and that would still be illegal.