target-revenue/workplans
tegwick 11f2dc3a6d Complete WP-0004 and WP-0005 jurisdiction research (8 of 8 each)
Executes all remaining shared jurisdictions across both workplans:
Germany/EU (deepened contract-law angle), US (deepened), UK (deepened),
Argentina, India, China, Africa (South Africa + OHADA), and Asia-Pacific
(Singapore, Japan, Australia) - 13 new history/ research artifacts.

Highest-priority findings:

- Australia's Unfair Contract Terms regime (expanded Nov 2023) covers
  standard-form contracts with any business under 100 employees/$10M
  turnover by default - the CUA is exactly such a contract, and most
  realistic Customers fall within this threshold. Unlike every other
  jurisdiction's consumer carve-out, this is not an edge case.
- China requires a "foreign-related" contract even to select foreign
  governing law, subject to a vague public-interest override even then -
  confirms a dedicated China rider is needed for both the License/CUA and
  the Enforcement Partner Agreement, not a shared global clause.
- India flatly prohibits advocate contingency fees (no exception gates,
  stricter than Germany) while explicitly permitting third-party
  litigation funding - the cleanest confirmation yet that the Litigation
  Funder/Local Counsel split-role model is both necessary and legal there.
- Japan's Article 12 fee-splitting rule means even the split-role
  fallback needs jurisdiction-specific structuring - the first case where
  the workaround itself, not just the original mechanism, has an open
  compliance question.
- Contingency Share ceilings vary widely where available: UK 50% (exact
  match), South Africa 25%, Argentina 35% (50% only with risk assumption),
  China 18% down to 6% on a sliding scale that shrinks as claims grow.
- Recurring cross-jurisdictional pattern (Germany, EU, US via CCPA,
  Argentina): B2B governing-law/liability clauses are respected, but an
  individual/sole-proprietor Customer's consumer-protection status is the
  operative risk everywhere, not a one-off edge case.

Updates specs/EnforcementNetworkConcept.md §8.1 with a full 12-jurisdiction
findings table and three cross-cutting conclusions. Updates both V1C1
documents' Appendix A items (governing law, liability cap, data
protection) with the most consequential findings. Both workplans now have
only their human-gated synthesis tasks (T09-T10 / T10) remaining.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-29 17:07:42 +02:00
..
TREV-WP-0001-license-prior-art-research.md Draft Commercial Use Agreement V1C1 template 2026-07-29 12:48:23 +02:00
TREV-WP-0002-trust-service-foundation.md Accept ADR-0001 and close TREV-WP-0002 2026-07-29 02:07:22 +02:00
TREV-WP-0003-normative-core-extraction.md Merge spec/ into specs/: one specs directory for the whole repo 2026-07-29 10:22:14 +02:00
TREV-WP-0004-global-jurisdiction-research.md Complete WP-0004 and WP-0005 jurisdiction research (8 of 8 each) 2026-07-29 17:07:42 +02:00
TREV-WP-0005-enforcement-network-research.md Complete WP-0004 and WP-0005 jurisdiction research (8 of 8 each) 2026-07-29 17:07:42 +02:00