{"id":596,"date":"2015-10-07T16:09:12","date_gmt":"2015-10-07T20:09:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/?p=596"},"modified":"2016-07-28T11:49:16","modified_gmt":"2016-07-28T15:49:16","slug":"rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/","title":{"rendered":"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The doctrine of contractual choice of law provides the parties with the power to select the law that governs their business or other private activities crossing jurisdictional boundaries. An issue facing the choice is whether the law chosen by the parties must bear certain relation between the enacting state or country and the parties, transactions or disputes. In the United States, such relation is required in order for the chosen law to become enforceable, but elsewhere in the world, the relation is not essential to the choice of law by the parties.<\/p>\n<p>In 2001, as part of their initiative to have a broader reform, the American Law Institute and the National Conference of Commissioner on Uniform State Laws attempted to replace U.C.C. \u00a71-105 with \u00a71-301. The major change was the deletion of the \u201creasonable relation\u201d requirement for contractual choice of law. The replacement was considered as a necessary step in the reform, and it was also deemed as an effort to align the U.C.C. with the established international commercial practices. Unfortunately, however, the attempt failed. As a result, the contractual choice of law in the United States remains significantly at odds with the international trends.<\/p>\n<p>This article argues that it is conceptually problematic to insist on the relation requirement for the contractual choice of law because such requirement is not only rooted in the misunderstanding of the very nature of the parties\u2019 autonomy in choice of law, but also derived from the undue concerns about state interests. Also as a practical matter, the relation requirement often situates American businesses in a dilemma when they deal with their international counterparts on the choice of law. The failure of the U.C.C. \u00a71-301 revision reflects the persisting hostility in the U. S. towards the power of the parties to select governing law, and also evidences the gap between the U.S. and many other countries in the conflict of laws. The article concludes that both the parties and the states involved would be better off without relation requirement in contractual choice of law.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2648472\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>Download the paper at SSRN.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The doctrine of contractual choice of law provides the parties with the power to select the law that governs their business or other private activities crossing jurisdictional boundaries. An issue facing the choice is whether the law chosen by the parties must bear certain relation between the enacting state or country and the parties, transactions or disputes. In the United States, such relation is required in order for the chosen law to become enforceable, but elsewhere in the world, the relation is not essential to the choice of law by the parties. In 2001, as part of their initiative to have a broader reform, the American Law Institute and the National Conference of Commissioner on Uniform State Laws attempted to replace U.C.C. \u00a71-105 with \u00a71-301. The major change was the deletion of the \u201creasonable relation\u201d requirement for contractual choice of law. The replacement was considered as a necessary step in the reform, and it was also deemed as an effort to align the U.C.C. with the established international commercial practices. Unfortunately, however, the attempt failed. &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":597,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[123,124,120],"audience":[],"coauthors":[122],"class_list":["post-596","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-faculty-scholarship","tag-choice-of-law","tag-conflict-of-laws","tag-faculty-scholarship"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\r\n<title>Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome - Voices at Temple<\/title>\r\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"This article argues that it is conceptually problematic to insist on the relation requirement for the contractual choice of law because such requirement is not only rooted in the misunderstanding of the very nature of the parties\u2019 autonomy in choice of law, but also derived from the undue concerns about state interests.\" \/>\r\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\r\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome - Voices at Temple\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This article argues that it is conceptually problematic to insist on the relation requirement for the contractual choice of law because such requirement is not only rooted in the misunderstanding of the very nature of the parties\u2019 autonomy in choice of law, but also derived from the undue concerns about state interests.\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Voices at Temple\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2015-10-07T20:09:12+00:00\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-28T15:49:16+00:00\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/Choice-of-law.png\" \/>\r\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"840\" \/>\r\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"560\" \/>\r\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\r\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Mo Zhang\" \/>\r\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\r\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Mo Zhang\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\r\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Beckie Schatschneider\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e\"},\"headline\":\"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome\",\"datePublished\":\"2015-10-07T20:09:12+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-28T15:49:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":360,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/cms\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2015\\\/10\\\/Choice-of-law.png\",\"keywords\":[\"Choice of law\",\"Conflict of Laws\",\"Faculty Scholarship\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Faculty Scholarship\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/\",\"name\":\"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome - Voices at Temple\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/cms\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2015\\\/10\\\/Choice-of-law.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2015-10-07T20:09:12+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-28T15:49:16+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e\"},\"description\":\"This article argues that it is conceptually problematic to insist on the relation requirement for the contractual choice of law because such requirement is not only rooted in the misunderstanding of the very nature of the parties\u2019 autonomy in choice of law, but also derived from the undue concerns about state interests.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/cms\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2015\\\/10\\\/Choice-of-law.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/cms\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2015\\\/10\\\/Choice-of-law.png\",\"width\":840,\"height\":560,\"caption\":\"People meeting\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/\",\"name\":\"Voices at Temple\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e\",\"name\":\"Beckie Schatschneider\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g9dc77189f33a293d2c82a50cd24ebb9f\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Beckie Schatschneider\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/author\\\/rschatsc\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\r\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome - Voices at Temple","description":"This article argues that it is conceptually problematic to insist on the relation requirement for the contractual choice of law because such requirement is not only rooted in the misunderstanding of the very nature of the parties\u2019 autonomy in choice of law, but also derived from the undue concerns about state interests.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome - Voices at Temple","og_description":"This article argues that it is conceptually problematic to insist on the relation requirement for the contractual choice of law because such requirement is not only rooted in the misunderstanding of the very nature of the parties\u2019 autonomy in choice of law, but also derived from the undue concerns about state interests.","og_url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/","og_site_name":"Voices at Temple","article_published_time":"2015-10-07T20:09:12+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-28T15:49:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":840,"height":560,"url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/Choice-of-law.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Mo Zhang","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Mo Zhang","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/"},"author":{"name":"Beckie Schatschneider","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#\/schema\/person\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e"},"headline":"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome","datePublished":"2015-10-07T20:09:12+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-28T15:49:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/"},"wordCount":360,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/Choice-of-law.png","keywords":["Choice of law","Conflict of Laws","Faculty Scholarship"],"articleSection":["Faculty Scholarship"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/","url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/","name":"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome - Voices at Temple","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/Choice-of-law.png","datePublished":"2015-10-07T20:09:12+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-28T15:49:16+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#\/schema\/person\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e"},"description":"This article argues that it is conceptually problematic to insist on the relation requirement for the contractual choice of law because such requirement is not only rooted in the misunderstanding of the very nature of the parties\u2019 autonomy in choice of law, but also derived from the undue concerns about state interests.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/Choice-of-law.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/Choice-of-law.png","width":840,"height":560,"caption":"People meeting"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/rethinking-contractual-choice-of-law-an-analysis-of-relation-syndrome\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rethinking Contractual Choice of Law: An Analysis of Relation Syndrome"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/","name":"Voices at Temple","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#\/schema\/person\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e","name":"Beckie Schatschneider","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g9dc77189f33a293d2c82a50cd24ebb9f","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Beckie Schatschneider"},"url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/author\/rschatsc\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/Choice-of-law.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/596","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=596"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/596\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":598,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/596\/revisions\/598"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/597"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=596"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=596"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=596"},{"taxonomy":"audience","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/audience?post=596"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=596"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}