{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017496635262449527, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0026917900403768506, 'mean_word_length': 5.0, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Scope and Application of the Optional Instrument

In this paper it is argued that in order to be effective, the Optional Instrument’s scope should be as broad as possible. This implies it should be available to both cross-border and domestic contracts, both to B2B- and B2C-contracts, and substantively it should deal with both general contract law and specific contract law, most notably with service contracts and digital contracts. The outcome of this analysis is compared with the European Commission’s choices in the Feasibility Study. It is argued that in particular the substantive scope of the future Optional Instrument should be expanded in order to ensure that the Optional Instrument is attractive to both businesses and consumers.