• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


Digital Disagreements: The Future of Artificial Intelligence in Online Dispute Resolution

0
by Karl Bayer

Monday, Mar 18, 2013


Tweet

This article is from a three part series by Grant Margeson. For the full article, see parts two and three.

Part 1 of 3

 

This is the first installment in a three Part series on the role of Artificial Intelligence in Online Dispute Resolution. Please join the conversation and comment below.

 

One of arbitration’s principle advantages is the informality with which the process is carried out.[1]  Informality may lead to increased speed of dispute resolution and reduced costs.[2] However, recently arbitration has taken on some of the formal attributes of litigation, and as a result, has reduced its advantages and decreased its desirability.[3]

In response to this problem, there is a not-so-conventional answer: Online Dispute Resolution  (ODR). The use of Online Dispute Resolution can help arbitration maintain its traditional informality, cost-effectiveness, and speed through the use of Artificial intelligence (AI) to help streamline processes for an arbitrator and the disputants.

ODR originally referred to processes for dispute resolution that relied on Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and were offered through the internet for addressing conflicts that arose online.[4] Subsequently, the use of these processes and mechanisms by ODR systems expanded to include aiding in the resolution of offline disputes.[5]

Understood in this way, ODR can mean any number of things, for example:

  • Electronically delivered briefs
  • Videoconference hearings
  • Fully automated online process

It is essentially any form of dispute resolution facilitated by ICT.

Just like traditional arbitration, ODR has gained popularity as a means of facilitating inexpensive dispute resolution.

Disputants can take advantage of ODR’s best features:

  • Disputants do not have to meet face to face
  • The resolution process may occur whenever it is convenient for the parties
  • Asynchronous communication is possible[6]

These features make ODR particularly suited for international commerce and e-commerce, where the disputants may be geographically separated or where the amount in controversy may be small.

Potential ODR users include internet service providers, data providers, e-commerce websites, and internet payment systems[7]—all sources of disputants with particular need for a quick, efficient resolution system in the same medium in which the dispute arose: the internet.

 

ODR in Use

Cybersettle and eBay’s dispute resolution systems provide particularly good examples of approaches to ODR:

Cybersettle has saved New York City, which used the program for personal injury and property damage claims against the City, an estimated $70,167,494 in costs.[8]  Their patent for a “computer executable system and method for dispute resolution”[9] uses an “online, double-blind bid, dispute resolution system[.]”[10] In this online dispute resolution system, offers and demands are matched to reach an agreement.[11]

Dispute resolution on eBay—which employs SquareTrade to assist in handling claims—is a little more involved. Customers with a complaint can resolve it in one of two ways: through a free internet forum to negotiate a settlement or with the help of a mediator (subsidized by eBay so that the cost is only $15).[12] eBay has resolved disputes quickly and cheaply, as well as “uncover[ed] common sources of problems and . . . structure[d] information on its site so that these problems do not recur.”[13]

These models provide parties with a range of options tailored to the disputants’ needs, unlike simply an online courthouse model like iCourthouse.[14]

By combining the connectivity potential of ICT with dispute resolution procedures, clients have a process that can increase efficiency and speed, while lowering costs and providing an easy-to-use dispute resolution system.

 

 

Stay Tuned for Part 2 on Digital Disagreements where we discuss examples of AI use with ODR, Concerns raised by AI use in ODR, and the role of People in ODR!

 

*Grant is a J.D. and Master of Public Affairs candidate at the University of Texas. He will graduate in 2014. In addition to law, Grant enjoys hiking, soccer, and watching Law & Order.


Related Posts

  • Digital Disagreements: Neural Networks and Their PotentialDigital Disagreements: Neural Networks and Their Potential
  • Digital Disagreements: Artificial [Intelligence] ArbitrationDigital Disagreements: Artificial [Intelligence] Arbitration
  • Fairness, Trust, and Security in Online Dispute ResolutionFairness, Trust, and Security in Online Dispute Resolution
  •  Online Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part V Online Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part V
  • Online Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part IVOnline Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part IV
  • Online Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part IIIOnline Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part III

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Karl Bayer

Karl Bayer is an ADR practitioner with almost thirty years of of experience in litigation, mediation, and arbitration. A long-time successful trial lawyer, Karl recognized early the opportunities which ADR provided to the world of litigation and began to explore the potential of his mediation practice. As he had already earned the respect and trust of both the plaintiffs' and the defense bars, he filled a niche in Austin as a mediator who is requested by both sides of most disputes. He has spoken extensively about ADR and technical topics, both at CLE presentations and as an adjunct professor at The University of Texas School of Law.

Karl also serves frequently as a pre-trial special master in federal district courts in Texas. While this service is often in the capacity of a Markman Master in patent infringement cases, he also serves as a general pre-trial master assisting judges and litigants as they wade through discovery and other pretrial procedural disputes.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy