• 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


Online Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part II

0
by Renee Kolar

Friday, Apr 11, 2014


Tweet

Online Dispute Resolution:  An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part II

Part I | Part III | Part IV | Part V

By: Burkley Wombwell

II.  What is online dispute resolution?

Online Dispute Resolution means exactly what it says: it is a method of resolving disputes through the use of an “online” system (the Internet). However, there is some ambiguity as to what this could entail. Does it refer to the resolution of disputes that were born online? Conducting ADR on the Internet? A combination of traditional ADR methods and online technology to resolve issues? ODR is still evolving, but currently it can entail almost any of these qualities. Boiled down, ODR is perfectly represented by its own vague name and is perhaps best explained as “the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms over the internet.”[i]

Interpreted broadly, ODR can be considered the use of online environments to facilitate communications and dispute resolution; however, the more conventional definition of ODR is a process that utilizes the Internet as a more efficient medium for parties to resolve their disputes through a variety of ADR methods, which brings disputing parties together online to have a dialogue about resolving their dispute.[ii] According to odr.info, which is the home of the National Center for Technology and Dispute Resolution (NCTDR) and the “prime portal for online dispute resolution”:

The online environment [is] a ‘place’ where increasingly powerful tools will be available for working to find solutions to many forms of offline/online conflict, whether they are public or private, whether they involve commercial transactions or other social relationships, and whether they are international or domestic.[iii]

As perhaps this perspective demonstrates, ODR is an amorphous field that can almost conform to whatever role need be. Although it is perhaps most common to encounter the use of ODR in consumer disputes, it can be used in a variety of arenas. ODR can be employed by business and consumers (B2C), in the commercial field (B2B), in the public sphere to resolve government and citizen disputes (G2C), and in the resolution of disputes related to intellectual property.[iv]

What is now known as ODR was initially a response to problems occurring in cyberspace, where a dispute resolution process that took place over a network seemed necessary and appropriate.[v] ODR traces its origins back to the 1990s with the emergence of the Internet and a new atmosphere where disputes would arise and need to be resolved.[vi] Originally, ODR was focused on disputes related to online activities but is now employed in offline disputes.[vii] Currently the issue isn’t what disputes should utilize ODR, but what tools can be used to deliver trust, convenience, and expertise for many different kinds of conflicts.[viii] Online commercial transactions were among the first to touch ODR. eBay was one of the first users of online dispute resolution, and by 2010 eBay handled sixty million disputes.[ix] During the Internet “bubble” in 1999-2000 ODR start-ups appeared and then disappeared, although a few remain intact; however, a new wave of ODR start ups are appearing, likely because of an expanded interest in ODR, the availability of software appropriate for the service, along with the acceptance of ODR by the ADR community.[x]

The current ODR landscape can be considered in two separate domains: tools (applications and technology) and systems.[xi] ODR tools are essentially types of software that can assist or manage the process and are found in the various forms of the providers of ODR, which will be discussed later. ODR systems, on the other hand, include ODR tools used in a coordinated way in a closed setting by a limited number of users who are engaged in ongoing interactions with other users.[xii] One example of an ODR system is that created by eBay, mentioned above.

ODR is a unique form of dispute resolution. Some of its more noteworthy features include the fact that the disputants don’t have to meet face to face, the process can take place at any time regardless of geographical distance, and asynchronous communication is possible.[xiii] However, the distinctive features of ODR will be considered in greater detail later in conjunction with the various providers of ODR and the benefits and drawbacks of the process.

Similar to traditional ADR, ODR can work in different ways. Depending on the circumstances of the conflict (the provider of the service, the parties involved, the type of dispute, etc.), certain forms of ODR, such as e-negotiation, e-mediation, or e-arbitration may be encountered. However, “general” or “generic” online dispute resolution is also a possibility. The way ODR works will be discussed in greater detail with the consideration of different ODR providers.

Although the field is not precisely defined, ODR is gaining acceptance in the world of alternative dispute resolution. The process can be very attractive to those seeking cheaper, faster, and less intrusive avenues for dispute resolution than found through in-person processes, and perhaps even more significantly, it increases the range of connection and communication possibilities.[xiv]

Stay tuned for more on the providers of online dispute resolution!

[i] Julio Cesar Betancourt & Elina Zlatanska, Online Dispute Resolution (ODR): What Is It, and Is It the Way Forward?, 79 Arbitration, Issue 3 (2013), at 256, electronic copy at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2325422.

[ii] Nicolas W. Verymeys & Karim Benyekhlef, ODR and the Courts, in ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: THEORY AND PRACTICE: A TREATISE ON TECHNOLOGY AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION, 25 (Daniel Rainey, Ethan Katsh, & Mohamed S. Abdel Wahab eds., The Hauge: Eleven International, 2012).

[iii] THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR TECHNOLOGY AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION, odr.info, http://odr.info/mission (last visited December 4, 2013).

[iv] Pablo Cortes, Online Dispute Resolution for Consumers, in ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: THEORY AND PRACTICE: A TREATISE ON TECHNOLOGY AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION, supra note ii, at 139.

[v] Orna Rabinovich-Einy & Ethan Katsh, Technology and the Future of Dispute Systems Design, 17 Harv. Negot, L. Rev. 151, at 164 (2012).

[vi] Ethan Katsh, ODR: A Look at History, in ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: THEORY AND PRACTICE: A TREATISE ON TECHNOLOGY AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION, supra note ii, 9-11.

[vii] Id. at 13.

[viii] Id.

[ix] Id. at 15.

[x] Id. at 15-16.

[xi] Orna Rabinovich-Einy & Ethan Katsh, Lessons from Online Dispute Resolution for Dispute Systems Design, in ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: THEORY AND PRACTICE: A TREATISE ON TECHNOLOGY AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION, supra note ii, at 40.

[xii] Id. at 41-42.

[xiii] Aura Esther Vilalta, ODR and E-Commerce, in ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: THEORY AND PRACTICE: A TREATISE ON TECHNOLOGY AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION, supra note ii, at 114.

[xiv] Amy J. Schmitz, Drive-thru Arbitration in the Digital Age: Empowering Consumers through Binding ODR, 62 Baylor L. Rev. 178, 181 (2010).

Related Posts

  • Online Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet an Effective Tool Part IOnline Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet an Effective Tool Part I
  • Online Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part IVOnline Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part IV
  • 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 IIIOnline Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part III
  • Digital Disagreements: Neural Networks and Their PotentialDigital Disagreements: Neural Networks and Their Potential

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 Renee Kolar

Renée Kolar received her J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law in December 2012 and passed the February 2013 Texas Bar Exam. Her experience living abroad and studying translation taught her that misunderstandings between people arise not just from their language differences, but also from the absence of a shared cultural background.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

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.

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