As a future computer scientist, it is hard not to write about the most recent issue of Landslide, published by the ABA Section of Intellectual Property Law. The magazine contains an excellent article by Mark V. B. Partridge and Scott T. Lonardo. The authors discuss ICANN‘s recent developments in the Internet domain name system: Domain Name Tasting. In order to decrease the practice of domain name tasting, ICANN has adopted a new policy to limit refunds during the add grace period. WHOIS Protocol. ICANN is following up on breach notices for registrars to cure data inaccuracy. New gTLDs. About 5,000 new addresses will be available as early as 2009. Follow this link to view the article (log in required): ICANN Can or Can It?, Landslide, May/June 2009. Technorati Tags: law, domain names, ICANN, gTLD, Whois, Domain Name Tasting

[update: H.B. 2139 passed the House and Senate (with amendments); the amended version was under consideration by the conference committee when the session ended. See here. ] Today, two bills related to ADR were passed by the 81st Texas Legislature: H.B. 1083. The bill, authored by Rep. Gary Elkins, states that “Except as provided by agreement of the parties, a court may not order mediation in an action that is subject to the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. Sections 1-16).” The bill’s history is here. H.B. 2139. Authored by Rep. McClendon, the bill establishes a victim-offender pretrial mediation program for first-time offenders. The bill’s history is here. Technorati Tags: arbitration, ADR, law, mediation

During this Memorial Day holiday, I came across a very interesting article by Victoria Pynchon, a graduate of the prestigious Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution. The piece is a well-written personal anecdote about her volunteer work during the past U.S. presidential campaign. The lesson? you don’t have to be persuasive to persuade. Here is an excerpt: Funny, but I wasn’t really trying to convince her of anything. We were women talking over the fence after hanging our laundry or putting our kids to bed. We connected. We had personal history in common with each other and with candidate Obama. We had shared goals and dreams. Here’s the thing. You can’t make this stuff up and you can’t pursue this type of communication for the purpose of changing someone’s mind. But if someone implicitly asks for your assistance in making an important decision, and if your goal is to help her make her decision instead of the decision you want her to make, you will, at a minimum, create common ground. And once you’ve done that, you can accomplish something constructive together, whether that accomplishment is what you had in mind in the first instance or not. The full article is here: Changing Minds Is Easier When Yours Is Open, Los Angeles Daily Journal, May 19, 2009. Technorati tags: ADR, Victoria Pynchon, Los Angeles Daily Journal, persuasion

By Holly Hayes While the use of mediation for conflict resolution is gaining strength in a number of industries, a recent accreditation standard (LD.01.03.01) issued by The Joint Commission is expected to prompt hospitals to explore an expanded use of mediation to manage conflict in the healthcare setting. The new Leadership Standard: Conflict Management Standard LD.01.03.01 became effective January 2009. The overall standard states, “The governing body is ultimately accountable for the safety and quality of care, treatment, and services.” Elements of Performance, or how The Joint Commission will score the standard, include: Development of a code of conduct that defines acceptable, disruptive, and inappropriate behaviors; and creation and implementation of a process for managing disruptive and inappropriate behaviors. Mediation is one tool a governing body can approve and a leadership team can implement to manage disruptive behavior among: management and staff, all levels of clinical staff, vendors and hospital staff, governing board members; and patients and staff to name a few. An outside, neutral mediator can be hired or contracted on a contingency/as-needed basis or internal staff can be trained in mediation techniques. By definition, a mediator is impartial and neutral; a facilitator, not a decision maker; and does not advise, evaluate or advocate for any particular resolution. Mediation gives the parties involved the ability to determine the outcome and resolution of their issues. The mediation process is simple, but can have a profound effect on the outcome of a dispute. Both parties share their concerns without interruption. The mediator may then ask questions for clarification and will develop a problem statement to summarize the issues to be addressed during the mediation. At some point, the mediator may meet privately with one or both of the parties and anything discussed privately cannot be shared unless agreed upon by the party and the mediator. Typically, the parties then brainstorm together to develop solutions for their issues. If an agreement is reached, a written resolution is developed which is final and binding when signed by both parties. As stated by the American College of Physician Executives (ACPE) and American Organization of Nurse Executives (AONE), “Disruptive behavior in a health care setting can lead to an unsafe environment for patients.” Mediation can be an effective tool to resolving conflict to enhance patient safety and improve the future working relationship of the parties involved.