[1] However, ODR can also augment these traditional means of resolving disputes by applying innovative techniques and online technologies to the process.
Although part of the doctrine incorporates a broader approach including online litigation and other sui generis forms of dispute resolution when they are assisted largely by ICT tools designed ad hoc.
[13][14][15] The fourth party may do many things such as organize information, send automatic responses, shape writing communications in a more polite and constructive manner e.g. blocking foul language.
[13]: 27 As a result, ODR processes are increasing in efficiency providing their disputants with greater advantages in terms of time saving and cost reductions.
It is also a valuable tool for lawyers because they too can use it without revealing what they're willing to accept (unless an agreement is reached) and more importantly, without waiving their right to access the court, in the case that the negotiation is unsuccessful.
Mediators use information management skills encouraging parties to reach an amicable agreement by enabling them to communicate more effectively through the rephrasing of their arguments.
This was achieved with software tools that limited the free text space, encouraged the proposition of agreements, set deadlines and even shaped the tone of exchanges.
"[24] Most disputes (over 80 percent) were resolved during the first two stages, which was an impressive success rate given that in the majority of cases, the parties had already been involved in some type of failed direct negotiation before engaging with SquareTrade.
[25] In the rest of the cases a mediator could be requested for a nominal fee, acting as an expert evaluator or conciliator that made settlement proposals to the parties.
According to SquareTrade, "[a] sophisticated case management technology enables mediators to handle lower to medium-value consumer disputes in an efficient cost effective manner.
In addition, SquareTrade services to eBay were concentrated on a reduced number of issues, such as delays, bad descriptions and negative feedback.
The success of consensual and automated processes depends on the nature of the dispute, the accuracy of information provided, and the capability of the software or the third neutral party in assessing and evaluating the facts and evidence.
[26] Another form of alternative dispute resolution prioritizes expedience and dispenses with adjudication all together, in recognition of the litigants' desire to simply dispose of the matter as quickly as possible.
By avoiding adjudication, expedient non-adjudicative online resolution saves litigants time in court, time away from work and other fees and expenses, while protecting each from ancillary damage: The winning party generally collects more of his disputed amount and the losing party suffers no credit damage from having a judgment entered against him.
Expedient Non-Adjudicative Online Resolution is generally utilized in cases that might otherwise be heard in small claims or limited civil matters.
As an alternative to private, professional settlement, the concept of crowdjustice has recently taken shape as a means to leverage social norms and the wisdom of crowds[27] to determine the outcome of a dispute.
In any case, the UDRP has developed a transparent global ODR process that allows trade mark owners to fight efficiently cybersquatting.
The UDRP is used to resolve disputes between trade mark owners and those who have registered a domain name in bad faith for the purpose of reselling it for a profit, or taking advantage of the reputation of a trademark.
[34] This may be due to a number of reasons, such as the lack of an appellative review and panels composed by members from a multitude of jurisdictions and informed by different legal traditions.
On the other side, it is undeniable what ICANN with the UDRP has achieved in developing an effective ODR procedure based on contractual adherence that allows trade mark owners to transfer or cancel a domain that blatantly violates IP rights.
Their success derives from two aspects: First, the UDRP deals only with blatant disputes, which are abusive registrations made in bad faith in order to take advantage of the reputation of existing trademarks.
This is a positive accomplishment for the development of e-commerce because it favours consumers' confidence in the Internet by reducing the number of fraudulent registered domain names.
Chargebacks is a remedy used to reverse transactions made with credit or debit cards when a fraudulent use has occurred, or when there is a violation of the contract terms.
Despite this, PayPal is in a very strong position since in most cases it is able to freeze the amount of money and resolve the dispute providing an instant and effective enforcement.
It is regarded as a very efficient tool for consumers because the speed, accessibility and lack of charge for their clients, who would just have to notify their banks or card issuers to cancel a transaction.
Thus, Edwards and Wilson suggested that it would be advisable to focus on developing chargebacks and other soft ODR methods because they are very effective amongst mainstream consumers.
Its main advantage is that it provides for the enforcement of decisions in any of the member states without the need to go through the formal mutual recognition of judgements (exequatur).
[6]: 95 Nevertheless, it can be expected that, in due time, electronic communications will reach every possible and reasonable aspect of the judicial procedure to assist in the resolution of online as well as off-line B2C disputes.
Perhaps, within the EU, where we have concern for the fairness of private procedures (i.e. restrictions in consumer arbitration) the ESCP may contribute to increase trust in ODR processes.
This platform or portal is available for use by consumers located in the European Union, or in Norway, Iceland or Liechtenstein,[43] to assist in settling disputes with traders out of court.