Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Workshop on AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems

AICOL 2013: AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems pp 54–68Cite as

Online Dispute Resolution and Models of Relational Law and Justice: A Table of Ethical Principles

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 8929))

Abstract

Regulatory systems constitute a set of coordinated complex behavior (individual and collective) which can be grasped through rules, values and principles that constitute the social framework of the law. Relational law, relational justice and the design of regulatory models can be linked to emergent agreement technologies and new versions of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and Negotiation Support Systems (NSS). We define the notions of public space and information principles, extending the concept of ‘second order validity’ to the fields of ODR and NSS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Al-Adwan, M.K.M.: The Legitimacy of Online Alternative Dispute Resolution (ODR). International Journal of Business and Social Science 2(19), 167–169 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bernard, P., Garth, B.: Dispute Resolution Ethics: A Comprehensive Guide. ABA, Section of Dispute Resolution, Washington D.C. (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Berners-Lee, T.: Linked Data (updated 2009), http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html

  4. http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_berners_lee_on_the_next_web.html

  5. Bodriagov, O., Buchegger, S.: Crowdsourcing and Ethics: The Employment of Crowdsourcing Workers for Tasks that Violate Privacy and Ethics. In: Elovici, Y., Altshuler, Y. (eds.) Security and Privacy in Social Networks, pp. 47–66. Springer, Dordrecht (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boehm, F.: Information Sharing and Data Protection in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Bott, M., Young, G.: The Role of Crowdsourcing for Better Governance in International Development. PRAXIS The Fletcher Journal of Human Security 27, 47–70 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bowden, C.: The US surveillance programmes and their impact on EU citizens’ fundamental rights. In: Presented to the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE Committee), PE 474.405 (September 05, 2013) , http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/libe/dv/briefingnote_/briefingnote_en.pdf

  9. Bruce, T.R.: Foundings on the Cathedral Steps. In: Peruginelli, G., Ragona, M. (eds.) Law via the Internet. Free Access, Quality of Information, Effectiveness of Rights, pp. 411–422. European Press Academic Publishing, Florence (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Burns, R.: Connecting Grassroots to Government for Disaster Management. The Wilson Center (2012), http://burnsr77.github.io/assets/uploads/Workshop_BackgroundReading.pdf

  11. Cameron, K.: The Laws of Identity...as of November 5, 2005. Microsoft Corporation (2005), http://www.identityblog.com/stories/2005/05/13/TheLawsOfIdentity.pdf

  12. Carneiro, D., Novais, P., Neves, J.: Towards Domain-Independent Conflict Resolution Tools. In: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, vol. 2, pp. 145–148. IEEE Computer Society (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Casanovas, P., Poblet, M.: Concepts and fields of Relational Justice. In: Casanovas, P., Sartor, G., Casellas, N., Rubino, R. (eds.) Computable Models of the Law. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4884, pp. 323–339. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Casanovas, P.: Agreement and Relational Justice: A Perspective from Philosophy and Sociology of Law. In: Ossowski, S. (ed.) Agreement Technologies. LGTS, vol. 8, pp. 19–42. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Casanovas, P.: Social Intelligence: A New Perspective on Relational Law. In: Schweighofer, E., Meinrad Handstanger, H., Hoffmann, F.K., Primosch, E., Schefbeck, G., Withalm, G. (eds.) Festchrift für Friedrich Lachmayer. Zeichen und Zauber des Rechts, pp. 493–510. Editions Weblab, Bern (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Casanovas, P.: Philosophy and Technology. Special Issue on Information Society and Ethical Inquiries (2014), doi:10.1007/s13347-014-0170-y

    Google Scholar 

  17. Casanovas, P., Barral, I. (Guest Editors): Special Section on Legal XML and Online Dispute Resolution. Democracia Digital e Governo Eletrônico 10, 1–432 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Castelfranchi, C.: Minds as Social Institutions. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Science (2013), doi:10.1007/s11097-013-9324-0

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cavoukian, A.: Privacy by Design. The 7 Foundational Principles. Implementation and Mapping of Fair information Practices. Information an Privacy Commissioner, Ontario, Canada (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cortés, P., de la Rosa, F.E.: Building a Global Redress System for Low Value Crossborder Disputes. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 62(2), 407–440 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cortés, P.: Developing Online Dispute Resolution for Consumers in the EU: A Proposal for the Regulation of Accredited Providers. International Journal of Law and Information Technology 19(1), 1–28 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Datta, P., Chatterjee, S.: Online Consumer Market Inefficiencies and Intermediation. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems 42(2), 55–75 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. D’Inverno, M., Luck, M., Noriega, P., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J.A., Sierra, C.: Communicating open systems. Artificial Intelligence 186, 38–94 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Egger, F.N.: Deceptive Technologies: Cash, Ethics & HCI, SIGCHI Bulletin, p. 11 (May/June 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Floridi, L.: Technology’s In-Betweeness. Philosophy and Technology 26(2), 111–115 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Greenleaf, G., Mowbray, A., Chung, P.: The meaning of ’free access to legal information’:A twenty year evolution’ (on LSN) Law via Internet Conference, Cornell University, Ithica, USA (October 2012)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ha, H., Coghill, K.: Online shoppers in Australia: dealing with problems. International Journal of Consumer Studies 32, 5–17 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Harris, C.G., Srinivasan, P.: Ethics and Crowdsourcing. In: Altshuler, Y. (ed.) Security and Privacy in Social Networks, pp. 67–83. Springer, Dordrecht (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  29. van der Herik, J., Dimov, D.: Towards Crowdsourced Online Dispute Resolution. Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology 7(2), 99–111 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hörnle, J.: Encouraging Online Alternative Dispute Resolution in the EU and Beyond. European Law Review 38, 187–208 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kannai, R., Schild, U., Zeleznikow, J.: Modeling the evolution of legal discretion – an Artificial Intelligence Approach. Ratio Juris 20(4), 530–558 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kersten, G.E., Vahidov, R., Arno, R.: Lodder and John Zeleznikow: Enhanced Dispute Resolution Through the Use of Information Technology. Group Decision and Negotiation 2, 525–530 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kittur, A., Nickerson, J.V., Bernstein, M.S., et al.: The Future of Crowd Work. In: Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSWC 2013, pp. 1301–1318. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Langheinrich, M.: Privacy by Design - Principles of Privacy-Aware Ubiquitous Systems. In: Abowd, G.D., Brumitt, B., Shafer, S. (eds.) UbiComp 2001. LNCS, vol. 2201, pp. 273–291. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Larson, M.: Crowdsourcing: From Theory to Practice and Long-Term Perspectives. Dagstuhl, September 1-4 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Letia, L., Groza, A.: Planning with argumentation schemes in online dispute resolution. In: IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing, pp. 17–24 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Lodder, A.: The Third Party and Beyond. An Analysis of the Different Parties, in particular The Fifth, Involved in Online Dispute Resolution. Information & Communications Technology Law 15(2), 143–155 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lodder, A., Zeleznikow, J.: Developing an Online Dispute Resolution Environment: Dialogue Tools and Negotiation Systems in a Three Step Model. The Harvard Negotiation Law Review 10, 287–338 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lodder, A., Zeleznikow, J.: Enhanced Dispute Resolution Through the Use of Information Technology. Cambridge University Press (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Mars de, J., Exon, S.N., Kovach, K., Rule, C.: Virtual Virtues: Ethical Considerations for an Online Dispute Resolution Practice. Dispute Resolution Magazine 17(1), 6–10 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Marshall, C.C., Shipman, F.M.: Experiences Surveying the Crowd: Reflections on Methods, Participation, and Reliability. In: WebSci 2013, Paris, France, May 2-4, pp. 234–243. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Meier, P.: On Crowdsourcing, Crisis Mapping and Data Protection Standards (2012), http://irevolution.net/2012/02/05/iom-data-protection/

  43. Noriega, P., Chopra, A.K., Fornara, N., Lopes Cardoso, H., Singh, M.: Regulated MAS: Social Perspective. Normative Multi-Agent Systems, pp. 93-134 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Ossowksi, S. (ed.): Agreement Technologies. LGTS. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Poblet, M.: Spread the word: the value of local information in disaster response. The Conversation (January 17, 2013), http://theconversation.com/spread-the-word-the-value-of-local-information-in-disaster-response-11626

  46. Poblet, M., Leshinsky, R., Zeleznikow, J.: Digital neighbours: Even Good Samaritan crisis mappers need strategies for legal liability. Planning News. 38(11), 20–21 (2012), http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=002163980680827;res=IELBUS

    Google Scholar 

  47. Reay, I., Dick, S., Miller, J.: A Large-Scale Empirical Study of P3P Privacy Policies: Stated Actions vs. Legal Obligations. ACM Transactions on The Web 3(2), Art. 6 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Rizza, C., Guimarães, A., Chiaramello, M., Curvelo, P.: Do-it-yourself justice considerations of social media use in a crisis situation: the case of the 2011 Vancouver riots. In: IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, pp. 720–721. IEE Computer Society (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Rule, C., Friedberg, L.: The appropriate role of dispute resolution in building trust online. Artificial Intelligence and Law 13, 193–205 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Rule, C., Rogers, V.: Building a Global System for Resolving High-Volume, Low-Value Cases. Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation 29(7), 135–136 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Schultz, T.: Private Legal Systems: What Cyberspace Might Teach Legal Theorists. Yale Journal of Law & Technology 10, 151–193 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Schultz, T.: The Roles of Dispute Settlement and ODR. In: Arnold Ingen-Housz, K. (ed.) ADR In Business: Practice and Issues Across Countries and Cultures, vol. 2, pp. 135–155. Kluwer, Amsterdam (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Schultz, T.: Internet Disputes, Fairness in Arbitration and Transnationalism: A Reply to Julia Hörnle. International Journal of Law and Information Technology 19(2), 153–163 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Turel, O.: Predictors of disputants’ intentions to use online dispute resolution services: the roles of justice and trust. Doctoral Dissertation. Canada, McMaster University (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Turilli, M.: Ethical Protocols Design. Ethics and Information Technology 9, 49–62 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Wahab, M.S.A., Katsh, E., Rainey, D. (eds.): Online Dispute Resolution: Theory and Practice A Treatise on Technology and ODR. Eleven International Publishing, The Netherlands (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Westin, A.F.: Privacy and Freedom Atheneum, N.Y (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Ye, Q.: Research on Disputes about the Reputation Right in Networks, E-Business and Information System Security. In: EBISS 2009. IEEE (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Zeleznikow, J.: Methods for incorporating fairness into the development of an online family dispute resolution environment. Alternative Dispute Resolution Journal 22, 16–21 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Zeleznikow, J., Bellucci, E.: Legal fairness in ADR processes – implications for research and teaching. Alternative Dispute Resolution Journal 23, 265–273 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Law and Technology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Pompeu Casanovas

  2. Center for Applied Social Research, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

    Pompeu Casanovas

  3. Laboratory of Decision Support and Dispute Management, College of Business, Victoria University, Victoria, Australia

    John Zeleznikow

Authors
  1. Pompeu Casanovas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Zeleznikow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. UAB Institute of Law and Technology, Autonomous, University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain

    Pompeu Casanovas

  2. Torino Law School, University of Torino, Lungo Dora Siena 100, 10153, Turin, Italy

    Ugo Pagallo

  3. CIRSFID, University of Bologna, Via Zamboni, 33, 40126, Bologna, Italy

    Monica Palmirani

  4. CIRSFID, University of bologna, via Zamboni 33, 40126, bologna, Italy

    Giovanni Sartor

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Casanovas, P., Zeleznikow, J. (2014). Online Dispute Resolution and Models of Relational Law and Justice: A Table of Ethical Principles. In: Casanovas, P., Pagallo, U., Palmirani, M., Sartor, G. (eds) AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems. AICOL 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8929. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45960-7_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45960-7_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-45959-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-45960-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation