Contracts in Cyberspace

(LQ): In terms of real space and cyberspace disputes, if there remains the traditional law as we understand it today and the arbitration process described for cyberspace, what happens when the two parties disagree over the choice of law meaning to apply that of the real space or that of the arbitration process.

(LQ): Similar to the above, if the real space system is somewhat different than a cyberspace system, can the proceedings in one system be used in the other system?  In short, are the two systems interchangeable or compatible?  If these systems are then compatible, what happens when a technical issue or matter requiring expertise in one precise area arose in the traditional system, and for whatever reason the proceedings move to the arbitration area, but the arbitrator does not have the requisite skillset nor the resources to acquire sufficient knowledge in this area?

(LQ): In the cyberspace system with the arbitrators, are the parties limited to just presenting the "facts," their version of the stories? Will they be allowed to bring in evidence?  If so, what will happen to the traditional rules of evidence with regards to this external evidence?

(LQ): In this cyberspace system, can a party who appears before an arbitrator choose representation if this 3rd party has the expertise on the issue at hand?  As a corollary, what will be the role of lawyers in this new system?  Will they serve in the capacity as we know it? As consultants? Or just vanish altogether?

(LQ): In the cyberspace world, what if there is a monopoly on a given market, and you, the buyer, must transact with this monopoly, is there any reassurance that you will not get swindled?  Or is such that this system will not allow a monopoly to arise?

(PYS): Reputational Enforcement can be done privately through public forums. Should the mathematics of reputational enforcement be left to the government? Maybe after a certain number of bad transactions they could execute reputation protocols (punish, fine or banishment). Should the government be in such a position? What about arbitrating firms doing the job?

(PYS): Arbitrators, Escrow Agents and Private Enforcement Agencies are great for CyberSpace contracts but what about the Courts? Where do Courts fit in? Maybe they can be available for certain types of contracts. What Kind?

(PYS): Would it be worthwhile for ICAAN, or another trusted independent agency, to set up an online version of the Better Business Bureau? Such an organization could facilitate the reputational knowledge of online sellers by keeping track of complaints and also listing their real space identities (if the stores so desire to register). Consumers would be more willing to trust a seller who took the time to certify their identity. If they are not hiding behind an online identity they may be less likely to run off with consumers money without delivering their end of the bargain.

(PYS): Isn't private enforcement of online contracts even more difficult when the parties wish to remain anonymous? Because often, alternative dispute resolution such as arbitration works because the parties come together face to face and there is opportunity to negotiate.

(PYS): If a significant percentage of contract claims are settled privately or in arbitration, how will the courts deal with a lack of case precedent when a case is brought before the court?

(PYS): Participants in a system which relies heavily on reputation have an incentive to manipulate their reputation by requiring any settlements to be kept secret as part of the settlement terms. Will reputation systems really be accurate, or will they be manipulated by ìsecretî settlements and payoffs allowing anyone to have a clean reputation as long as they have a big enough wallet? Assuming we do not have a truly transparent society where no settlement could be kept secret or private.

LQ: Logan Quirk

PYS: Previous Year's Student