U.S. patent application number 13/016597 was filed with the patent office on 2012-08-02 for computerized method of mediating disputed issues.
Invention is credited to Christine Margaret Tozzi.
Application Number | 20120198357 13/016597 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 46578454 |
Filed Date | 2012-08-02 |
United States Patent
Application |
20120198357 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Tozzi; Christine Margaret |
August 2, 2012 |
COMPUTERIZED METHOD OF MEDIATING DISPUTED ISSUES
Abstract
A computerized Internet web server/browser method of mediating
disputed issues. Here a semi-anonymous mediation network,
optionally linked to a pre-existing social network, containing
various members interested in providing disputes to mediate and
mediating these disputes, is created. Members may post disputes
according to various issue types, have these disputes analyzed and
commented on by other members, who will then receive feedback
according to the success of their analysis. The system keeps track
of member expertise in resolving these disputes, thus determining
which members have better track records at resolving various types
of problems. The system additionally may contain various analytical
and graphical tools to enable members to analyze mediation
responses according to the characteristics of the response givers.
Members may additionally post general questions to other members
and receive responses. Certain data may be shared with advertisers,
who may post ads relevant to the disputed issues.
Inventors: |
Tozzi; Christine Margaret;
(San Francisco, CA) |
Family ID: |
46578454 |
Appl. No.: |
13/016597 |
Filed: |
January 28, 2011 |
Current U.S.
Class: |
715/753 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 50/182
20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
715/753 |
International
Class: |
G06F 3/01 20060101
G06F003/01; G06F 15/16 20060101 G06F015/16 |
Claims
1. A computerized method of mediating disputed issues, said method
comprising: Creating a mediation network comprising a membership
database of a plurality of member individuals interested in
participating in mediation activities, said membership database
comprising at least email addresses, login identification,
passwords, aliases, ages, genders, a mediation experience counter,
a mediation history file, and approximate locations of said
plurality of member individuals, said membership database connected
to at least one Internet web server; making at least said alias,
age, gender, mediation experience counter, and mediation history
file for said plurality of member individuals publically available
on said mediation network; entering a first set of facts related to
a disputed issue involving at least one first member (dispute
member) individual into a web browser running in the graphical user
interface of an internet connected computerized device, and
uploading said first set of facts to an issue database connected to
an Internet web server; transmitting the existence of said disputed
issue to the web browser of at least one second member (mediation
member) individual, so that when said at least one second member
individual is logged in to said mediation network, said at least
one second member individual can choose to participate in mediating
said disputed issue; wherein if said at least one second member
individual chooses to participate in mediating said disputed issue,
said mediation network transmits said first set of facts to said at
least one second member, and invites said at least one second
member to transmit back at least one mediation decision to said at
least one first member individual; wherein if said at least one
second member individual chooses to enter said mediation decision,
transmitting said at least one mediation decision back to said at
least one first member individual, and incrementing the mediation
experience counter(s) associated with said at least one second
member; and providing at least one feedback web page to said at
least one first member wherein said at least one first member may
enter in feedback relating to the quality or success of said
mediation decision into the mediation history file(s) associated
with said at least one second member.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein said approximate locations
comprises one or more location information data selected from the
group consisting of country, state, county, city, and zipcode
information.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein said first set of facts comprises
one or more facts selected from the group consisting of text
descriptions and photographs.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein said at least one first member
individual can additionally set a mediation response deadline or a
minimum number of second member mediation responses deadline.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein said mediation database
additionally provides one or more statistical analysis and/or
graphical analysis software modules to enable said at least one
first member individual to analyze said at least one mediation
decision according to said age, gender, mediation experience
counter, mediation history file, or approximate geographical
location of said at least one second member(s).
6. The method of claim 1, wherein said at least one second
member(s) may exchange comments between said at least one first
member individual and other said at least one second member(s), and
in which said comments are automatically screened for inappropriate
words using an automated or human text checker.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein if said at least one first member
comprises more than one first members, said first members may both
enter and edit said first set of facts related to said disputed
issue prior to transmitting said first set of facts to said at
least one second member(s).
8. The method of claim 1, wherein said at least one first member
may further include human witness email links, telephone numbers,
or other hypertext links in said first set of facts.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein said at least one first member
may select said at least one second member(s) from said membership
database, and invite said at least one second members to
participate in a mediation panel.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein said Internet web server
presents a list of disputes to said least one second member(s), and
said at least one second members select said disputed issue from
said list of disputes and elect to participate in mediating said
disputed issue.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein said Internet web server
provides a list of suggested dispute mediation responses to said at
least one second member(s), and said at least one second member(s)
enter their mediation response by selecting at least one element
from said list of suggested dispute mediation responses.
12. The method of claim 1, wherein if said at least one first
member comprises more than one first members, and at least some of
said first members comprise plaintiff first members (plaintiff
dispute members) and defendant first members (defendant dispute
members) who cannot agree on said first set of facts, then
providing for said first set of facts to be divided between a
plaintiff first set of facts and a defendant first set of facts,
allowing said plaintiff first members to edit said plaintiff first
set of facts, allowing said defendant first members to edit said
defendant first set of facts, and presenting both said plaintiff
first set of facts and defendant first set of facts to said least
one second members.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein said mediation network members
with a mediation experience counter or a mediation history file
that exceeds a preset limit are designated by the mediation network
as judges, and said judges are authorized by said mediation network
to conduct mediation sessions between said plaintiff first members
and said defendant first members.
14. The method of claim 13, wherein mediation network members with
real world legal, mediation, or counseling experience are given
extra credit in their mediation experience counter and/or mediation
history file.
15. The method of claim 12, wherein said plaintiff first members
and/or said defendant first members place funds in a escrow
account, and said escrow account is released upon receiving said
mediation decision.
16. The method of claim 1, wherein said mediation network limits
said at least one first member individuals to a preset number of
disputed issues that have not received mediation decisions.
17. The method of claim 1, wherein said age, gender, approximate
geographic location, and type of mediation issue are provided to
advertisers, said advertisers upload advertising media to said
mediation network, and said mediation network transmits said
advertising media to mediation network members that meet advertiser
specified criteria for age, gender, approximate geographic
location, and type of mediation issue.
18. The method of claim 1, wherein said membership database is
obtained from a social network membership database, and said
mediation network is linked to and is accessible from a social
network.
19. The method of claim 1, wherein said first member individuals
may additionally post questions to at least some of said mediation
network members, and receive question responses from said at least
some of said mediation network members.
20. A computerized method of mediating disputed issues, said method
comprising: Creating a mediation network comprising a membership
database of a plurality of member individuals interested in
participating in mediation activities, said membership database
comprising at least email addresses, login identification,
passwords, aliases, ages, genders, a mediation experience counter,
a mediation history file, and approximate locations of said
plurality of member individuals, said membership database connected
to at least one Internet web server; making at least said alias,
age, gender, mediation experience counter, and mediation history
file for said plurality of member individuals publically available
on said mediation network; entering a first set of facts related to
a disputed issue involving at least one first member individual
into a web browser running in the graphical user interface of an
internet connected computerized device, and uploading said first
set of facts to an issue database connected to an Internet web
server; wherein if said at least one first member comprises more
than one first members, said first members may both enter and edit
said first set of facts related to said disputed issue prior to
transmitting said first set of facts to said at least one second
member(s); wherein said at least one first member may select said
at least one second member(s) from said membership database, and
invite said at least one second members to participate in a
mediation panel; wherein said at least one first member individual
can additionally set a mediation response deadline or a minimum
number of second member mediation responses deadline; transmitting
the existence of said disputed issue to the web browser of at least
one second member individual, so that when said at least one second
member individual is logged in to said mediation network, said at
least one second member individual can choose to participate in
mediating said disputed issue; wherein if said at least one second
member individual chooses to participate in mediating said disputed
issue, said mediation network transmits said first set of facts to
said at least one second member, and invites said at least one
second member to transmit back at least one mediation decision to
said at least one first member individual; wherein if said at least
one second member individual chooses to enter said mediation
decision, transmitting said at least one mediation decision back to
said at least one first member individual, and incrementing the
mediation experience counter(s) associated with said at least one
second member; wherein said mediation database additionally
provides one or more statistical analysis and/or graphical analysis
software modules to enable said at least one first member
individual to analyze said at least one mediation decision
according to said age, gender, mediation experience counter,
mediation history file, or approximate geographical location of
said at least one second member(s); and providing at least one
feedback web page to said at least one first member wherein said at
least one first member may enter in feedback relating to the
quality or success of said mediation decision into the mediation
history file(s) associated with said at least one second
member.
21. The method of claim 20, wherein said at least one second
member(s) may exchange comments between said at least one first
member individual and other said at least one second member(s), and
in which said comments are automatically screened for inappropriate
words using an automated or human text checker.
22. The method of claim 20, wherein said age, gender, approximate
geographic location, and type of mediation issue are provided to
advertisers, said advertisers upload advertising media to said
mediation network, and said mediation network transmits said
advertising media to mediation network members that meet advertiser
specified criteria for age, gender, approximate geographic
location, and type of mediation issue.
23. A computerized method of mediating disputed issues, said method
comprising: Creating a mediation network comprising a membership
database of a plurality of member individuals interested in
participating in mediation activities, said membership database
comprising at least email addresses, login identification,
passwords, aliases, ages, genders, a mediation experience counter,
a mediation history file, and approximate locations of said
plurality of member individuals, said membership database connected
to at least one Internet web server; making at least said alias,
age, gender, mediation experience counter, and mediation history
file for said plurality of member individuals publically available
on said mediation network; entering a first set of facts related to
a disputed issue involving at least one first member individual
into a web browser running in the graphical user interface of an
internet connected computerized device, and uploading said first
set of facts to an issue database connected to an Internet web
server; wherein if said at least one first member comprises more
than one first members, and at least some of said first members
comprise plaintiff first members and defendant first members who
cannot agree on said first set of facts, then providing for said
first set of facts to be divided between a plaintiff first set of
facts and a defendant first set of facts, allowing said plaintiff
first members to edit said plaintiff first set of facts, allowing
said defendant first members to edit said defendant first set of
facts, and presenting both said plaintiff first set of facts and
defendant first set of facts to said least one second members;
transmitting the existence of said disputed issue to the web
browser of at least one second member individual, so that when said
at least one second member individual is logged in to said
mediation network, said at least one second member individual can
choose to participate in mediating said disputed issue; wherein
said mediation network members with a mediation experience counter
or a mediation history file that exceeds a preset limit are
designated by the mediation network as judges, and said judges are
authorized by said mediation network to conduct mediation sessions
between said plaintiff first members and said defendant first
members; wherein if said at least one second member individual
chooses to participate in mediating said disputed issue, said
mediation network transmits said first set of facts to said at
least one second member, and invites said at least one second
member to transmit back at least one mediation decision to said at
least one first member individual; wherein if said at least one
second member individual chooses to enter said mediation decision,
transmitting said at least one mediation decision back to said at
least one first member individual, and incrementing the mediation
experience counter(s) associated with said at least one second
member; and providing at least one feedback web page to said at
least one first member wherein said at least one first member may
enter in feedback relating to the quality or success of said
mediation decision into the mediation history file(s) associated
with said at least one second member.
24. The method of claim 23, wherein said plaintiff first members
and/or said defendant first members place funds in a escrow
account, and said escrow account is released upon receiving said
mediation decision.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0001] 1. Field of the Invention
[0002] The invention is in the general fields of computerized
internet social networks, computerized survey questionnaire
methods, and internet advertising methods.
[0003] 2. Description of the Related Art
[0004] Disputes regarding various issues between individuals are a
constant part of everyday life. These disputes can range from minor
to very serious. At one end, they can be simple domestic arguments
about the division of chores in living arrangements, minor
relationship issues, and the like. The disputes can be more serious
disputes, such as disputes about automobile repair problems and
auto accidents. The disputes can also be even more serious, such as
civil torts and breach of contract disputes.
[0005] At present, there is no fully satisfactory method to handle
any of these issues or disputes. (Note that a dispute will
generally be composed of issues, and will generally have at least
one issue, but may often contain multiple issues). Some problems,
such as the less serious domestic arguments and minor relationship
issues, are just too small for the legal system to handle at all.
Other problems, such as small claims problems (often involving cash
amounts under about $5,000 or $7,500) can be handled by small
claims courts, and more serious tort or breach of contract problems
can be handled by superior courts. However the court process is
cumbersome. At a minimum, the parties must often hire attorneys,
pay fees, and physically travel to the courthouse, where they may
have to wait for a considerable length of time before the trial
commences. If the trial involves a jury, the process is even more
laborious, since the various jury members have to be summoned,
physically travel to the court, and also wait, with a considerable
loss in time and effort.
[0006] Although alternatives to the court system, such as private
mediation services, often conducted by retired judges exist, such
systems are generally also quite cumbersome, again often involving
physical travel and a substantial amount of expense as well.
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0007] What is needed is a simple, low cost, method, preferably
internet based, that has the ability to handle many of the issues
and disputes that are presently too minor for the legal system to
recognize, and ideally scale up to handle some of the various
issues presently being handled by small claims court and superior
court. Here such a method is disclosed.
[0008] In one embodiment, the invention may be a computerized
method of mediating disputed issues. This method may comprise
creating a mediation network based on one or more Internet servers
(or alternatively placing the system on the "cloud").
[0009] The mediation network may comprise at least a membership
database of a plurality of member individuals who are interested in
participating in mediation activities. This membership database
may, for example, contain at least the email addresses, login
identifications, passwords, aliases, ages, marital status and
genders of the various members. The mediation database may
generally also contain various member mediation experience
counter(s), mediation history file, and optionally the approximate
locations of the various member individuals.
[0010] Typically the mediation network will make at least the
alias, age, gender, mediation experience counter, and mediation
history file for the various member individuals publically
available. This way, for example when a member logs in and is
interested in selecting various other members for mediation
assistance, the system may provide a directory one or more web
pages listing the various members by alias name, as well as this
type of information. Often the system will then allow the member to
sort through this directory and pick out, for example, other
members that may have a high experience level, and a high success
level, in mediating the particular type of dispute, issue, or
problem of interest at that time.
[0011] A mediation network member will typically interact with the
mediation network through web browsers running on standard
computerized devices, such as smart phones (e.g. iPhone, Android,
and the like), desktop computers, laptop computers, tablet
computers, and other devices, which in turn will be connected to
the Internet via one or more wired or wireless communications
links.
[0012] The first member (e.g. dispute member(s)) can then solicit
help regarding a dispute or issue by, for example, transmitting the
existence of this dispute or issue, via the mediation network's web
server, to the web browser of one or more second mediation network
member individual(s). As a result, when these one or more second
member individual(s) (e.g. mediation member(s)) is/are logged in to
the mediation network (i.e. logged in to the one or more Internet
web servers that create this mediation network), these one or more
second member individual(s) can choose to participate in mediating
this particular dispute or issue.
[0013] The mediation network may monitor the second member(s)
mediation participation by multiple means. For example, when the
one or more second member individual(s) chooses to enter their
mediation decision(s) for a particular case, in addition to
transmitting these one or more mediation decisions back to the one
or more first member individual(s), the system may also store the
decisions in its mediation database for later statistical analysis.
The system will additionally at least increment a mediation
experience counter(s) associated with each participating second
member. Here one or more types of mediation experience counter may
be used. For example, the disputed issue may be assigned to one or
more dispute or issue types, and there may be a different mediation
experience counter type assigned to each disputed issue type, as
well as an overall accumulated mediation experience counter that
keeps track of all mediation experiences.
[0014] In order to evaluate how successful the various second
members are at mediating various types of disputed issues, the
system will also allow the various first members to enter in
feedback regarding how satisfied the respective first member(s) are
with the mediation advice given.
[0015] In operation, by necessity the mediation network will
generally accumulate information, such as age, gender, approximate
geographic location, and type of mediation issues under discussion.
This information can also be quite valuable for advertisers, and
this advertising tie-in may help finance the system in operation,
thus reducing or eliminating user costs. For example, automobile
repair shops may be interested in local automobile accident
disputes, and may pay to advertise their services to local cases.
Thus in some embodiments of the invention, this information
(generally on a user anonymized basis) may be provided to
advertisers. These advertisers may in turn provide or upload
advertising media to the mediation network. The mediation network
may in turn transmit this advertising media, generally as part of
the uploaded mediation network web pages, to the various mediation
network members that meet various advertiser specified criteria for
age, gender, approximate geographic location, and type of mediation
issues.
[0016] In some embodiments, the mediation network membership may be
affiliated with, linked to, or run under an existing social network
such as Facebook.
[0017] In addition to mediating disputes, the mediation network may
additionally help members post questions on a wide variety of other
issues to other mediation network members, and use the network's
capabilities to receive and analyze responses to these
questions.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0018] FIG. 1 shows an overview of how the mediation network may be
implemented on an Internet web server--web browser system.
[0019] FIG. 2 shows the system being used to resolve a domestic
dispute.
[0020] FIG. 3 shows the system being used to resolve a small-claims
court type dispute.
[0021] FIG. 4 shows an example screenshot of a user entering in
information pertaining to a domestic dispute, and selecting among a
list of available mediators.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
[0022] The basic vision of the invention is to provide a method for
implementing an online mediation network, which would be a web
(internet server/browser) based place where individuals (members)
can virtually meet to resolve conflicts and reconcile with others.
Other goals of the invention are to allow individuals to both give
and get feedback on various issues, some disputed, some not, and by
this feedback gain greater insight into how best to handle these
respective issues. The mediation network is also intended to allow
individuals to share their learning, life experience, and wisdom
with other individuals.
[0023] At present, as previously discussed, the formal legal system
for mediating disputes is expensive, slow, and relatively "toxic"
in that it can often foster continued disputes and ill-will. By
contrast, the invention is intended to provide a quicker, less
expensive, and less toxic alternative to legal systems, at least
with regards to various small claim issues, and various civil
issues that are open to mediation based process. It is also set up
to preserve the anonymity of the individuals involved.
[0024] The invention's mediation network has other purposes as
well. By providing a continual range of potentially interesting
disputes to mediate or at least monitor, the mediation network will
provide considerable entertainment value. Further, although the
invention will be designed to respect user privacy, in the process
of mediating disputes, the invention will be generating valuable
data, such as types of disputes (e.g. damaged car), location of
disputes (e.g. the zip code 95030), and the like that would
potentially be highly valuable for advertising purposes (e.g. car
repair shops located near the 95030 zip code).
Setting Up the System
[0025] Disputes often involve sensitive or private material, and in
order to encourage candor, the mediation network system may be
designed to emphasize user privacy issues. On setup, the system may
require the user's real email address (or instant messaging address
or online voice/video chat address), but then usually shield this
real email address from other users by either routing email or text
or voice chat through the system and keeping the actual email
address anonymous, or alternatively routing email, instant
messaging, or voice/video through third party systems through
anonymous links.
[0026] In some embodiments, additional user verification steps may
also be done as required, such as through driver's license data,
credit card data, or other hard to counterfeit identification data
to ensure system safety and, for example, to prevent unscrupulous
users from signing up under multiple accounts and/or spoofing the
system. This verification data will generally not be released to
the general user base or to advertisers, however.
[0027] Once registered and optionally verified, the system will
generally either invite the user/member to either provide a "stage
name" or alias name, or alternatively may automatically suggest or
provide the stage name/alias name. This stage name/alias name will
generally be changeable at user digression, but the underlying
user/member statistics will remain the same regardless of these
name changes.
[0028] In order to provide good, if anonymous, demographic
information for mediation selection, analysis, and advertiser
purposes, the users will often also be prompted to enter in
additional information, such as the user's age, gender, marital
status, general location (e.g. country, state, county, city, or zip
code) and potentially also, depending upon legal admissibility
criteria, other information such as race, religion, educational
status, income level, political affiliation, and so on.
[0029] The system will generally always keep track of the number of
disputes that that member has participated in, the decisions that
the member has rendered, the dispute originator feedback on these
decisions (e.g. a numeric rating of quality of decision, check box
analysis (good, fair, bad), and verbal comments). The system may
optionally also keep track of the type of dispute that the member
has previously participated in, the approximate geographic location
where these disputes have originated, and so on. This way, for
example, some mediation network members may acquire system
recognized expertise in certain types of dispute topics (e.g.
automobile disputes, domestic disputes, workplace disputes, and so
on).
[0030] Although the mediation network may, for many applications,
act as an alternative to small claims court or civil court for
various disputes, for other applications, the mediation network may
also serve as a convenient forum for conveying advice or feedback
on a variety of non-legal related issues as well. For example, a
first member may login to the mediation network and solicit advice
on relationship issues in sort of a "Dear Abby" or "Mrs. Manners"
online analog from a panel of either selected or non-selected
second members. In this advice giving mode, a first member may for
example describe a problem that may have occurred on a recent ski
trip taken with friends, upload additional information--e.g.
descriptions of the trip and hotels, descriptions of the friends,
and so on, and then request non-legal feedback from the second
members in the form of either checkbox responses (e.g. "friends
should not have gone on the trip", "friends should have gone, get
over it", and so on), or as text responses. The first member may
also set the system to collect responses over a set period of time
(e.g. one week), or for a set number of responses (e.g. 100
responses) before closing the issue.
[0031] Once the preset number of days or responses has been
reached, or upon early termination by the first member, the first
member may then take advantage of various statistical analysis
programs and graphics programs provided by the system to analyze
the number of responses, such as presenting the response data
broken down by the second member's age, gender, or previous
experience with this type of issue, and then providing suitable
statistical analysis (e.g. bar graphs, line graphs) and numeric
statistics (e.g. 60% "friends should not have gone on the trip",
40% "friends should have gone, get over it) as appropriate.
Use of Comments
[0032] In addition to voting, mediation network members who have
been asked to vote on a particular issue may also be given the
ability to provide comments regarding the issue, and the first
member who has posted the issue or dispute may be allowed to review
the comments at any time. To preserve anonymity, the comments
generally show up only under the screen names or aliases assigned
to these members. Again these screen names/aliases may be either
changed regularly by the computer system, or alternatively the
various members may choose to build their reputations by repeatedly
using the same screen name or alias.
[0033] In order to avoid bad language, the system will often employ
one or more levels of moderation. In a first level of moderation,
automatic text recognition software may scan the comments for
improper words or phrases, or known variants of these improper
words or phrases, as well as activity associated with high
emotions, such as typing in all capital letters. In a second level
of moderation, either on an as requested basis, or other
appropriate basis (e.g. randomly, according to previous history,
and so on), human moderators may come in and delete or edit
comments as appropriate.
Issues and Disputes Involving Multiple Individuals
[0034] Often various types of issues involve more than one
individual. These disputes can be friendly (non-adversarial), or
they may be adversarial. In the case of non-adversarial issues or
disputes, the system may allow more than one first member (e.g.
dispute member(s)) to logon and work on creating and editing the
particular issue or dispute in question, as well as create and edit
a menu of proposed options to give the second members who will be
asked to pass judgment on the dispute. Thus one first member may
login and create a first draft of the proposed issue, then
electronically pass the issue to another first member who can login
and edit the issue, and pass it back again. Alternatively both
first members may log in at the same time. These first members may
also annotate the description of the dispute with additional
information, such as photographs, links to witnesses, testimony
from witnesses, and so on.
[0035] In an alternative embodiment, which is particularly useful
for more adversarial disputes, the more than one description of the
issue, event, or dispute in question may be entered in. Here, for
example, an initial first member, here called the plaintiff
member(s) (or plaintiff dispute member), may enter in the plaintiff
member's view of the issue, event, or dispute, and other first
members involved in the dispute, but with differing viewpoints,
here called the defendant member(s) (or defendant dispute member),
may enter in their version of the issue, event, or dispute. Indeed
the system may be designed to accommodate a different version of
the issue, event, or dispute for each first member participating.
However for simplicity, most of the examples in this specification
will discuss a simple two-sided issue or dispute, and here the two
sides will be generally referred to as a "plaintiff" side and a
"defendant" side. Note that although this plaintiff/defendant
nomenclature is particularly useful for discussing quasi-legal
issues or disputes, the methods of the invention are in fact more
general purpose and may be used for many other non-legal purposes,
such as the "Dear Abby" or "Mrs. Manners" advice giving purposes
previously described.
[0036] As previously discussed, in other embodiments, the invention
may also function in a quasi-legal mode to help mediate issues and
disputes, which may involve more than one first member. Here
several options or embodiments can be done. In a first option or
embodiment, the system will enable the first member(s) who are
submitting the issue/dispute to also appoint a panel of second
members who may act on a jury like basis to resolve the
issue/dispute. This "jury" or panel of second members may be
selected on a random basis among system members that meet certain
criteria pre-selected by either the system or by the first
member(s). These pre-selection criteria may be one or more criteria
such as online status of the second member, previous experience,
age, gender, voting history, approximate geographic location of the
second member, and so on. Continuing the "jury" analogy, after
initial selection, this panel of second members may be further
screened by the various first members, and at least some of this
panel may then be selected or dismissed based on agreed upon
criteria.
[0037] In one embodiment of the invention, which is particularly
useful when quasi-legal issues are being resolved, but which may
also be useful for non-legal applications as well, the various
first members may be allowed or required to place something into an
escrow account. This "something" could be money, in the case where
the mediation issue may involve an issue that can be resolved by
cash, or alternatively can be a physical object, such as a disputed
item of property, which might potentially be sent or mailed into a
neutral repository for safe keeping. Based upon prior agreement,
when the issue or dispute is ultimately resolved, including any
optional pre-agreed upon appeals, the system will then release the
escrow funds or other item to the winning party, or otherwise
dispose of the item as per previous agreement.
[0038] In addition to "jury like" panels of members, the system may
also enable certain more highly qualified members to serve in a
judge like capacity. Here, the system may operate by selecting
various members with an experience level in one or more issue
types, positive feedback level, or other criteria (e.g. age,
real-world legal experience) and designate them as "Judges". The
system will make the "judge" status of such members known, and will
allow other members to select judges to mediate disputes either on
a standalone basis (e.g. one judge), on a panel of judges basis
(e.g. three judges), or as moderators to help summarize issues and
guide the decisions of the system's online jury.
[0039] In one embodiment, such judges can enable disputes to be
rapidly solved on a real-time basis. In this mode, the relevant
first members, such as the plaintiff first member, and the
defendant first member, and the second member(s) serving as
judge(s) may be online at the same time. Then, much as a real-world
court, the first members will relate their particular version of
the facts and issues, the mediation network judge(s) will ask
questions, and then decide the issue/dispute, either in real time,
or after suitable reflection as required. Private judges or retired
judges may also be used on a paid basis.
Results of Mediation
[0040] Depending upon user selection, the system may either allow
the results of a particular case to be viewed by any other
mediation system member, or alternatively only by a subset of
members (such as jury or judge members associated with that
particular issue or dispute), or kept entirely private. The system
may additionally allow first members to pay the other second
members for their time and contribution, as desired.
Other Applications
[0041] In addition to quasi-legal mediation and less formal "Dear
Abby"/"Mrs. Manners" type mediation, the system may also function
to keep its members entertained by allowing users to put up random
questions with multiple choice answers, as well as collecting and
displaying statistics on the resulting answers. Users additionally
may be able to search for mediation opportunities by category or
case number (e.g. a friend may refer an interesting case number for
review) for purposes of entertainment as well. The site may be
marketed on billboards and through other forums, such as by use of
one or more online scrolling screens, which may highlight
interesting mediation cases, and encourage users to log on and
submit their opinions.
Getting Feedback
[0042] In some embodiments, in order to insure that the system is
collecting good feedback regarding the success or utility of the
various members regarding their mediation efforts, the system will
require that the first members who originated the dispute or issue
in question to provide feedback prior to closing out that
particular issue or dispute. This feedback can include feedback
such as "I/we took the advice and were pleased with the results,
I/we didn't take the advice and wish we had, I/we took the advice
and wish that we had not, I/we did not take the advice and were
glad that I/we did not", and so on. The feedback can also be if the
issue has been totally resolved, partially resolved, or not at all
resolved.
[0043] The system may further limit each member to a preset maximum
number of open or unresolved issues or disputes at any given time.
This maximum number may be a constant, or may be varied according
to the experience level of the member. In some embodiments, members
may be able to purchase an ability to put up an additional number
of open issues above and beyond the minimum default number.
Advertising/Analytics
[0044] Although the main focus of the invention is on techniques to
improve the dispute mediation process, as a side product of
mediating many disputes, the system will acquire much information
which, although still anonymized, can still be quite valuable to
advertisers. This is because disputes may be categorized as to
type: specific problems with relationships, neighbors, automobiles,
products, renting, purchases and so on, as well as to geographic
area (i.e. city, zip code), and each specific problem may be of
specific interest to various local, regional, national, or
international businesses that provide solutions to these specific
problems. Thus as previously discussed, an automobile accident
dispute may be of interest to local auto repair shops, auto
dealers, or insurance agencies. A domestic dispute may be of
interest to local marriage counselors, tenant-landlord issues may
be of interest to local apartments, as well as local real estate
agents and legal firms, and so on.
[0045] The system may thus generate revenues by, for example,
selling the ability for advertisers to place text or graphic
advertisements along with the various mediation web pages served up
by the system. A particular advertiser may, for example, then elect
to purchase 1000 ad impressions based on a set range of dispute
topics or issues, within a particular geographic area, and going to
members in a certain age range.
[0046] The user may use a web browser user interface to set up a
new case, issue, or dispute. Here the user may, for example, click
on an issue general topic, such as relationships, work, neighbors,
real estate, product sales, and the like, and from this general
topic select various sub-topics, such as landlords, tenants,
property taxes, insurance and the like under the real estate
general topic. Similarly a broad relationships topic might be
further subdivided into various sub topics such as marriage,
divorce, living together, friends, children, and so on.
[0047] The user may next click on additional menu items, such as
type of case, issue or dispute: e.g. advice, mediation network
opinion, small claims disputes (e.g. money amounts under a certain
limit such as $5,000 or $7,500. The user can also select other
items such as single party, multiple party, role (plaintiff,
defendant), and as needed sign up any co-parties to the issue or
dispute as well.
[0048] The user may then select other options as well, such as
mediation level requested (e.g. seeking advice, getting opinion,
jury mediation, judge mediation) an additionally may post money or
other items into escrow pending the mediation decision, as desired.
Alternatively the user may put less or nothing at stake, and even
select an option stating that the opinion is simply wanted for
advisory purposes only, and that the user has little or no intent
of actually taking the advice.
[0049] Other options selectable by the user include judge or jury
characteristics desired (e.g. age, sex, experience level, location,
and so on), and optionally preferred second members (jurors) may
also be selected. Privacy options--e.g. making the case open to the
general membership to view, or closed to all but a selected group
of members, and suitable screen names may also be selected.
[0050] Once initiated, the system will often generate both a case
number and a URL or other means so that the case may be viewed as
needed. In some embodiments, the web page(s) where the case may be
accessed from the outside may be behind a security wall, encrypted,
or otherwise protected to help preserve case privacy from
unauthorized viewers.
[0051] The mediation network may also have many other options as
well, such as access to libraries, even legal libraries, where
members may research various topics of interest to the mediation
process.
SPECIFIC EXAMPLES
[0052] Thus in one embodiment, the invention may be a computerized
method of mediating disputed issues. This method may comprise
creating a mediation network based on one or more Internet servers
(or alternatively placing the system on the "cloud").
[0053] These Internet servers may be based on one or more computer
processors, such as the popular Intel or AMD x86 series of
processors, computer memory (often RAM, Flash, or Disk drive
memory), network connections to the Internet, and suitable
operating system software such as Windows, UNIX, Linux or other
variant. The Internet server(s) will typically contain or be
connected to data storage devices, often disk drives or flash
memory, and in turn may control and manipulate one or more
databases, often by way of database software such as MySQL or other
software. The Internet servers will also often run web server
software, such as Apache, and interact both with the various
mediation network members by serving HTML based web pages by way of
various middleware such as PHP, Perl, Ruby and the like.
[0054] The mediation network will typically comprise at least a
membership database of a plurality of member individuals who are
interested in participating in mediation activities. This
membership database may, for example, often contain at least the
email addresses, login identifications, passwords, aliases, ages,
and genders of the various members. The database will also contain
various member mediation experience counter(s), mediation history
file, and approximate locations of the various member
individuals.
[0055] Typically the mediation network will make at least the
alias, age, gender, mediation experience counter, and mediation
history file for the various member individuals publically
available. This way, for example when a member logs in and is
interested in selecting various other members for mediation
assistance, the system may provide a directory one or more web
pages listing the various members by alias name, as well as this
type of information. Often the system will then allow the member to
sort through this directory and pick out, for example, other
members that may have a high experience level, and a high success
level, in mediating the particular type of dispute, issue, or
problem of interest at that time. Alternatively, the system may
assign mediators either randomly or according to an alternative
predetermined scheme. In many embodiments, when mediators log in,
the system may present them with a list of issues (e.g. by
displaying a rolling list of issues, or by other presentation
format). Here mediators may choose to provide their mediation
assistance as they desire. Mediators may also be prompted to
provide input based upon their prior experience, as judged by the
system.
[0056] In operation, a member may proceed to use the mediation
system by, for example, entering a first set of facts related to a
disputed issue (usually involving this member) into a web browser
running in the graphical user interface of an internet connected
computerized device. To do this, the system will often provide
various web pages containing suitable check boxes, forms, and data
entry locations where the member may enter in this information. The
member can then use this web page to uploading this first set of
facts to an issue database connected to the Internet web server(s).
This first set of facts can include human witness email links,
telephone numbers, or other hypertext links.
[0057] If more than one first members are involved in setting up
the dispute or issue, the system may be configured to enable
multiple first members to collaborate, allowing both to enter and
edit this first set of facts.
[0058] In some cases, more than one first member may be involved in
the issue or dispute, but these members may be on opposite sides of
the issue or dispute, and neither may wish the other access to edit
their particular version of the facts. In this case, the system may
be designed to handle such adversarial situations.
[0059] For example, the system may be designed to designate at
least some of the first members as plaintiff first members, and
other first members as defendant first members. The system may then
allow the first set of facts to be divided between a plaintiff
first set of facts and a defendant first set of facts. The system
will allow the plaintiff first members to edit the plaintiff first
set of facts, and allowing the defendant first members to edit the
defendant first set of facts. After this is done, the system may
then present both sets of facts to the various second members for
subsequent mediation. The system can be designed to be flexible,
and can have multiple categories of first members, each with their
own respective set of facts, and each with control over presenting
their own respective set of facts, as needed.
[0060] In some embodiments, the mediation network may be affiliated
with a pre-existing social network, such as Facebook, Twitter,
MySpace, and the like. For example, the mediation network may be
either linked to the preexisting social network's operating system,
or run under the preexisting social network's operating system.
Here, to preserve anonymity, only some data from the social
network's database may be used, and other parts, such as
identifiable names, may be suppressed. Thus, for example, a
Facebook user in need of mediation services may click on a Facebook
link, and be able to access the mediation network, have some
information (e.g. age, rough geographic location) ported over to
the mediation network, yet be confident that he or she could then
resolve disputes in relative privacy, with the issues kept isolated
from the rest of the user's social network, and only shared
according to a level authorized by the user.
[0061] The web browser will typically be a standard web browser,
such as Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and the like,
often running on a standard computerized device, such as a smart
phone, desktop computer, laptop computer, tablet computer, and the
like, which in turn is connected to the Internet via one or more
wired or wireless communications links. This computerized device
will itself typically be made up of one or more computer
processors, memory, video display devices, user interface devices
(e.g. keyboards, mouse devices, touch sensitive screen devices) and
suitable network connection(s), run under the control of various
operating system software such as Windows, Linux, Android, iOS, and
the like.
[0062] The member can then solicit help regarding this issue by,
for example, transmitting the existence of this disputed issue, via
the mediation network's web server, to the web browser of one or
more second mediation network member individual(s). As a result,
when these one or more second member individual(s) is/are logged in
to the mediation network (i.e. logged in to the one or more
Internet web servers that create this mediation network), these one
or more second member individual(s) can choose to participate in
mediating this particular disputed issue.
[0063] In operation, assuming that at least one second member
individual chooses to participate in mediating this disputed issue,
the mediation network will transmit this first set of facts to the
relevant second member(s), and invite these relevant second
member(s) to transmit back, again usually by entering data into a
web page on the second member's web browser, at least one mediation
decision regarding this disputed issue. The mediation network will
then keep track of this decision, and ultimately relay this
decision, along with the decisions rendered by other mediation
network second member(s) back to the one or more first member
individual(s).
[0064] Alternatively the facts may be presented so that the
relevant second member(s) may simply click on a response choice
(e.g. accept facts, accept paragraph 1, reject paragraph 2, reject
all facts, and so on) among several choices that are laid out
either by the first member, or by the system itself.
[0065] The mediation network may monitor the second member(s)
mediation participation by multiple means. For example, assuming
the one or more second member individual(s) chooses to enter their
mediation decision(s), in addition to transmitting these one or
more mediation decisions back to the one or more first member
individual(s), the system may also store the decisions in its
database for later statistical analysis. The system will
additionally at least increment a mediation experience counter(s)
associated with each participating second member. Here one or more
mediation experience counter may be used. For example, the disputed
issue may be assigned to one or more types, and there may be a
different mediation experience counter assigned to each disputed
issue type, as well as an overall accumulated mediation experience
counter that keeps track of all mediation experiences.
[0066] In order to evaluate how successful the various second
members are at mediating various types of disputed issues, the
system will also allow the various first members to enter in
feedback regarding how satisfied the respective first member(s) are
with the mediation advice given. This will be usually done by
having the mediation network web server(s) again serve up at least
one evaluation web page to the web browser(s) of the various first
member(s), which will typically provide suitable checkboxes, radio
buttons, sliders, text entry regions, numeric ratings, and so on
where this feedback can be rendered. Often the system will then
assign this feedback information to the various participating
second members, often on a per disputed issue type basis. This way,
for example, a particular mediation network second member, after
mediating various disputed issues, might get an excellent feedback
rating with regards to mediating auto repair problems, but a lower
rating with regards to mediating personal or family disputes. Based
on these ratings, other mediation network members would come to
know that this particular individual may be a guru with respect to
automobiles, but is probably best not consulted for delicate
personal issues. Another individual may accumulate a reverse
rating, and become recognized as very wise with respect to
interpersonal problems, but best not consulted with respect to
anything mechanical, and so on.
[0067] The mediation feedback will generally be stored in the
mediation history file(s) that are associated with each member. The
mediation feedback may also be stored and associated in the history
files associated with the originating first member as well, and
optionally also either publically displayed, or at least displayed
to potential second members prior to accepting a mediation
assignment from that particular first member. This way, for
example, if a particular first member has a history of giving low
feedback for everything, the person might gradually acquire a
reputation as being a difficult individual, and other members can
take this into account when deciding whether or not to help this
individual in various future mediation problems.
[0068] An example of some of the data flow involved in this method
is shown in FIG. 1. Here the mediation network software may be
stored on Internet server (100), which in turn may be connected to
database (102). Database (102) in turn may store membership data
pertaining to the various mediation network members (104) such as
member ID (e.g. email addresses, and/or other contact information
such as phone numbers, social network link, etc.), alias (e.g.
system name), age, gender, location, experience (often broken down
by dispute issue type), member mediation feedback (again often
broken down by dispute issue type), and other information as
desired. Database (102) or other database may also store dispute
data (106) pertaining to the various ongoing and historical
disputes or issues, including the dispute owners (i.e. the first
members that placed the dispute and issues onto the system in the
first place), type of dispute, approximate location of the dispute,
various dispute facts, any deadline or maximum number of responses
set to mediate the dispute, and funds or items placed in escrow
pending dispute resolution, list of dispute mediators, comments
regarding the dispute, and the various mediator dispute
responses.
[0069] Internet web server will generally be connected to the
internet (108) and though the internet make connections with
various web browsers (110, 112, 114, 116) running on computerized
devices that in turn are being used by the various mediation
network members.
[0070] The approximate location information associated with each
member may be information such as the user's country, state,
county, city, and/or zip code. In some embodiments, the system may
request the member's complete address, but then only make the
approximate location available to other users in order to preserve
member anonymity.
[0071] Alternatively, in some embodiments, the system will allow
all users to a particular dispute to mutually identify themselves
to other dispute participants as long as proper permissions are
obtained. In these situations, members of a dispute may invite
others to a dispute by, for example, exchanging an internet link
such as a URL, or by other means.
[0072] The first set of facts entered in by the first member
regarding a disputed issue can be almost anything. These facts can
include text descriptions of the issue, photographs, videos, sound
recordings, links to witnesses, witness statements, links to other
websites or external data, and so on. In order to preserve
anonymity, the system may optionally make use of various software
filters, or moderators, or even human moderators, designed to
screen the data for potentially sensitive information, such as
identifiable names and addresses, and automatically redact such
sensitive information according to mediation network system
policies.
[0073] In order to move the mediation process along, the system
will often enable the first member individual(s) who originate the
disputed issue in the first place to additionally set either a
mediation response deadline or a minimum number of second member
mediation responses needed to complete the mediation process for
any given issue or dispute.
[0074] As previously discussed, often the mediation network will
provide one or more statistical analysis and/or graphical analysis
software modules to enable the one or more first member
individual(s) to analyze the various mediation decisions supplied
by the various second members participating in that particular
issue or dispute. These statistical analysis tools and or graphical
analysis tools will often be various software applications or
modules, often residing on the mediation network's network server,
which can process the second member mediation decisions that are
stored in the mediation network database, and then transmit the
analysis results to the first member's web browsers. These
statistical analysis and/or graphical analysis software modules or
tools may, for example, enable the various first member individuals
to analyze the mediation decisions by any combination of the
characteristics of the various second members. For example, the
data may be analyzed according to the second member's age, gender,
mediation experience counter, mediation history file, or
approximate geographical location of said at least one second
member(s).
[0075] Thus, for example, a user with a computer related issue may
find it useful to do an age sort (analysis) of the mediation data,
often using statistical and graphical tools supplied by the
mediation network system, and may find, for example, that filtering
the mediation responses by age may produce better results if the
feedback from older mediation network members is de-emphasized or
discarded. By contrast, a user with a delicate personal problem to
resolve may obtain better results by preferentially taking the
mediation data from older mediation network members, and possibly
taking the gender, mediation type experience, marital status and
other second member(s) characteristics into account as well.
[0076] In order to facilitate the mediation process, particularly
when multiple second members are assigned to a particular issue or
dispute, in some embodiments, it may be useful to allow the various
second members to exchange comments, either between themselves,
with the first mediation member(s) that initiated the issue, or any
combination of the two. As previously discussed, in order to
maintain decorum, in some embodiments, the system may screen these
comments for inappropriate words using an automated or human text
checker.
[0077] Additionally, to facilitate mediation data analysis, often
it will be useful to provide the mediators with a preselected list
of responses, so that mediators need merely check a particular
response. Use of such a list can greatly facilitate summing up
results from multiple mediators. Such a preselected list of
responses can be generated by a variety of means. In one option,
the first user entering in the dispute may generate the list of
responses as part of the dispute description and set-up.
Alternatively the system may automatically generate a list of
responses based, for example, on the type of dispute in question.
As yet another alternative, the system may as an additional service
allow a dispute initiator to request one or more human moderators
to provide a list of responses for the dispute. As yet another
alternative, the mediators may vote on what list of responses is
most appropriate first, and then enter in their responses as a
second step.
[0078] As previously discussed, in some embodiments, it may be
useful to designate certain mediation network members with a
mediation experience counter or a mediation history file that
exceeds a preset limit as judges, at least within their particular
mediation type category of expertise. These judges may be
authorized by the mediation network to conduct mediation sessions
between plaintiff first members and defendant first members, or
other combinations of first members as desired. Here, mediation
network members that have previous real-world legal, mediation, or
counseling experience may be given extra credit in their mediation
experience counter and/or mediation history file by the mediation
system or mediation system moderators, and this can help put the
system on a sound footing.
[0079] FIG. 2 shows an example of some of the data flows that can
occur while the system is operating. In this example, the first
member, going by the alias of "Juliet" (200), is asking the system
to help resolve a domestic issue involving a fiance and various
relatives and in-laws. The various second members who are available
to help include a second member with the alias "Mercutio" (202),
another second member with the alias "Paris" (204), other second
members, and an N'th second member using the alias "Abby"
(206).
[0080] Here Juliet (200) may contact the mediation network through
her web browser (110), and initiate dispute 1 by sending back data
to the web server (100) and database (102). The web server and
database (102) will update the dispute portion of the database
(106) with the information that Dispute 1 is owned by Juliet.
Juliet can further enter that the dispute involves a domestic issue
type, and the location is the city of Verona. Juliet can further
enter in other facts, such as that the dispute involves potential
in-laws, that no money has been put in escrow, and the like.
[0081] Various second members, again usually operating under
aliases, may be selected by Juliet or the system to help mediate
the dispute. In this example, either Juliet or the system may have
decided to select on the basis of location, so all the second
members have been chosen from the same city of Verona. Here various
second members are helping to meditate this process, including one
member with the alias "Mercutio" (202), another member with the
alias "Paris" (204), other members, and an nth member with the
alias "Abby" (206).
[0082] The membership data associated with these members is shown
in FIG. 2 (104). As can be seen, "Mercutio" is apparently a young
man of 16 with no previous experience in these matters, the data
for "Paris" is not shown, and the Nth second member is someone
named "Abby" is a middle aged woman who has apparently had
substantial mediation experience in this area, and is highly
rated.
[0083] The number of mediators selected (here N is assumed to be
12), their comments, and their respective responses are further
saved in the dispute database (106).
[0084] Once the time has expired, Juliet may then analyze her
mediation results by using appropriate statistical and graphing
software applications, often provided by web server (100), to
analyze the mediation response data (208).
[0085] For example, although the initial mediation response data
may have been evenly divided with six out of 12 second mediators
recommending the "get married and run off" option, and six out of
12 second mediators recommending the "you're too young, cool it,
stay friends, and see what develops" option, when Juliet analyzes
the data by age, she may see that when she selects and age 20
option for the cutoff, most of the "get married and run off" option
is being selected by mediators under 20, while most of the "you're
too young, cool it, stay friends, and see what develops" option is
being chosen by mediators over 20. She may also see that the
responses from mediators with a high feedback rating follow similar
lines. The system software, often running on web browser (100), can
send suitable graphics to Juliet's web browser (110) to help her
visualize the various options.
[0086] Juliet can then make her determination of what advice is
best, and provide feedback rating to the various participating
members (210) regarding their recommendations (210) in this
case.
[0087] FIG. 3 shows an example of a screenshot of the system
working in dispute entering mode. Here Juliet, our example from
FIG. 2, is in the process of entering in her basic dispute
information (300), (302), and also selecting from a list of
available mediators (304). In this example, in the basic dispute
information, Juliet has entered in the type of dispute (domestic),
subtype (potential in-laws), location (Verona), if there is an
escrow amount involved (no), urgency (high), time required for
dispute mediation (24 hours). Juliet has also selected to manually
select the mediators from a mediator list (306) rather than have
the system suggest mediators for her. Juliet has also requested
that a system advisor (either a human advisor or an automated
algorithm) select a list of mediation suggestions for her. These
are shown in (310).
[0088] As the example above suggests, the system may provide more
than one way to select mediators for a dispute. In some
embodiments, the dispute participants may elect to hand select
mediators based upon available mediator information. In other
embodiments, the system itself may select the mediators, either
randomly or else based on a selection process. For example, in one
type of selection process, when mediators log in, the system may
scroll or otherwise display a list of disputes to the mediators,
and the first "n" mediators that show an interest in a particular
dispute will be selected by the system to mediate the dispute. Many
other mediator selection schemes may also be used.
[0089] Finally, FIG. 3 shows an example of an advertisement (312).
Use of such advertisements can help the system operator operate as
a low-cost or free service. As previously discussed, the system may
use basic dispute information such as dispute type and location to
offer up potentially relevant advertisements.
[0090] FIG. 4 shows an example of the system working in a "small
claims court" mode. In this example, assume that two women, going
by the aliases of "Pam" and "Debby" are disputing the $1,000
insurance deductable charges for a minor "fender bender" accident,
which was only partially witnessed by witness with the alias name
of "Will". The facts of the situation are in enough dispute that
the two cannot agree on liability, and thus are turning to the
mediation network to help resolve the problem.
[0091] In this example, Pam (400), who may have suffered the auto
damage in this case, may open the dispute by uploading data through
her web browser (110), Internet (108), web server (100) to database
(102) and dispute data (106) opening the dispute as a plaintiff,
and uploading the type of dispute (automobile), the approximate
location of the accident (Fresno Calif.), her version of the facts,
and the deadline for resolving the facts (408)
[0092] Here Debby (402), who may not have suffered damage, but who
Pam thinks is responsible for the accident and if so may owe Pam
the $1,000 deductable payment, may have previously agreed to
mediate the dispute using the mediation network. Here assume that
Debby has also agreed to put her $1,000 that is potentially owed to
Pam into an escrow account that will be held by the system or by a
third party escrow service. In this mode, the system will allow
Debby (402) to upload her version of the facts by web browser
(112), and again through the Internet, server, and database to the
dispute database (106), (410).
[0093] Here either Pam or Debby can upload information such as
photos of the scene of the accident, damage to the car and so on,
as well as a link to any witness willing to testify. Here one of
them has added a link to witness Will (404), who here is willing to
participate through his web browser (114).
[0094] Unlike some of the other examples, which used a panel of
multiple second members, here Pam and Debby have agreed to put the
case before a highly experienced mediation network member Jackie
(406), who's membership data indicates has accumulated a huge
number of experience (397 relevant cases) and a high level (91%+)
of positive feedback. Member Jackie has thus been given the rank of
"Judge" by the system, and is thus authorized to mediate disputes
by herself.
[0095] In this case, Pam, Debby, Jackie and Will can agree to
either hold the mediation session online at a given time, or else
handle over a period of time as each log in to the system. Here
Jackie may review the plaintiff's version of the facts, review the
defendant's version of the facts, send questions to witness Will,
ask additional to Pam and Debby as needed, and finally render a
decision. Depending upon how the system is set up, Jackie may
additionally be empowered to release the funds from escrow to
whoever prevails in this particular case.
* * * * *