Idea: 9
Friday, 09 January 2015
By. Francis Pedraza
RBTR8
Instead of paying traditional firms to draft agreements, settle disputes, and litigate cases, parties that create a contract on RBTR8 draft their agreement in plain English, agree on an experienced arbitrator and a jury of their peers, then rely on technology to keep everyone on the same page, so disputes are resolved both fairly and efficiently.
RBTR8 is basically “software eats arbitration”, but with a twist:
- Parties select an experienced arbitrator to supervise and a “jury of peers” to serve as witnesses.
- They record their agreement in video, audio and writing — in plain English, no gobbledygook.
- Once everyone — the parties, the jury, and the arbitrator — sign off on the record, it serves as a mutually understood agreement.
- If, in the future, they wish to amend the agreement — for example, to add an unforeseen detail — they may “commit” a change to the record, much like engineers check in code.
- When a dispute arises, the arbitrator officiates in a digital courtroom, asking questions of both parties, and asking for input from the jury.
- Not only do the proceedings not happen in person, they take place remotely and asynchronously.
- At each new stage of the process, members of the jury get email and push notifications, review the latest material, and vote.
- Pricing? Marketplace. Arbitrators get paid $X and jurors get paid $Y per hour. RBTR8 takes 30% of everything.
Further thoughts:
- For $$$$ contracts, the traditional system may be the most predictable. But for smaller deals, something light like this may be more efficient.
- As a perk, this format discourages people from behaving like assholes to each other. The jury provides social accountability.
- Would this move the legal system from a Justinian model (top down legislation) to a Common Law model (bottom up, organic and evolving, based on precedent)?
- Even the Founding Fathers stressed the value of having a jury of one’s peers.
- At worst, wooing a jury in a popularity contest is a less corrupt dominant strategy than the tacit extortion of a settlement.
