Robot Lawyers Solve Problems

Ben22 writes "The Register is reporting that soon new 'Robot Agents' will handle all of our online disputes. The new system is called e-Dispute and could eventually be used on services such as eBay or even all online stores. Perhaps it will help usher in an age of simplified, safe online shopping. Someday, Congress and the Senate might even use programs such as this to resolve conflicting bills. The possibilities are endless."

Personalization No More

[komodo9]

Sounds horrible. First we have to go through 500 options over a telephone menu to reach the right person, now there is no more people. And as horrible as ebay/paypal's customer service is anyway... this will remove even more personal contact. Ugh.
--
United Bimmer - BMW Enthusiast Community [unitedbimmer.com]

Stupid article title

[dcam]

What a poor title for the article. For those who can't be bothered to read the article, we aren't going to see robots chasing ambulances or wearing pinstripe armani suits any time soon.

FTA:
"Robot agents digest all the information and make proposals to the parties. Once the arbitrator is agreed upon, the robot agent finds a suitable meeting date for everybody," said Jacques Gouimenou, managing director of Tiga Technologies, the company behind e-Dispute, speaking with ElectricNews.Net. "Our system reduces delays and costs. It is also very secure."

So what we are really talking about is something that:
1. Stores documentation
2. allows the two parties to select an anbitrator
3. Selects a date

What does this have to do lawyers? This is a scheduling tool.

Re:Personalization No More

[Ravatar]

I'd rather read a written statement, than try to understand the person on the other side of the phone line (and probably the ocean).

Headline misrepresents story, what else is new...

[TwentyLeaguesUnderLa]

So basically, as far as I can tell, this is basically a chat room with a human organizer scheduling and moderating things - except that it also has lots of features (videoconferencing, etc) to make communication as convenient as possible, and it's also optimized for "chatting" about legal disputes.

I wouldn't at all be surprised if it becomes very widely used, since for two parties across the globe it's pretty difficult to arrange a long series of meetings in person, but it's being misrepresented - no "robot lawyers" are solving anything, it's just a computer interface to a human lawyer, for convenience.

Re:Personalization No More

[johncadengo]

Perhaps there won't be personal contact, but... Whether or not you prefer robots over people depends on if the company of your choice has decided to outsource or not and whether or not you can understand heavy (just an example) Indian accents...

And most technical support people that you contact over the phone aren't really knowledgeable. There nothing more than robots, they are given a set of instructions and something to say in response to what you say and they try to walk you through mostly what is already available on the internet. And when all else fails they blame it on you, your equipment or something similar. And it takes a whole lot more time to actually get to someone knowledgeable who can help solve your problem, if you ever do.

Not much will change but the price for the companies.

Ummm...

[sterno]

Do you really want to have personal interactions with lawyers? :)

So I'm wondering if they have a patent on it. If they have a patent on it, then they could write an arsenal of lawsuit bots and nobody could defend themselves because they'd have to violate the patent. They could rule the world! MUAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!

Re:In all honesty... NO.

[PSaltyDS]

As others have pointed out, the article makes it sound more like a sched tool. But even if it really was a robot lawyer or robot arbiter:

You are talking about a system set up, owned, and run, by the company you are disputing with. Think about that. Your HMO denies your medical treatment and you call to dispute that and get care you really need. You get to use a system built to your HMO's specs to try and dispute your HMO's decision. It's just as bad as contract clauses that require you to use a specified arbiter who is already selected a paid off by the company before you start.

The computer program had it in for me.

[PrinceAshitaka]

How many people will continue to shuffle responsibility by whineing after litigation that "the computer had it in for me since the beginning." People are goign to hate this. They will no longer be able to blame the "bigoted" judge or artbitur. The next thing you know they will claim the code was written with bias towards them.

You cannot solve problems between people by removing the human element. You need to teach people to get along and take responsibility.