Re: cr> Online Court System


Sender: Robert Cannon <•••@••.•••>

The idea of online arbitration is fascinating.  It will probably be of great
assistance in resolving many legal problems.  It must be remembered however
that no one can be forced into arbitration;  both parties must consent to
the extra-judicial determination of their legal rights.  One's rights cannot
be determined absent such consent.

The idea that there might be an online non-governmental court which would
banish people is, I would suggest, legally suspect.  Those who did the
banishing would likely find themselves liable for harm caused to the
banished.  Vigilantes are liable for the harm they cause regardless of
whether they think they are right.

At 04:57 PM 3/19/96 -0800, you wrote:
>Sender: Off The Edge <•••@••.•••>
>        In response to Marilyn's post, immediately below, I am forwarding
>along an anouncement I received from the Red Rock Eater. My only comment to
>Marilyn is in this day of multiple AOL aliases, if somebody wants to flame,
>they will figure out a way.
>>But yes, we *can* prosecute in our own courts, online.  I look forward
>>to seeing flameproof areas on the net.  We can enforce this by holding
>>online court.  (eVote can be used for this.)  I could bring charges
>>against a flamer and if there is measurable agreement among peers that
>>a particular post is on fire, we banish the author from the flameproof
>>parts of cyberspace for a month or so.

Just my thoughts.  Not legal advice.
|                 Robert Cannon, Esq.                |
|   Internet and Interactive Telecommunications Law  |
|    •••@••.•••   703-527-6631 (home office)    |
|    Washington, D.C.   |

 Posted by Andrew Oram  - •••@••.••• - Moderator: CYBER-RIGHTS (CPSR)
   CyberJournal:  (WWW or FTP) -->
 Materials may be reposted in their _entirety_ for non-commercial use.