The European Commission, the United States Government, academics, and participants in e-commerce recognize the importance of dispute resolution. This is a powerful and low cost method of dispute resolution. Its success in satisfying both merchants and consumers is exemplified by the miniscule amount of litigation occurring over the last couple of decades over credit card charge back arrangements. The OECD was correct in its white paper issued last Spring that proponents of e-commerce should focus on extending the chargeback idea. The United States Government through its diplomatic channels with the OECD should encourage this point of view in Europe and elsewhere.
Many myths exist.
First of all, the United States and Europe take remarkably similar approaches to basic concepts of prescriptive and adjudicative jurisdiction. We use different terminology, and sometimes have different starting points in terms of legal philosophy, but our legal systems deal with similar problems and would resolve most contested cases in exactly the same way. I have been involved in discussions over a proposed international treaty on the international enforcement of civil judgments, a project of the Hague Conference on Private International Law. These discussions have been illuminating and have promise for helping provide an appropriate framework to encourage electronic commerce on the Internet. As the discussions continue, we must focus attention sharply on differences between European and American interest groups on whether consumer contracts should be treated specially, understanding in a more precise way similarities and differences between European approaches and the approaches of state consumer protection agencies in the United States.