סכסוכים ובלוקצ׳יין: זירה חדשה ליישוב ולמניעה של סכסוכים באופן מקוון

The article addresses the gap between the promise for a dispute-free environment as envisaged by blockchain enthusiasts and a reality fraught with disputes that cannot be effectively addressed in this setting. Blockchain technology was expected to create a safe environment, within which transactions could be securely executed and automatically enforced. Nevertheless, the area of smart contracts and cryptographic coins has suffered some large-scale fraud, which caused substantial economic harm. In addition, use of blockchain technology is often fraught with problems and conflicts over such matters as misunderstandings between contracting parties, interpretations of smart contracts, human errors, mistakes in language-to-code translations, and more .Given the nature of blockchain-related disputes, which tend to arise in fast-paced transactions between distant strangers who are often anonymous, traditional dispute-resolution mechanisms fail to provide viable redress avenues. Courts and alternative dispute-resolution processes, which require face-to-face meetings and protracted proceedings, are inappropriate for this setting.The understanding that problems and disputes in the blockchain context(specifically in the smart-contract context) require innovative redress avenues gave rise to online dispute-resolution processes that can reliably and effectively resolve (and even prevent) disputes without having the disputed parties meet face-to-face. These processes are tailored to the nature of the dispute, the parties, and the unique, global,and typically anonymous setting in which communication takes place.The article describes the nature of the blockchain arena and explains why there was an expectation for a dispute-free environment, which quickly dissipated. The article analyzes the types of disputes that arise in the blockchain setting, and the reasons why traditional dispute-resolution avenues fail to address blockchain issues. It than describes innovative platforms for addressing smart contract-related disputes, which draw on current developments in the fields of online dispute resolution and dispute system design. It further explores the legal and cultural barriers that prevent the distribution and large-scale implementation of online dispute-resolution avenues for smart contract-related disputes. Finally, the article sketches an outline that encourages the adoption of online dispute resolution in the blockchain setting while ensuring that such processes operate effectively and appropriately.