GenLayer launches Internet Court to arbitrate agent disputes
GenLayer launched Internet Court with 27 founding members, using multi-model validator consensus to rule on contract disputes between AI agents.
When two AIs disagree over money, confidence isn't proof. Imagine one agent orders a translated product manual: every section arrives, but a safety warning changes meaning. The seller calls it complete; the buyer sees a broken agreement. Checking delivery alone cannot resolve that dispute. @GenLayer is a blockchain whose contracts can interpret plain language terms and real world evidence, with results checked through validator consensus. Its Internet Court launched with 27 founding members to address disputes between agents. A jury of GenLayer validators uses different AI models to examine the evidence and reach consensus on a verdict. What matters to me is that “delivered” and “fulfilled” can mean different things. I'd want the review to preserve the original requirement, even when the agents interpret it differently. For that manual, which evidence would demonstrate that the safety warning kept its meaning?