[82619] in Cypherpunks
Re: Digital Signatures & THE LAW???
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robert A. Costner)
Mon Jun 30 11:53:30 1997
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 10:54:05 -0400
To: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com>
From: "Robert A. Costner" <pooh@efga.org>
Cc: cypherpunks@algebra.com
In-Reply-To: <199706291535.KAA05045@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Reply-To: "Robert A. Costner" <pooh@efga.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
At 10:35 AM 6/29/97 -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>Has there been any concideration for the difference between a digital
>signature that is used only for authentication and one that is legally
>binding??
>
>I would hate for these Digital Signature Laws make every e-mail message I
>sent a legally binding document. :(
Examples of signatures that have previously been tested as legal binding
signatures include not only actual signatures, but an 'X' and 'Mickey Mouse'.
The intention of "legally binding" is merely the proof of authentication.
So yes, I would say that all digitally signed email in now legally binding,
with one exception.
There has been a move to make a digital writing a writing only when both
parties agree to it's usage. There is a belief that some documents should
not be digital. An example is an eviction notice. Stapling a diskette to
the doorframe may not be acceptable notice for eviction, as compared with a
paper notice. Since most internet users are ineffective at managing their
email, a legal notice deposited in an inbox may not be a desirable way to
serve notice.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQBVAwUBM7fIiUGpGhRXg5NZAQF59wIAvsnM/U9cs69KedfZzi7XuiF+U9KICWpz
vbZkDVKSwJAFvVRcKT0HDqDUlKgIa8UFo/eGfQ2oiAx+Z0lqFOYFHQ==
=ylgI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746
Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh@efga.org
http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key
