TC> This happens all the time, though "I am not a lawyer," in disputes about TC> whether a contract was signed properly, about whether the signer had the TC> right authority, etc. And it is apparently not necessary to have the TC> "state" establish itself, for example, as the keeper of signatures. But the state does establish Notaries Public, and courts put special credence in the validity of signatures witnessed by them. Which is to be expected, of course, having the King's X being good in the King's courts. I don't see this as an either/or binary at all. To me, the natural thing to do is for a person who is already a Notary under the laws of a state to offer digital notary services. I would expect the State of California or Commonwealth of Massachussets to have the Secretary of State's office (or whoever is in charge of Notary Credentials there) to digitally sign the public keys of any Notaries commissioned thereby. In fact, I would like to see provision made for a digital signature to have an expiration date included, so that the SoS office could have its signature on a key set to expire along with the Notary's commission. Thus the existing state framework for verification of identity and consent on contracts is extended into the electronic sphere seamlessly. None of which prevents you or I from doing business without the services of the Royal Notary. * ZenCrafters - Total Enlightenment in about an hour --- * Monster@FAmend.Com *