When encryption is also authentication...
eresrch at eskimo.com
Thu May 30 08:46:21 PDT 2002
On Thu, 30 May 2002, cypherpunk_reader wrote:
> If the end user insists on e-signing a document without having read it it is
> there perogative,
> but I think there should be a better system in place to insure that they
> either read it or that
> they did not read it but agree anyway.
I don't think so. If they are fool enough to sign a document without
reading it, it's the same as using a pen to sign a contract without
reading it. A fool is a fool, why try to protect them? It's pretty
hopeless to try because fools are so clever!
I don't have a problem with a signing system that requires the user to
do something (like maybe even use a pda stylus and actually sign with
their own handwriting), but *forcing* them to read a contract is just
plain silly. When enough fools have been burned by a scam, the word
will get out and the rest of the fools who don't read contracts might
think about not signing.
An e-signature can have the same weight in law as an ink one, and the
same rules apply. A fool and their money are soon parted.
Patience, persistence, truth,
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy