82,903
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{g}}The Unless the instrument is something like a deed or lease which has formal legal requirements, then digital signatures are fine and, in fact, in many respects better t...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{g}} | {{g}}Evidencing [[offer]] and [[acceptance]] of a [[contract]] using digital authentication technology. A topic that for all the current excitement relating to matters digital and artificially intelligent, receives less attention than it really should. For a properly implemented digital execution strategy will yield productivity and data control benefits out of all proportion to the simplicity of the technology, and certainly will have a bigger day-to-day impact on productivity then chatbots, natural language processing or machine learning. | ||
===But does it work, legally?=== | |||
Cue voluminous, sombre, [[tedious]] monographs on the legal effectiveness in different jurisdictions of electronic signatures. | |||
But — unless your [[Financial instrument|instrument]] is a [[deed]] or [[lease]] or has peculiar formal execution requirements — most confirmations and instructions which pass between the operational teams of financial institutions don’t—it really needn’t be that complicated. Generally, digital signatures are fine and, in many respects, ''better'' than a handwritten signature, especially a scanned, emailed [[facsimile]] of a handwritten signature which could easily have been forged. | |||
For a signature – ''any'' signature — is simply a means of gathering and recording evidence and that your counterparty agreed to your transaction or gave the instruction that your records say it did. It is an [[audit]] trail. It is [[due diligence]]. You will only need it if you wind up having an argument with your counterparty about your [[contract]]. The moment your counterparty denies signing your contract, is the moment you pull out your dog-eared copy of its signature — or your fully authenticated, time-stamped, digital representation of its authorised officer’s agreement. Are | |||
So your key question, always, is “how confident do I feel that this instruction/consent is genuine, so I can prove it to a court later if I need to?” Where you have a digital signature, in most cases (other then deeds) the natural answer ought to be “very”, or at least “quite”. | |||
It doesn’t matter if it is a hand-inked signature scratched on onion skin with a quill and waxen seal, or a two-factor-authenticated digital signature or, for that matter, a series of unambiguous semaphore messages from a person atop a distant hill whom you sincerely and plausibly believe to be your client. If it ''is'' your client, and you have a record of its assent, however communicated to you, it will be hard for your client later to claim the contrary. |