I happen to know a couple of things about signatures: Signature recognition is done using the same tech as biometrics, and it's surprisingly good. I like to use BioWallet as an example - you use your finger to "sign" the screen of your phone to unlock a secure wallet. If I hand my phone to someone and tell them my password, they can't get in. Even if I give them a piece of paper with my signature on it so they can attempt forgery, they still can't get in, because they sign the wrong area of the screen, or going too slow or too fast. But if I give them a video of me signing (or I sign with them watching) then with some practice they can forge my signature and get in. I very rarely have my signature rejected by the system (I guess about 1% of the time), and the other person has a very difficult time trying to fool the system, even when they're given every advantage and practice.
Not long ago I had a conversation with my lawyer about what counts as a signature. He said basically, any mark that's used to indicate your acceptance, acknowledgement, or agreement is a signature. You could write an "X" or draw the "Prince" symbol - even when you write a regular non-signed email, the mere fact that your name appears on a written document that says "Ok, yeah, I agree to that," counts as a signature, legally binding. What matters (besides the language and clarity of what exactly you agreed to) is the case of dispute over authenticity - Suppose you signed an "X" and later failed to live up to your end of the agreement, so the other party took you to court. You can claim "That wasn't me, that's a forgery," unless they have additional evidence such as your fingerprints on the paper to prove it really was you. Or if it was a written email, you claim "I never wrote that, it was someone else who gained access to my email account," if they don't have any way to prove it really was you, they lose. Basically, as long as there is no dispute over the authenticity of the signature, literally anything counts. In the case of dispute, then it becomes a matter of forensics - can somebody *prove* that you signed it even though you deny it? This is the reason why having multiple original copies of ink-signed papers is more binding than photocopies and stuff - Because if either party denies the signature, the other party can carbon date the paper, extract your fingerprint from the paper, chemically analyze the ink, demonstrate that your fingerprint *covers* the ink and therefore appeared after the ink was placed, etc. Even more binding when signed with witnesses, notarized, etc. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.lopsa.org https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
