From: "P.J. Ponder" <ponder@wane-leon-mail.scri.fsu.edu>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 04:30:36 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Electronic Signature Act of 1996
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9606050852.A28531-0100000@wane3.scri.fsu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


The Florida act is available at
  http://www.scri.fsu.edu/fla-leg/bills/senate-1996/sb0942.html

as was repeatedly brought up during hearings on this bill, the existing 
law does not preclude digital signatures from being used or from being 
offered in evidence in support of an argument that so-and-so 'signed' or 
agreed to something.  What the sponsors of this bill wanted was to 
provide additional credence and an air of legitimacy to digital 
signatures, even tho the existing law already permits their use.

In practice, if one asserted a digital signature as evidence of another's 
agreement to a contract for example, the party making the assertion could 
offer other evidence to attest to the validity of the signature, just as 
one would do in the case of a hand-written or holographic signature. (by 
bringing in handwriting experts, e.g.)

The interesting thing to watch in Florida will be the rules and 
procedures to be developed by the (Florida) Secretary of State's office 
relating to certificate authorities, licensing requirements, CRLs, etc.
</end of free legal advice>

I think the Florida Bar wants me to add to that if you feel you have a 
legal problem of any kind, you should seek the advice of a competent 
attorney.  I am not representing you and you rely on cypherpunks mailing 
list legal advice at your peril.
--
pj