On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 13:14 +0100, Konrad Hinsen wrote: > On 4 Dec 2009, at 23:23, Cliff Wells wrote: > > > What isn't clear to me is exactly what a piece of paper provides > > that an > > electronic form doesn't (aside from inconvenience). I don't see any > > A clear legal status all over the world. A signed statement on paper > is recognized everywhere. The legal status of electronic messages, > even if signed by some suitable technique, varies wildly from one > country to the other. > > It would be nice if open software could somehow escape from the legal > hassle surrounding copyright law, but I don't think this is a > realistic idea.
What I'm saying is that a signed document, whether digital or on paper, provides little in the way of forgery prevention. Therefore, without witnesses (e.g. a notary) or a sworn admission of signing, a signature is largely inconsequential. Since the Clojure CAS requires nothing of the sort, it is no better than a digital signature, regardless of jurisdiction. Clearly the decision is up to Rich (it's his project, anyone who doesn't like it could easily start a clojure-community project with relaxed requirements), but frankly the current requirements are rather pointless since they provide no real protections. Regards, Cliff -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
