[rprasad]

As a lawyer, I would prefer to avoid your overly-long and complicated signing process and just ask for a faxed or scanned and emailed copy. Both are equally valid in court.

Heck, an email confirmation by a party to the contract is now a valid method of signing/executing a contract.

So my question is: what makes squidsign better than the old fashioned/easy way or the big-name competitors in the field (i.e., Verisign, Adobe, or the other companies named elsewhere in the comments)

[geosaa]

By email, how can you prove that the right person was behind the desk and that his outlook or email program wasn't just open and that any person could have relied ? Same goes for the fax ?

[capsule_toy]

I'm not saying it's right, but convenience often trumps security. Until there's a big problem with fraud or regulation requiring increased security, most people aren't going to adopt a solution with more hoops.

[newhouseb]

Curious - on what basis is email confirmation now valid? Court precedent, a law, or something else?

[Vitaly]

The only thing that is required for the contract to be valid is the agreement of both parties. Even if you agree verbally over the phone the deal is "theoretically" valid.

The only problem with verbal agreement is that you will have a problem to prove in court that you really agreed to anything.

Almost any impartial third party confirmation will make proof simple.

So even simple email confirmation is "legal" and should be enough.