Policy-Discussion

[Sven Anderson <sven AT anderson.de>]

Hi,

Ian G, 22.02.2007 20:13:
> Philipp Gühring wrote:
>> Yes, the certificates are already legally binding in some juristictions, 
>> just 
>> like electronic signatures (those things you can find at the bottom of 
>> most 
>> emails), and normal PGP keys. We don´t have much say in whether some 
>> juristiction takes something as legally binding or not, we can´t even deny 
>> that.
> 
> This use of "legally binding" is very confusing.
> 
> Contracts can be legally binding, but I don't think 
> signatures are.  Can anyone point at the contract here?

what I mean by "legally binding" is:
 1. in case of an assurance, if a court could convict me, if I make wrong
statements on the CAP (= Assurance Form), or if it would accept the CAP as
a piece of evidence.
 2. in case of a signature, if the signature is accepted by a court like a
handwritten signature.

(1) can be necessary for (2): If I want to prove, that a certain signature
is really by the person I want to sue, I may need the CAPs as a piece of
evidence. If these CAPs turn out to be signed by minors, they will most
probably ignore it.

The question is simply, if the WoT should provide a network of statements,
which you can use in front of a court, or not.

> Signatures are tokens used within contracts typically used 
> to indicate intent/understanding/agreement, etc.  They are 
> generally optional, and courts in both anglo and napoleonic 
> traditions will find contracts without signatures and even 
> without paper (so I am told ... IANAL...).

Of course, signatures are just used as evidence, that a contract exists.
If you have other evidence, you don't need the signature. But (in Germany
at least) certain kind of contracts _have_ to be written down, or the are
void.

> Which contract?

Wikipedia: "A contract is a legally binding exchange of promises or
agreement between parties that the law will enforce."

On the CAP the Applicant states "I hereby confirm that the information
stated above is both true and correct, and request the CAcert Assurer
(identified below) to witness my identity in the CAcert Assurance Programme."

The Assurer states when and where he met the Applicant face-to-face,
against which IDs he verified his identity.

Ok, because these statements are no promises about the future, it is
probably more like a testimony (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testimony):
"In the law, testimony is a form of evidence that is obtained from a
witness who makes a solemn statement or declaration of fact."

I see. So the question is, are written testimonies by minors in general
less useful in front of a court?

Another question is: how can I access the CAPs, if I really need them in
front of the court? At the moment I can just ask the board to tell me the
addresses of the assurers and ask them to send me a certified copy. Is it
meant to be like this? Is this wanted at all?


Cheers,

Sven

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature