[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Use of the term "notarised signature"?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 01:25:14PM -0400, Ian Grigg wrote:
> When the word "notarised signature" is used, is this
> a term that has been tested against the legal meaning
> of the words?
> Specifically, the term has quite different significances
> under civil code and common law. In the civil code, a
> notary is a very important person, perhaps more significant
> than an attorney. He or she has to study for 6 years to
> obtain their qualification, and it is a tightly constrained
> field (at least in the country I'm mildly familiar with).
The term "notary signature" should not imply any legal meaning
whatsoever. As you point out, it means different things to different
people in different places.
I can't imagine the terminology is a problem. After all, the terms
"signature", and "certification" mean different things in different
legal juristictions as well, and PGP has been using those terms for
over a decade.
> If not, as a minimum, it might be a good idea to add
> a statement that the use of the term is not meant to
> draw from the legal definition(s) of same.
I'm okay with this if the WG thinks it is necessary, though if we're
going to go down that route, it would probably be simpler to put a
single sentence in the introduction disclaiming any legal standing for
terminology used in the whole document than it would be to add
specific notes to the notary section.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-cvs (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----