Electronic Signatures As Evidence
Electronic Signatures as Evidence: Overview
An electronic signature (e-signature) is any electronic method that indicates acceptance or approval of an agreement or document. E-signatures are legally recognized in many jurisdictions under laws like the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN Act) in the U.S., and the eIDAS Regulation in the EU.
When it comes to evidence, courts often analyze:
Authenticity: Is the signature genuinely from the person it claims to be from?
Integrity: Has the document been altered after the signature?
Consent: Did the person intend to sign electronically?
The key question often is whether an electronic signature can be accepted as valid and binding evidence of a party’s intent or agreement.
Key Cases on Electronic Signatures as Evidence
1. Feldman v. Google, Inc., 513 F. Supp. 2d 229 (E.D.N.Y. 2007)
Facts:
Feldman sued Google for breach of contract and other claims, challenging the validity of Google's arbitration clause contained in an online terms-of-service agreement that included electronic acceptance via clickwrap (where the user clicks "I agree").
Issue:
Is an electronic clickwrap agreement enforceable, and can the electronic acceptance act as valid evidence of contract formation?
Ruling:
The court held that clickwrap agreements, where users affirmatively click to accept terms, create binding contracts. The electronic “signature” or assent was sufficient evidence of Feldman's consent. This case emphasized that electronic assent via clicking "I agree" was enforceable.
Significance:
The ruling reinforced that electronic signatures, including clicks on online terms, are valid as evidence of contractual consent.
2. Specht v. Netscape Communications Corp., 306 F.3d 17 (2d Cir. 2002)
Facts:
Users downloaded software from Netscape, but the arbitration clause was buried in a hyperlink at the bottom of the page, and users were not required to click "I agree."
Issue:
Did the court accept the electronic assent as valid evidence when there was no explicit click acceptance?
Ruling:
The court found that there was no binding agreement because users were not given sufficient notice and did not explicitly assent by clicking an "I agree" button.
Significance:
This case clarified that passive browsing or implicit conduct without affirmative electronic assent does not constitute valid electronic signature evidence.
3. Register.com, Inc. v. Verio, Inc., 356 F.3d 393 (2d Cir. 2004)
Facts:
Verio scraped data from Register.com’s website despite a contractual restriction in terms of use accessible via an online agreement.
Issue:
Was Verio bound by the terms of the online agreement that were accepted electronically?
Ruling:
The court upheld the enforceability of electronically accepted terms and stated that Verio was bound by the contract, reinforcing the idea that electronic signatures or assent through website usage can be binding.
Significance:
The case supported the idea that electronic agreements with clear assent mechanisms can be admitted as evidence and enforceable.
4. Meyer v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 868 F.3d 66 (2d Cir. 2017)
Facts:
Uber drivers challenged the arbitration clause in the app's electronic agreement.
Issue:
Does clicking “I agree” on a mobile app constitute sufficient electronic signature evidence for contract formation?
Ruling:
The court found that clicking “I agree” in the app was sufficient to bind users to the arbitration clause. It reinforced the enforceability of electronic signatures on mobile platforms.
Significance:
This case confirmed that electronic signatures on apps have the same evidentiary and legal weight as traditional signatures.
5. Zaretsky v. William Morris Agency, LLC, 2013 WL 3383677 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)
Facts:
An employee argued that an electronically signed arbitration agreement was invalid because the signature wasn’t handwritten.
Issue:
Is an electronic signature valid evidence of agreement if it lacks a handwritten component?
Ruling:
The court ruled that the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN Act) does not require a handwritten signature for validity. The electronic signature on the arbitration agreement was valid and enforceable.
Significance:
The decision underscores that courts do not require physical signatures; electronic signatures are equally valid evidence of consent.
Summary of Principles from the Cases
Affirmative consent required: Mere browsing or viewing terms isn’t enough; an electronic act such as clicking “I agree” is necessary (Specht).
Electronic signatures are valid evidence of agreement: Courts consistently accept clickwrap and similar electronic signatures as binding (Feldman, Register.com, Meyer).
No handwritten signature required: ESIGN Act supports the validity of non-handwritten electronic signatures (Zaretsky).
Notice and accessibility of terms are critical: Terms must be presented clearly and conspicuously (Specht).
RELATED Blog
0 comments