[Cryptography] Proposal of a fair contract signing protocol

[mok-kong shen]

Am 25.06.2016 um 01:03 schrieb Adrian McCullagh:
> Dear M.K. Shen,
>
>
>
> What you are proposing just does not make commercial or legal sense.
>
>
>
> The law does not work for your proposal.
>
>
>
> There can only be a contract if there is agreement as to what Alice
> offers.  If Bob simply ignores the offer then no agreement arises.  Only
> is very rare cases can there be a deeming of intent to create an contrcat.
>
>
>
> There 5 basic elements in the creation of a contract/agreement to be
> enforceable at law:
>
> ·       An offer is communicated from person A (Alice)
>
> ·       Person B (Bob) unequivocally accepts the terms of Alice’s offer
> and communicates that acceptance to Alice;
>
> ·       There is consideration supporting the agreement/contract;
>
> ·       There is an intention to create legal relations which for the
> most part is determine by an objective test but can be inferred in a
> commercial setting as opposed to a domestic setting (family
> arrangements); and
>
> ·       Both parties have legal capacity to be bound by the terms of the
> contract.
>
>
>
> The acceptance must be communicated  and for the most part received by
> the offeror for there to be a contract.  Bob is under no legal
> obligation to do anything with Alices Offer.  As far as I am aware that
> is teh law in all common law countries which includes teh UK, USA,
> Canada and Australia.
>
>
>
> Unless I am missing something and with respect this proposal of yours
> will not be accepted by the law or by commerce.  In essence I still do
> not see any unfairness.

You are entirely right that "Bob is under no legal obligation to do
anything with Alices Offer". The issue in the present thread assumes
however that Bob considers Alice's offer to be acceptable and does
step 2 and the protocol comes to an end with Alice doing step 3,
producing the contract document C and showing that it is signed by
both Alice and Bob. Now the question is whether the contract signing
process is fair. My argumentation is that it is indeed fair according
to the fairness definition I have given.

Is the matter now clear to you?

I don't fully understand your last paragraph: (1) If Alice and Bob
choose to do as desribed in my protocol, is that against the law??
(2) If you don't see any unfairness in what is done in the protocol,
then all the better for me, isn't it?

M. K. Shen