> If that were the case, courts wouldn't be able to enforce contracts with wet signatures (which are straightforward to forge) I'm pretty confident that I coul

> If that were the case, courts wouldn't be able to enforce contracts with wet signatures (which are straightforward to forge) I'm pretty confident that I could sign an email with a DKIM key if that were published, however, there's nothing that would give me the confidence that I could forge a pen signature in such a way that not even an expert could detect the forgery. > or verbal contracts (which are valid contracts and regularly enforced). I'm not a a lawyer, but according to the first google result "the Uniform Commercial Code [...] requires that contracts for the sale of goods over $500 to be in writing".[1] > Disputes over whether the text of the executed contract is authentic are rare in real life. Maybe they are rare precisely because it's hard and risky to forge signatures. [1] https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/are-verbal-agreements-binding-35794 https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/are-verbal-agreements-bind...