4 ms·

>"Eg if you’re a CFO, would you being willing to take the risk just to save a couple of bucks " Typical FUD preached by many online companies to lure customers

by FpUser 3y ago

>"Eg if you’re a CFO, would you being willing to take the risk just to save a couple of bucks " Typical FUD preached by many online companies to lure customers. Even verbal contracts are enforceable (with the caveats of course). These will be fine for the most boring cases. The others are signed with lawyers anyways.

gamblor956 3y ago
"take the risk" This is the important part you're ignoring. Yes, verbal contracts between businesses are binding, but only to the extent you can actually prove the terms in a court of law. Using DocuSign (or similar) is about risk mitigation, specifically about being able to prove the the contents of the contract in legal proceedings. The risk with being a business that allows for verbal contracts is that one of your vendors may be unscrupulous and truly screw you over. And that's a matter of when, not if.
- FpUser 3y ago
  You are suddenly switching from Ducusign vs Docuseal to DocuSign vs verbal. That was not point of my reply.
- gnicholas 3y ago
  I've never understood how DocuSign mitigates the risk any more than both parties signing a PDF in Preview (or similar) and exchanging via email. Doesn't the email part validate that you are the person signing the document?
  - somery 3y ago
    I think that's a valid point - and actually in their terms of services say that they are not responsible for the signer authenticity. Here is a summary from their TOS: "DocuSign provides tools and features that help to establish the authenticity of a signer, such as email verification, access code, SMS verification, phone verification, and knowledge-based authentication. However, it's important to note that while these tools can enhance the security and authenticity of the signing process, DocuSign itself does not guarantee the authenticity of the signers. The responsibility of ensuring the identity of the other party lies with the user"

by FpUser 3y ago

gamblor956 3y ago

"take the risk" This is the important part you're ignoring. Yes, verbal contracts between businesses are binding, but only to the extent you can actually prove the terms in a court of law. Using DocuSign (or similar) is about risk mitigation, specifically about being able to prove the the contents of the contract in legal proceedings. The risk with being a business that allows for verbal contracts is that one of your vendors may be unscrupulous and truly screw you over. And that's a matter of when, not if.

FpUser 3y ago
You are suddenly switching from Ducusign vs Docuseal to DocuSign vs verbal. That was not point of my reply.
gnicholas 3y ago
I've never understood how DocuSign mitigates the risk any more than both parties signing a PDF in Preview (or similar) and exchanging via email. Doesn't the email part validate that you are the person signing the document?
- somery 3y ago
  I think that's a valid point - and actually in their terms of services say that they are not responsible for the signer authenticity. Here is a summary from their TOS: "DocuSign provides tools and features that help to establish the authenticity of a signer, such as email verification, access code, SMS verification, phone verification, and knowledge-based authentication. However, it's important to note that while these tools can enhance the security and authenticity of the signing process, DocuSign itself does not guarantee the authenticity of the signers. The responsibility of ensuring the identity of the other party lies with the user"