> [...]Short of using a legally binding electronic signature, there's not
> really any way to make the process easier. At least in the US, as of about a
> year ago, electronic signatures can be legally binding. At one point in the
> past, I asked RMS to look into this, and something might come of it in the
> future.
Isn't a signed fax legally binding?
If so, that would be much faster etc. If necessary for records, the paperwork
could follow, but needn't hold up the work - and it's this delay which seems to
be the sticking point. I believe that fax-then-snail-mail is pretty standard
procedure for business contracts.
> Until then, given the nature of copyright law, there's really no way
> to make the process of assigning copyright easier -- a physical piece
> of paper needs to be signed, sent to the FSF, and then
> processed/signed/filed-away at the FSF.
Of course, assignment of copyright may be a slightly different kettle of fish
from business contracts.
And I guess that's what you are saying, and that the fax possibility was
thoroughly looked into and decided against long ago.
Cheers,
Brendan
--
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] v: +61 (3) 9905 1502
Email is checked daily Phone is rarely attended
_______________________________________________
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
