--- begin forwarded text


Date:         Tue, 2 Nov 1999 00:23:24 -0800
Reply-To: Digital Signature discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Digital Signature discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Daniel Greenwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject:      House Rejects Bliley Bill (HR 1714)
Comments: cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Hello World,

The U.S. House of Representatives rejected the Bliley bill this week by a
vote of 234-122.  The bill aimed to make the world safe for e-commerce by
blowing up all current laws and theoretically possible laws that could
impede the use of electronic transactions. The target was seriously
overshot, however, and the bill was drafted far too broadly.  The
provisions ran roughshod  over several consumer protection and related
state and federal laws requiring records and signatures to be in writing or
otherwise formatted, delivered or processed in a particular manner.  The
preemption provisions were also severely flawed (creating conflicts and
confusion regarding otherwise valid and important areas of state
jurisdiction over contract law and certain aspects of commercial law).  In
the upper chamber, however, Senator Abraham's bill (S. 761) remains capable
of revision and possible movement.  Thought you might be interested.

Regards,

Daniel Greenwood
http://civics.com

--- end forwarded text


-----------------
Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

Reply via email to