The Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN), 15 U.S.C. §7001 et seq., in force since 2000, provides that a signature, contract or record relating to a transaction in or affecting interstate commerce may not be denied legal effect, validity or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form. ESIGN applies alongside state law rather than replacing it.
What ESIGN requires of you, not of us. Where a transaction involves a consumer, §7001(c) requires that the consumer affirmatively consent to receive records electronically, be given specified disclosures before consenting, and not have withdrawn that consent. DBX Sign presents a disclosure and records the consent, including which version of the disclosure was shown, by hash. Whether a consumer is involved, and whether the disclosure you use meets your obligations, is yours to determine.
The Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) has been adopted in almost every state. Arizona's version is at A.R.S. §44-7001 et seq. It provides that a record or signature may not be denied legal effect solely because it is electronic, that a contract may not be denied enforceability solely because an electronic record was used in its formation, and that where a law requires a signature, an electronic signature satisfies it.
UETA applies only between parties who have agreed to conduct the transaction by electronic means, which is determined from the context and surrounding circumstances.
Article 25(1) of Regulation (EU) 910/2014 (eIDAS) provides that an electronic signature shall not be denied legal effect or admissibility as evidence in legal proceedings solely on the grounds that it is in electronic form or does not meet the requirements for a qualified electronic signature. The UK retains a domestic version of eIDAS following its departure from the EU.
eIDAS distinguishes three levels — a simple electronic signature, an advanced electronic signature (Article 26) and a qualified electronic signature (Articles 28–34). Only a qualified signature has the automatic legal equivalence to a handwritten signature given by Article 25(2). DBX Sign does not provide qualified electronic signatures, is not a Qualified Trust Service Provider, issues no qualified certificates and uses no qualified timestamps. We make no advanced electronic signature claim under Article 26 either; whether a given signature meets that definition is an assessment for somebody other than us. If your transaction requires a qualified signature, use a qualified provider.
Across jurisdictions, certain instruments are commonly excluded from general electronic signature laws, or carry formalities an electronic signature does not satisfy. ESIGN §7003 sets out federal exceptions. Commonly encountered examples:
That list is illustrative and it is not a safe harbour. It is not complete, it is not current by definition, and the position differs by state and by document. Deciding whether a particular document may be signed electronically is the sender's responsibility, as our legal page says.
Rather than tell you what a court will conclude, here is the record we create, so you and your advisers can weigh it: each signer's affirmative consent to transact electronically with the disclosure version recorded by hash; the authentication route used and how the signing link was issued; the signature adopted and its style; timestamps; the IP address the signature came from; a SHA-256 fingerprint of each original document and of the final sealed file; a hash-chained event history where each entry's hash incorporates the one before it; and an embedded PAdES digital signature that makes the sealed document self-verifying in standard PDF readers. Anyone can check a sealed document at /verify without an account and without asking us.
That is evidence, not a verdict. What it proves in a given dispute is for a court, and what you need for a given transaction is for your attorney.