FW: Opportunity to provide input on Uniform Law for Electronic Transactions

[Tony Barry]

Hi

For Information.

Tony
.................

 >Date: Tue, 30 Sep 97 15:04:25 EDT
>Reply-To: gils@cni.org
>Sender: owner-gils@cni.org
>Precedence: bulk
>From: Patrice McDermott <patricem@RTK.NET>
>To: Multiple recipients of list <gils@cni.org>
>Subject: FW: Opportunity to provide input on Uniform Law for Electronic
>Transactions
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>X-Sender: Patrice McDermott <patrice@RTK.NET>
>X-To: gov-info-access@RTK.NET, gils@cni.org
>X-Cc: Jeffrey Ritter <jritter@osc.edu>
>
>
>This message was posted to the GOVPUB list. Others, inside and outside the
>government may have an interest in participating in a venue to provide
>input to a drafting committee to write a Uniform Electronic Transactions
>Act -- which
>        "confronts some of the most challenging aspects of
>automating government transactions and public records. Its      provisions
>will define minimum legal standards for the          validity of
>electronic records, will impact the evidentiary     suitability of
>electronic records, whether created              electronically or
>converted from other media, and will          define key features of the
>interface between the public and     private sectors in the flow of
>information necessary to the     effective functioning of society in the
>information age. The    law, as presently drafted, also  considers aspects
>of           digital signatures and related methods of authentication."
>
>If you are interested, please send a message to <lsmith@osc.edu>
>indicating your interest.  For everyone's sake, do NOT reply  directly to
>this message.
>
>---------------Original Message---------------
>The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws
>(NCCUSL)consists of commissioners appointed by each state who volunteer to
>assist in the drafting of laws intended for uniform adoption among the
>states. The most well-known product has been the Uniform Commercial Code
>(UCC) but the Conference has produced many other useful works which have
>established uniform legal structures among the states in the absence of
>Federal pre-emption.
>
>Last spring, NCCUSL authorized a new drafting committee to be  established
>to develop what is now referred to as the Uniform Electronic Transactions
>Act. This model law was intended to provide legal validity  to electronic
>contracts or other transactions which were outside the  scope of the UCC.
>Concerns that many transactions involve government, both as a commercial
>party and as a party to other types of electronic transactions and
>records, resulted in the expansion of the scope of the  drafting
>committee's objectives to include government transactions and records.
>
>The most recent draft of the law, indeed the first draft of the model,is
>posted at http://www.law.upenn.edu/library/ulc/uecicta/ect997.htm.  This
>site will also contain future drafts and related materials. The draft was
>considered by the drafting committee during a three day session in late
>September and will again be considered in early January.
>
>This drafting effort confronts some of the most challenging aspects of
>automating government transactions and public records.  Its provisions
>will define minimum legal standards for the validity of electronic
>records, will impact the evidentiary suitability of electronic records,
>whether created electronically or converted from other media, and will
>define key features of the interface between the public and private
>sectors in the flow of information necessary to the effective function of
>society in the information age. The law, as presently drafted, also
>considers aspects of digital signatures and related methods of
>authentication.
>
>        Govpub could provide an excellent venue by which government
>stakeholders could better develop input into the process and identify and
>provide to the drafting committee and other interested parties insights
>into the requirements, business practices and possible solutions for
>consideration.  As well, state-based networks and listservs may wish to
>participate, review materials and the like. Others may wish to suggest
>other groups, stakeholders or venues.
>
>In an effort to determine whether there is sufficient interest for
>initiating that discussion, please send a brief note to  lsmith@osc.edu
>indicating your interest.  For everyone's sake, do NOT reply  directly to
>this message.
>
>Then, if sufficient interest exists, we can either begin the dialogue
>within govpub or consider establishing a related discussion venue. Your
>thoughts on that are welcomed as well.  The American Bar Association (and
>perhaps others) also intend to support this important process by
>developing web-sites with more complete information, input mechanisms and
>the like; however,there seems some value to state and local officials
>having the opportunity to directly consider and debate some of these
>issues.
>
>
>Jeffrey B. Ritter                  Director, ECLIPS
>Ohio Supercomputer Center          www.osc.edu/eclips
>v. 614.292.5691                    f. 614.292.9220
>
>----------End of Original Message----------
>
>-------------------------------------
>Patrice McDermott
>patricem@rtk.net
>Date: 09/30/97
>Time: 15:04:25
>-------------------------------------
>

__________________________________________________________
mailto:tony@ningaui.anu.edu.au          |    Voice/Fax
mailto:tonyb@netinfo.com.au             | +61 2-6288-0959
          http://purl.oclc.org/NET/Tony.Barry
 Ningaui Pty Ltd, GPO Box 1680, Canberra City, ACT 2601

 Visiting Fellow, Department of Computer Science, FEIT
         Australian National University