Thursday, December 29, 2005
Written contracts have developed a form of signalling and processes in order to ensure contract formation. Oral contracts have their form too. Now, we have electronic contracts. How should be deal with signalling in these cases?
Moringiello, Juliet, "Signals, Assent and Internet Contracting" . Rutgers Law Review, Vol. 57, p. 1307, 2005 http://ssrn.com/abstract=859485
Part of the abstract states:
While the Internet is new, the challenges presented by Internet contracts are not. Traditional contract rules, based on the paradigm of two individuals meeting face-to-face to negotiate written terms, have been modified over the years to accommodate diverse methods of communicating contract terms. These modifications have been fashioned to account for the different signals sent to offerees by new methods of contracting.
Today's courts, however, virtually ignore the fact that the common law of contracts has developed rules that account for the different signals sent by contract terms that are delivered in novel ways. This article argues that courts must consider the cautionary function that the paper contract form has traditionally served and account for the different signals sent by electronic contracts. To support this argument, the article reviews the electronic contracting case law and compares it to older cases addressing the issue of assent when contract terms are delivered by novel methods. The paper then discusses the factual differences between paper and electronic contracts, drawing on computer science and marketing scholarship examining the ways that individuals perceive electronic communications. The paper concludes by suggesting approaches to the assent issue that take these different perceptions into account.