Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dropbox buys HelloSign (YC W11) for $230M

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 164 posts

Re: Dropbox buys HelloSign (YC W11) for $230M

#31

Post by koreyb »

gruez wrote: post #8

There's something I never understood about e-signature services: how are they legally binding? Why do we need them at all? The end users don't have control over any of the keys, so it all hinges on the e-signature service telling the truth. It's significantly less secure than say, S/MIME with a proper CA-signed certificate. Is the bar for legal "signatures" really that low?

Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce (ESIGN) Act in 2000 https://acrobat.adobe.com/content/dam/doc-cloud/en/pdfs/adob...

Re: Dropbox buys HelloSign (YC W11) for $230M

#32

Post by chrisseaton »

azhenley wrote: post #14
chosenbreed37 wrote: post #6

> Dropbox snares HelloSign (YC W11) for $230 The title appears to have a negative slant. Is the modern jargon for acquisitions of this nature?

I don’t think it is meant to be negative. I think “snares” could be positive or negative. I interpreted it as Dropbox was fortunate to acquire HelloSign. Also, this may just be some creative writing. Dropbox’s announcement did not use such language.

> I think “snares” could be positive or negative.

You know a snare is a hidden trap for animals? I can't imagine being snared to be positive - it implies you're going to be skinned or eaten.

Re: Dropbox buys HelloSign (YC W11) for $230M

#35

Post by azhenley »

chrisseaton wrote: post #32
azhenley wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think it is meant to be negative. I think “snares” could be positive or negative. I interpreted it as Dropbox was fortunate to acquire HelloSign. Also, this may just be some creative writing. Dropbox’s announcement did not use such language.

> I think “snares” could be positive or negative. You know a snare is a hidden trap for animals? I can't imagine being snared to be positive - it implies you're going to be skinned or eaten.

People often say “he/she is a good catch.” Sure, the term probably comes from hunting but I have always considered it to be a compliment.

Not the term I would use in a business context though.

Re: Dropbox buys HelloSign (YC W11) for $230M

#36

Post by bogomipz »

If anyone at Techcrunch is reading "Snare" is not an appropriate word selection for the title of an article describing a friendly acquisition.

A "snare" or to "ensnare" is to trap an animal generally with a noose. The correct wording is "Dropbox Snags Hellosign." Such an incorrect word choice would have never have made it past an editor or proofreader. The level of journalism at TC is truly cringeworthy.

Re: Dropbox buys HelloSign (YC W11) for $230M

#37

Post by ceejayoz »

chrisseaton wrote: post #28
ceejayoz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You basically can. https://www.pcworld.com/article/253523/how_to_make_sure_that... > The second class of signatures, which Parmar uses all the time in her practice, is signing one's name to a document electronically by typing your name in one of the following formats: > For submissions to the Federal court system: /s/Angela West > For submissions to the Patent & Trademark Office: /Angela West/ > Both the // and the /…

Right - and the point is that in a casual email you may reply 'yes that's fine' and is that signing a contract or not? But if we have some ceremony, like a physical signature, or using this // notation, then it's clear what your intent was.

Even a verbal contract has some weight. A "yes that's fine" reply to an unambiguous email is likely to stand up in court. "I, agree to this" is even better.

A formal contract with a real ink signature makes things easier, but it's often not required.

Re: Dropbox buys HelloSign (YC W11) for $230M

#40

Post by gruez »

chrisseaton wrote: post #26
gruez wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then that leads to my second question >Why do we need them at all? Why not just email the contract, and the person replies back with "I agree to this"? Simpler and cheaper than paying $150/year.

Because the ceremony of a signature has been socially recognised for thousands of years. That's what our society expects.

>Because the ceremony of a signature

Come to think of it, I remember "signing" pdfs in adobe reader by clicking a form field that produced a signature similar to[1]:

   John Smith
   Digitally signed by
   CN=John Smith
   [...]
This would satisfy the "ceremony" requirement. According to adobe[2] it looks like you can do this with self signed certificates, so it's completely free as well. But this option is significantly less popular than hellosign/docusign. I guess the value-add for them is having a web interface, but I'm not convinced it's worth the $150/year (significantly more for "business" or "enterprise" plans) for a web interface that essentially signs pdfs with self-signed certificates.

[1] https://helpx.adobe.com/content/dam/help/en/acrobat/11/using...

[2] https://helpx.adobe.com/acrobat/11/using/signing-pdfs.html#S...

Post reply on HN