|Re: [eclipse.org-committers] eSignature via HelloSign, was: Committers Agreement Open Ended|
Hi I complained about this privately.Denis Roy conceded that I had a point in expecting that a trusted institution such as www.eclipse.org should propagate the trust to any subcontract such as hellosign by exploiting its service as
www.eclipse.org/.../hellosign/...thereby assuring us that the EF has verified that hellosign is providing a service that the EF has assessed. Allowing noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx to provide an unexpected invitation to transact Eclipse business at e.g. hellosign/.../eclipse/.. is IMHO unacceptable since how can we really tell that we are not being redirected to a variant of
trojans.r.us/.../eclipse/.... Regards Ed Willink On 24/02/2019 13:36, Mykola Nikishov wrote:
Michael Keppler <Michael.Keppler@xxxxxx> writes:Also, if future changes (which we are surely notified about) turn out to be bad, you can still just turn down committer status at that point of time, right?Up to this point it was fine - as an individual contributor, I've signed the contributor agreement with a party I trust but, at the same time, our agreement has quite a limited scope so that I do not expect some legal quirks to backfire at me in areas unrelated to the agreement. Now, there is a 3-rd party, HelloSign (a DropBox company), that would provide legally binding eSignature on my behalf: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- From: Eclipse Foundation <noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Reminder: IMPORTANT: Action Required - Update Required to your Eclipse Individual Committer Agreement is awaiting your signature Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 20:13:28 +0000 Reply-To: HelloSign <noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Eclipse Foundation is awaiting your signature [...] To simplify this process, we are using HelloSign  to provide a secure and legally binding eSignature experience for the exercise.  https://www.hellosign.com/ --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- It claims to reduce the amount of paperwork required from committers but it does not, quite the opposite. First, it brings in a new party that, by default, I do not trust in providing legally binding signature on my behalf. Second, to retain my Eclipse Individual Committer status, I have to find a local layer that is professional enough to give a legal advice on conventional/electronic signatures at the intersection of international and local laws of: - the State of California, USA - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada - un-named non-EU country  https://twitter.com/manandbytes/status/1099053820007469056Ciao, Michael PS: Of course, this is not legal advice.
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Back to the top