

Signsquid: The cool way to sign contracts online - antoineleclair
http://signsquid.com/

======
bravura
I use RightSignature:

    
    
      http://rightsignature.com/
    

SignSquid charges $9/mo for 10 documents. RightSignature charges $14/mo for
unlimited documents.

I enjoy the workflow of RightSignature. I upload the doc/PDF of the contract,
or import for Google Docs. I find the fields that need to be filled in,
highlight them, and designate who fills it in (me or the counterparty).

I then fill in text fields using a text entry box and the signature using my
mouse. They have a good system for tracking the mouse speed to show the width
of the line, and the signatures look quite good with minimal effort.

When you want a counterparty to sign, they get an email asking them to follow
a link. They then can fill in the fields and sign, without registering for the
site. Finally, we both get a PDF of the final contract, and they store the
final PDF on their site. You cannot "delete" the contract from their site once
it has been executed, which corresponds to the gut feeling that the contract
is cannot be undone (without executing a contract that overrides it).

I also think their design looks serious and conveys to proper gravity to a
contract signing process.

~~~
geosaa
RightSignture has been for a while, and like the existing solutions it send
the documents by email. What legal advantage does it have over simply and
directly sending the PDF by email?

With Signsquid we decided to ditch completely the hand-written signature, in
favor of a better thought process. We do not go into the contract redaction
process, we leave that to the expert lawers. We use a combination of a unique
link, sent by email, and a unique secret code, told by phone, for each
signatory. This way, we can be sure the good person signed.

As for the design, as always it is a matter of taste :)

Give the application a try, and let us know what you think.

------
bjornsteffanson
Hopefully this doesn't sound too hypercritical - I'm not posting this simply
to nitpick - but I think some of the site's English is a little off. I mean,
it's readable enough, but there are a few areas where it seems like something
was translated too literally from French to English.

As a specific example, in the FAQ section I found the question "For how long
are the documents kept?" with the response "Yes, all signed documents are
stored on our secure server for three years to ensure their integrity." A
native English speaker would more likely say something like, "How long are
documents stored?" "All signed documents are stored on our secure servers for
three years..." Similarly, some sentences in the Legality section were a
little confusing to read for the same reasons.

Again, not trying to start a flame war over grammar. But, as a potential
customer to a company that would be handling my legal contracts, I'd want
communication to be as clear as possible.

~~~
antoineleclair
I know, you're right. The original texts were written in French and then
translated by someone else to English. We certainly have work left to be done
in that area.

I decided to post it on HN anyway to get feedback ASAP.

Thanks for the example. The original (French) question is more like "Do you
keep the documents?". I'll have this fixed.

------
reverend_gonzo
There are iPhone apps for <$2 that will let you hand sign any document and
send it via through your phone that I believe works much better (and I've used
for contracts and employment offers).

Given that this is $9 a month (which I consider relatively pricy) and an
entirely different way of signing documents that many may not w

those are legally accepted (given that there is a signature), this is $9 a
month (which I would consider relatively pricy), and this is an entirely
different way of doing things that many crossparties may not be willing to
deal with, whereas signing and forwarding an electronic document doesn't
change their workflow in any way.

I have no idea about the market for document signing that is more secure than
traditional methods.

------
antoineleclair
Hey there. I'm one of the guys that co-founded this project. The main debate
here is about the big squid on the home screen. Some say it's too "friendly"
for a legal product. What do you think?

~~~
nicholasreed
It reminds me of Roger (the alien) from American Dad. Not sure how I feel
about that, but do agree that it seems a bit "friendly." The bulgy(sic?) right
eye is what does it.

My biggest qualm is with the italicized header text. You use it as your logo
text, the header, and the pricing, but it is difficult for me to clearly read.

6 items on the menu seems a bit much. While legality always seems to come up
when talking about electronic signatures, I don't know if you need a
completely separate item for it. Maybe Partners and Legality should go under
FAQ, and Discover and About should be merged too?

How do you plan on taking market share from your larger competitors such as
DocuSign, EchoSign (Adobe), HelloFax, etc.? I notice you do not have an API
(yet?) and that would seem like a great way to increase your customer base
(especially coming from HN).

Disclosure: I work at DocuSign

~~~
antoineleclair
You certainly have good points.

We try to be different than DocuSign, EchoSign, etc. with the process: no
hand-written signature, a secure combination of unique link and unique code,
no online contract editing.

------
JoachimSchipper
Minor point: you say that "In the event of a [signature] dispute, Signsquid
will assume the legal fees necessary for you to prove in court that our
process guarantees your document’s electronic signature." Aside from the fact
that $9/month doesn't pay for many cases, what if Signsquid loses, possibly by
doing a bad job in court?

~~~
antoineleclair
I must say I'm not the legal expert in this project. I am a developer.

One of the co-founders is a lawyer by profession. I just noticed him with your
interrogation.

From my understanding (again, I'm not speaking as the legal expert), what we
do in case of a dispute regarding the legality of the signature process is
providing a legal expert that will explain the process and why it's legal. We
are not paying for a lawyer to defend the case in court.

------
mchusma
You can do the same on signnow.com for free. I'm the founder, and we are
pushing a big update later this week.

~~~
mchusma
And to be fair there is EchoSign and Docusign too, be curious what angle you
are taking.

~~~
antoineleclair
I can't speak for SignNow.com, but on our side (Signsquid), we decided to
ditch completely the hand-written signature, in favor of a better thought
process.

We use a combination of a unique link, sent by email, and a unique secret
code, told by phone, for each signatory. This way, we can be sure the good
person signed.

Also, we decided to not enter the contract redaction process. You simply
upload the pdf that will be signed.

Once the contract is signed, a page that contains the audit trail (who signed
and when) is appended.

~~~
beambot
How does a unique link (over insecure email) and a phonecall (to which number?
how to verify speaker?) ensure the person's identity? That sounds dangerously
straight forward to subvert.

~~~
antoineleclair
You make it sound like it's totally insecure. Look at all the alternatives,
and I am pretty sure we are the more secure.

Most still use a fax, which is incredibly insecure (how can you be sure who
signed?). Other online solutions either use simple email reply or a hand-
written signature.

Just to clarify the process, once you uploaded your file and chose the
signatories, Signsquid sends a link to each signatory. Each one of them has
its own unique link. Then, the sender (you), gain access to the list of codes
assigned to each signatory. Again, each one of them as one unique code. You
have to call them by phone to tell them the code.

If someone wanted to "hack" the process, he would have to gain access to the
inbox of the user and also fake his voice over the phone.

~~~
beambot
We've had a few thousand years to figure out decent ways to authenticate
paper-based documents. Presumably, one of the biggest implications of a paper-
based solution is that you get some level of contestability. In the case of a
signature, you get penmanship (at least to a certain degree of expert
evaluation); for currency, you get the paper type, watermarking, holograms,
etc.

You have very little of that in the process described by the OP. The
accountability is "email is secure, and you know the person's voice." That's
fine if you implicitly trust your contracting counterpart (heck, then the
contract has little purpose). But it does little if they later recant or
refute the signature. In the end, the most important aspect: It needs to be
tested in a court of law before I'd even consider it.

I'm not sure what the "right" solution is in the digital age, but my hunch is
that it will involve some sort of PK Crypto. Perhaps we're not too far from
having NFC tags embedded in our body for precisely this purpose.

------
zefhous
They stole the Coda icon:

<http://www.panic.com/coda/>

Not very professional.

(edit: It's been since replaced with another leaf icon)

~~~
antoineleclair
I must admit it looks oddly similar. We did not see it on Coda site before
using it. Not sure of the provenance (I will ask my designer).

As smackfu noted, the water drops are not exactly the same. But obviously,
since it's very similar, we'll change it. It's very accidental and far from
intentionnal.

~~~
zefhous
I understand, and it's reassuring that you were not aware of it.

However, it's not "oddly similar." Yes, it's been rotated, mirrored, and
slightly modified, but it's their icon and somebody blatantly stole it and
tried to pass it off as their own work.

Interestingly, it actually happens so frequently with Panic's work that they
have a page dedicated to people ripping off their icons:
<http://panic.com/extras/ripoff/>

------
rprasad
As a lawyer, I would prefer to avoid your overly-long and complicated signing
process and just ask for a faxed or scanned and emailed copy. Both are equally
valid in court.

Heck, an email confirmation by a party to the contract is now a valid method
of signing/executing a contract.

So my question is: what makes squidsign better than the old fashioned/easy way
or the big-name competitors in the field (i.e., Verisign, Adobe, or the other
companies named elsewhere in the comments)

~~~
geosaa
By email, how can you prove that the right person was behind the desk and that
his outlook or email program wasn't just open and that any person could have
relied ? Same goes for the fax ?

~~~
capsule_toy
I'm not saying it's right, but convenience often trumps security. Until
there's a big problem with fraud or regulation requiring increased security,
most people aren't going to adopt a solution with more hoops.

