Eventually, someone in the US will make bank selling "signature laundering machines" - basically the ImageMagick script on a microcontroller in a tamper-proof enclosure that's plugged as peripheral, with paper trail certifying that the output it produces is equivalent to printing a document and scanning it again, or faxing it, and therefore should be legally considered as equivalent to fax.
Have there been any court cases where a contract was considered void because the signature was digital?
I’m really not sure under what basis one would make that determination. Signatures are mainly symbolic and provide nearly zero guarantees. Sure there’s some extra security you can build around signatures (eg.: docusign), but paper doesn’t really have all of that extra stuff.
