Sender: Vik DOT Heyndrickx AT rug DOT ac DOT be
Message-ID: <35ED7CD7.73CE@rug.ac.be>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 19:13:59 +0200
From: Vik Heyndrickx <Vik DOT Heyndrickx AT rug DOT ac DOT be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" <salvador AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
CC: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: egcs-1.1
References: <m0zEE4W-000S5dC AT inti DOT gov DOT ar> (salvador AT inti DOT gov DOT ar) <m0zEG72-000S6qC AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET) wrote:
> DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> > You can't FTP a *written* offer.  It has to be on paper.
> 
> Looks like you are right, becasuse "written" looks like on paper, but with
> the current technologies (PGP signed documents, etc) and the current
> globalization you can create electronic documents as valid as the ones on
> paper.

Sorry for intruding the discussion,
but realize that PGP signed documents are not globally (as in "all
around the earth") accepted as legally valid transcripts. In many
countries FTP distributions including such a signed message may be
legally interpreted differently than intended by FSF.
If everybody accepted PGP as legally enforcing, then I think that the
word "written" could also be applied to electronic/optical/magnetic
stored transscripts.

-- 
 \ Vik /-_-_-_-_-_-_/
  \___/ Heyndrickx /
   \ /-_-_-_-_-_-_/  Knight in the Order of the Unsigned Types