I use RightSignature:<p><pre><code> http://rightsignature.com/
</code></pre>
SignSquid charges $9/mo for 10 documents. RightSignature charges $14/mo for unlimited documents.<p>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).<p>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.<p>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).<p>I also think their design looks serious and conveys to proper gravity to a contract signing process.
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.<p>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.<p>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.
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).<p>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<p>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.<p>I have no idea about the market for document signing that is more secure than traditional methods.
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?
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?
They stole the Coda icon:<p><a href="http://www.panic.com/coda/" rel="nofollow">http://www.panic.com/coda/</a><p>Not very professional.<p>(edit: It's been since replaced with another leaf icon)
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.<p>Heck, an email confirmation by a party to the contract is now a valid method of signing/executing a contract.<p>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)