[Fwd: [ebBP] 11/4/2004: Comments on HasLegal Intent]

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

Everyone,
I've not received any other comments since our discussion last week, so 
I think unless we get more inputs we can call it a day here. I'd suggest 
that we use the last additional detail as footnotes for additional 
clarity. Any comments?

I may get a few minor tweaks this week from Kelly Ray and Jamie Clark. 
Thanks.

>
> I've received a few comments and provided an updated version below. In 
> addition, there are three terms specified in the referenced paper that 
> I believe are helpful to understand 'intent'. [1] Thank you.
>
> =========================================================================================================================== 
>
> "This optional HasLegalIntent attribute can represents a statement or 
> commitment between trading partners, and their shared intent. As 
> referenced in the eCommerce Patterns v1.0, more than the digital 
> signature is needed to infer intent [1]. This constraint exists on a 
> Business Transaction Activity. This constraint could represent a 
> substantive and enforceable precondition on the BTA. The mechanisms in 
> the BSI that provide the capability to support this precondition are:
> a. reliability
> b. document security: confidential, tamper detectable and authenticated
> c. nonrepudiation
> d. authorization
> e. document integrity
>
> The contractual framework, agreements and their application to any 
> artifact are outside of this specification.
>
> hasLegalIntent could have widely differing interpretations and 
> enforceability depending on type of business, process, and 
> jurisdiction. No implication of interpretation or enforcability is 
> made by the ebBP committee.
>
> Reference eCommerce Patterns, v1.0, May 2001, 
> http://www.ebxml.org/specs/bpPATT.pdf.
> =========================================================================================================================== 
>
> Original reference: 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200411/msg00004.html
> =========================================================================================================================== 
>
>
> [1] Three terms (see reference above).
>
> "Legally Binding – An optional character of a statement or commitment 
> exchanged between trading partners (such as an offer or acceptance), 
> set by its sender, which indicates that the sender has expressed its 
> intent to make the statement or commitment legally enforceable. 
> [ebGLOSS] .......
>
> Nonbinding -- An optional character of a statement or commitment 
> exchanged between trading partners (such as an offer or acceptance), 
> set by its sender, that indicates the intent to be legally bound. See 
> "Legally Binding" above.............
>
> Trading partners may also wish to exchange proposed terms, without 
> making an assertion of intent to be legally bound. This is analogous 
> to the paper contracting practice of exchanging unsigned drafts or 
> term sheets."
>
>
>