Yes, it's a creaky, old system, but that's how it works: with paper and signatures and old, wrinkly men sitting on benches deciding your fate based on their incomplete understanding of modern technology.
As I mentioned in another comment, having an expert witness testify about public/private keys, PKI, "Web of Trust" should be sufficient in court.
Alternatively, passing legislation that gives a digital signature prima facie status in court would work as well.
All US jurisdictions already have such laws (in virtually all states, the same law—UETA—has been adopted, and E-SIGN is the federal law.)
Foreign jurisdictions may or may not have laws with similar effect, though I suspect they are pretty common by now, at least in the developed world.
[1] https://www.assuresign.com/electronic-signatures-vs-digital-...
Obviously, people selling centralized document storage and electronic signature services are incentivized to obfuscate this as much as possible.
If that's the case, then why does the FSF require scanning a printout with a physical signature (as one commenter mentioned) instead of opting for a digital signature of that document?
Does case law pertaining to the laws you cited support the assertion that digital signatures have the same legal meaning as an electronic or physical signature?
I dunno, ask the FSF what their reasoning is. Among the numerous plausible explanations is that they are concerned about laws in some non-US jurisdictions, or that they haven't expended resources examining other options.
> Does case law pertaining to the laws you cited support the assertion that digital signatures have the same legal meaning as an electronic or physical signature?
I didn't assert that case law made digital signatures equivalent to electronic signatures (in fact, I explicitly pointed to one way in which it is possible for a digital signature to fail to meet the similar requirements in UETA and E-SIGN for an electronic signature.)
> I didn't assert that case law made digital signatures equivalent to electronic signatures
You're correct; I didn't read your original response carefully enough. Also, the comment [2] that stated that the FSF does indeed allow for digital signatures (in the US at least) definitely settles the issues and answers my original question.
Presumably, lawyers and judges will understand state (notably, UETA, in all but three states) and federal laws (notably, E-SIGN) governing the use and validity of electronic signatures.
Are you erring on the side of legal caution? 'Cause I assure you the FSF is.