- this was used in the past on other contracts between the two
Note that judge looked into the meaning of the emoji, looked into how it was interpreted before, and said "but nevertheless under these circumstances this was a valid way to convey the two purposes of a ‘signature,”‘ Keene wrote in his decision."
Note purposes of a signature, not signature. FYI, making a mark is still legal, judges know it, yet that language was not used.
And you don't look into how a emoji was used by other people, if it is being used as a uniquoe "mark" aka "signature" aka "trade mark".
Because a mark, a signature is unique. An emoji is as un-unique as a word such as YES.
This is also why someone cannot trademark a colour, or a generic font. Trademarks aka marks aka signatures mist be unique.
In this case, the decision was "he accepted the deal", just as a handshake or verbal OK.
Marks do not have to be unique. It is the act of doing so, symbolised by the mark, that forms the contract. It was commonly just an X.
This particular case hinges more on whether the emoji :thumb_up means agreement or acknowledgement. However if the person had habitually been agreeing with a mark then that would weigh in favor. It's not clear without the exhibit of previous text messages, but strongly implied by the wording, that this was indeed the case.
So this was accepted as a written contract with mutually agreed terms. There was no verbal addendum or additional terms.
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/farmer-ordered-to-pay-a...
The nuance here us that:
- the emoji was bring used to reply with an OK
- this was used in the past on other contracts between the two
Note that judge looked into the meaning of the emoji, looked into how it was interpreted before, and said "but nevertheless under these circumstances this was a valid way to convey the two purposes of a ‘signature,”‘ Keene wrote in his decision."
Note purposes of a signature, not signature. FYI, making a mark is still legal, judges know it, yet that language was not used.
And you don't look into how a emoji was used by other people, if it is being used as a uniquoe "mark" aka "signature" aka "trade mark".
Because a mark, a signature is unique. An emoji is as un-unique as a word such as YES.
This is also why someone cannot trademark a colour, or a generic font. Trademarks aka marks aka signatures mist be unique.
In this case, the decision was "he accepted the deal", just as a handshake or verbal OK.