I’m almost afraid to ask, but I keep seeing this shit… what is so magical about a “wet ink” signature? Ink dries fast, so I presume this means it’s the original signture and not a copy of whatever contract (or treaty?) in question. I’m so confused.
Really it’s just a misunderstanding of contract law. While it’s getting less common, because of esignatures growing in popularity, wet ink signatures used to be required on some contracts. Which is really someone just physically making a mark on a physical piece of paper. Basically sovcits decided that “wet ink” applied to everything, which I can assure you is not the case.
Here’s some more actual info about wet ink signatures:
I’m almost afraid to ask, but I keep seeing this shit… what is so magical about a “wet ink” signature? Ink dries fast, so I presume this means it’s the original signture and not a copy of whatever contract (or treaty?) in question. I’m so confused.
Really it’s just a misunderstanding of contract law. While it’s getting less common, because of esignatures growing in popularity, wet ink signatures used to be required on some contracts. Which is really someone just physically making a mark on a physical piece of paper. Basically sovcits decided that “wet ink” applied to everything, which I can assure you is not the case.
Here’s some more actual info about wet ink signatures:
https://www.adobe.com/acrobat/business/resources/wet-signature.html
A misunderstanding of contract law explains the whole sovereign citizen movement.