Legal Risk in E Contracts By Group 3:

Chandandeep Singh Pabla (WMP6014) Rohit Goswami (WMP6040) Siddharth Anand (WMP6049) Siddharth Guha (WMP6050) Varun Malhotra (WMP6056) Vinay Gurudev (WMP6058) Viresh Suri (WMP6059)

A report submitted in fulfillment of the assignments for Legal Aspects in Management WMP 2013

Indian Institute of Management, Lucknow Noida Campus 2010

Date: 21/12/2010

Table of Contents

What are E contracts? Essentials/Terms of valid E contracts

Types of E contracts Relevant IT Act provisions governing E Contracts.

Current issues in E Contracts

E Contract laws of other countries Conclusion References

1.

What are E contracts?

An E contract or an electronic contract is an agreement in which both the terms of the agreement and the action taken to indicate that an agreement had been formed occurred electronically through electronic media like computer messages. An E-contract may be formed in the course of e-commerce in any of the following cases:
-

Interaction of two or more individuals using electronic means, such as e-mail Interaction of an individual with an electronic agent, such as a computer program Interaction of at least two electronic agents that are programmed to recognize the existence of a contract.

E-contracts can be mapped to computer programs, which satisfy the contract requirements in software. Even though they work in most cases, these programs do not have the capabilities to handle complex relationships between parties to an e-contract Procedures available for forming e Contracts include:
-

E-mail: Offers and acceptances can be exchanged entirely by e-mail, or can be combined with paper documents, faxes, telephonic discussions etc. Web Site Forms: The seller can offer goods or services (e.g. air tickets, software etc) through his website. The customer places an order by completing and transmitting the order form provided on the website. The goods may be physically delivered later (e.g. in case of clothes, music CDs etc) or be immediately delivered electronically (e.g. e-tickets, software, mp3 etc). Online Agreements: Users may need to accept an online agreement in order to be able to avail of the services e.g. clicking on I accept while installing software or clicking on I agree while signing up for an email account.

Difference in the formation of normal contracts v/s electronic contracts:

1. An offer becomes effective when the offeree receives it. However, in an e

contract, the time at which the offer becomes effective is determined as follows: (a) if the offeree has designated a specific computer system under his control where the offer should be sent, the time the offer enters that system will be the time the offer becomes viable (b) if the offeree has not designated a specific computer system under his control as the one for the offer to be sent to, the time the offer enters any computer system under the control of the recipient will be the time that the offer becomes viable.
2. Ordinarily an acceptance becomes effective when the offeror receives it.

However, in case of e contracts, the time at which the acceptance and the contract become effective is determined as follows: (a) if the offeror has designated a specific computer system under his control where the acceptance should be sent by the offeree, the time the acceptance enters that system will be the time the acceptance and the contract becomes viable (b) if the offeror has not designated a specific computer system under his control as the one for the acceptance to be sent to, the time the acceptance enters any computer system under the control of the offeror will be the time that the acceptance, and the contract, becomes viable.
3. In the case of a unilateral contract, the offeree accepts with action, not words.

Therefore, the acceptance and the contract become viable when the offeree performs an act of acceptance in accordance with transaction practices or as required in the offer.
4. If the contract is negotiated using e-mail messages, one party may require the

other to execute a confirmation letter before the contract is formed. If so, the contract will come into existence when the confirmation letter is executed 5. Ordinarily, a contract will be considered to have come into existence at the place the acceptance occurred. However, if a contract is negotiated electronically, the acceptance is assumed to have occurred at the main business place of the recipient. If the recipient has no business place, it will be considered to have occurred at the recipients residence.
6. The parties have latitude to make their own agreement at the assumed place at

which their contract comes into existence.

2. Essentials / Terms of Electronic Contracts

As in every other contract, an electronic contract also has the following requirements: 1. An offer needs to be made: In many transactions (whether online or conventional) the offer is not made directly one-on-one. The consumer browses the available goods and services displayed on the merchants website and then choose what he would like to purchase. The offer is not made by website displaying the items for sale at a particular price. This is actually an invitation to offer and hence is revocable at any time up to the time of acceptance. The offer is made by the customer on placing the products in the virtual basket or shopping cart for payment. 2. The offer needs to be accepted Until the offer is accepted, a valid contract is not formed. An acceptance is a final and unqualified expression of assent to the terms of an offer, made in the manner specified or indicated by the offeror. Generally, the offeree is required to communicate to the offeror his notice of acceptance. If no notice is given, no contract is formed. In the online environment, when the e-business agrees to sell a product to a customer who has made an offer to buy the product, it is considered that the offer made has been accepted. An e-business has four possible ways to convey its acceptance:
-

By sending an e-mail or web-mail message of acceptance to the offeror By delivery online of an electronic or digital product or service By delivery of the physical product By any other act or conduct indicating acceptance of the offer

Until the contract is formed, both parties have the right to withdraw from the agreement without any liability. There are 2 general rules of acceptance: The Mailbox or Postal Acceptance Rule (Used in postal service) - If the acceptance is in written form and parties use the postal service for communications, the acceptance takes place when the letter is posted, regardless when the letter actually arrives The Instantaneous Communications or Receipt Rule (Used for instantaneous communications like telephone, telefax) - A contract is only binding when and where the communication of acceptance of the offer is received by the offeror. Note that owing to the complexity of email technology, applicability of either one of these rules for email communication is debatable. 3. There has to be lawful consideration Any contract to be enforceable by law must have lawful consideration, i.e., when both parties give and receive something in return.

4. There has to be an intention to create legal relations If there is no intention on the part of the parties to create legal relationships, then no contract is possible between them. Usually, agreements of a domestic or social nature are not contracts and therefore are not enforceable. 5. The parties must be competent to contract A contract is considered to be valid only if it is entered by people who possess contractual capacity. It means it cannot be entered by people of unsound mind. 6. There must be free and genuine consent Consent is said to be free when there is absence of coercion, misrepresentation, undue influence or fraud. In other words, there must not be any subversion of the will of any party to the contract to enter such contract. Usually, in online contracts, especially when there is no active real-time interaction between the contracting parties, the click through procedure ensures free and genuine consent. e.g. between a website and the customer who buys through such a site. 7. The object of the contract must be lawful A valid contract presupposes a lawful object. Thus a contract for selling narcotic drugs or pornography online is void. 8. There must be certainty and possibility of performance A contract, to be enforceable, must not be vague or uncertain and there must be possibility of performance. A contract, which is impossible to perform, cannot be enforced, e.g., where a website promises to sell land on moon.

3. Types of E Contracts
The following types of e contracts exist:
-

Shrink wrap contract (when purchasing off-the-shelf software, for example) when the purchased product is received, it comes with additional terms and conditions in the packaging or in the accompanying documentation. Web based agreements which require assent by this technique are also known as Web wrap contracts. Click-wrap contract, made at or before the time of purchase on a web site. The purchaser is required to click I agree before the transaction will continue, the installation will proceed or the user will gain access to the web site. E.g. after selecting a
product to purchase, the Internet user sees the contract terms on the computer screen and cannot complete the purchase without clicking a box on the screen to indicate assent.

Browse wrap contract, where the user will visit the pages of a web site. Somewhere on the web site, terms and conditions are posted that purport to bind anyone who uses the web site or its services. When using this method, an Internet vendor gives the user the
opportunity to look at the terms of the sale, but does not require the user to click on anything to

indicate assent to these terms before paying for the product. For example, the web site may contain a button saying click here for legal terms, which the purchaser may click or ignore

Although the first type of transaction (the shrink wrap) has been around for some time and actually exists in a paper environment, the other two types of transactions (click wrap and browse wrap) are unique to electronic commerce.

Electronic Data Interchange or EDI is a communication between trading partners of structured business messages from one computer application to another. Here unlike the other E contracts, there is exchange of information and completion of contracts between two computers and not an individual and a computer.

4.

Relevant IT provision Act pertaining to E Contracts :

The value of e-contracts can be well understood in the light of the following sections of Indian Evidence Act. Sections 85A, 85B, 88A, 90A and 85C deals with the presumptions as to electronic records whereas Section 65B relates to the admissibility of electronic record. The above mentioned sections can be explained as follows: Section 85a: As per this section, every electronic record of the nature of an agreement is concluded as soon as a digital signature is affixed to the record. Section 85A has been added in order to ensure the validity of e-contracts. But there are some restrictions as regards the presumptive value. The presumption is only valid to electronic records, electronic records that are five years old and electronic messages that fall within the ambit of Section 85B, Section 88A and Section 90A of Indian Evidence Act. Section 85b: Section 85B states that the court shall presume the fact that the record in question has not been put to any kind of alteration, in case contrary has not been proved. The secure status of the record may be demanded till a specific time. The digital signature should also be presumed to have been affixed with an intention of signing and approving the electronic record. Further it has been provided that the section should not be misread so as to create any presumption relating to the integrity or authenticity of the electronic record or digital signature in question. Section 88a: As per this section, the court may presume that an electronic message forwarded by the originator through an electronic mail server to the addressee to whom the message purports to be addressed corresponds with the message as fed into his computer for transmission, but the court shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent.

This section is self-explanatory as it purports to follow the basic rules of a valid hard-copy agreement. The words may presume authorize the court to use its discretionary power as regards presumption. Sections 85A and 85B contained the words shall presume which expressly excluded this discretionary power of the court. Section 90a: In case of an electronic record being five years old, if proved to be in proper custody, the court may presume that the digital signature was affixed so as to authenticate the validity of that agreement. The digital signature can also be affixed by any person authorized to do so. For the purpose of this section, electronic records are said to be in proper custody if they are in the custody of the person with whom they naturally be. An exception can be effected in case circumstances of a particular case render its origin probable. Section 85c: As far as a digital signature certificate is concerned, the court shall presume that the information listed in the certificate is true and correct. Inclusion of the words shall presume again relates to the expressed exclusion of the discretionary power of the court. Section 65b: Section 65B describes admissibility of electronic records. It says that any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper or stored/recorded/copied on optical/magnetic media produced by a computer shall be deemed to be a document and is admissible as evidence in any proceeding without further proof of the original, Indian law provides for the authentication of electronic records by affixing a digital signature. The law provides for use of an asymmetric crypto system and hash function and also recommends standards to be adhered. Chapter IV of the Information Technology Act, 2000 contains sections 11, 12 and 13 and is titled Attribution, Acknowledgment and Despatch of Electronic Records. Attribution of Electronic Records: According to section 11 of the IT Act, an electronic record shall be attributed to the originator (a) if it was sent by the originator himself, or (b) By a person who had the authority to act on behalf of the originator in respect of that electronic record, or (c) By an information system programmed by or on behalf of the originator to operate automatically. According to section 2(1)(a) of the IT Act, originator is a person who: 1. Sends, generates, stores or transmits any electronic message or 2. Causes any electronic message to be sent, generated, stored or transmitted to any other person. The term originator does not include an intermediary.

Acknowledgment of Receipt: According to section 12(1) of the IT Act, where the originator has not agreed with the addressee that the acknowledgment of receipt of electronic record be given in a particular form or by a particular method, an acknowledgment may be given by (a) any communication by the addressee, automated or otherwise; or (b) any conduct of the addressee, sufficient to indicate to the originator that the electronic record has been received. According to section 2(1)(b) of the IT Act, Addressee means a person who is intended by the originator to receive the electronic record but does not include any intermediary. According to section 12(2) of the IT Act, where the originator has stipulated that the electronic record shall be binding only on receipt of an acknowledgment of such electronic record by him, then unless acknowledgment has been so received, the electronic record shall be deemed to have been never sent by the originator. According to section 12(3) of the IT Act, where the originator has not stipulated that the electronic record shall be binding only on receipt of such acknowledgment, and the acknowledgment has not been received by the originator within the time specified or agreed or, if no time has been specified or agreed to within a reasonable time, then the originator may give notice to the addressee stating that no acknowledgment has been received by him and specifying a reasonable time by which the acknowledgment must be received by him and if no acknowledgment is received within the aforesaid time limit he may after giving notice to the addressee, treat the electronic record as though it has never been sent. Time and place of despatch and receipt According to section 13(1) of the IT Act, save as otherwise agreed to between the originator and the addressee, the despatch of an electronic record occurs when it enters a computer resource outside the control of the originator. According to section 13(2) of the IT Act, save as otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee, the time of receipt of an electronic record shall be determined as follows, namely: (a) If the addressee has designated a computer resource for the purpose of receiving electronic records (i) Receipt occurs at the time when the electronic record enters the designated computer resource (ii) if the electronic record is sent to a computer resource of the addressee that is not the Designated computer resource, receipt occurs at the time when the electronic record is retrieved by the addressee (b) if the addressee has not designated a computer resource along with specified timings, if any, receipt occurs when the electronic record enters the computer resource of the addressee. According to section 13(3) of the IT Act, save as otherwise agreed to between the originator and the addressee, an electronic record is deemed to be despatched at the place where the originator

has his place of business, and is deemed to be received at the place where the addressee has his place of business. According to section 13(4) of the IT Act, the provisions of sub-section (2) shall apply notwithstanding that the place where the computer resource is located may be different from the place where the electronic record is deemed to have been received under sub section 3 Digital Signature and Indian Law Digital Signature Certificate means a certificate issued by a recognised certifying authority authenticating the digital signature of a subscriber. The certifying authorities who are recognised license holders have the power to issue Digital Signature Certificates. Any person desiring to issue a Digital Signature Certificate has to apply to a recognized certifying Authority in the prescribed manner. Such application must be accompanied by a Certification practice statement or in absence of such statement, a statement containing such particulars as are specified by regulations. According to section 3 of the IT Act, (1) Subject to the provisions of this section any subscriber may authenticate an electronic record by affixing his digital signature. (2) The authentication of the electronic record shall be effected by the use of asymmetric crypto system and hash function which envelop and transform the initial electronic record into another electronic record. A secure digital signature should satisfy the following conditions:
1. It should be unique to the subscriber affixing it. A digital signature is unique and is based

upon the message that is signed and the private key of the signer.
2. It should be capable of identifying such subscriber. What this implies is that the digital

signature should be verifiable by the public key of the signer and by no other public key.
3. It should be created in a manner or using a means under the exclusive control of the

subscriber. This implies that the signer must use hardware and software that are completely free of any unauthorized external control.
4. It should be linked to the electronic record to which it relates in such a manner that if the

electronic record were altered, the digital signature would be invalidated.

5.

Current risks in electronic contracting

Since the mid 1990s, interest in the commercial use of the Internet continues to grow by leaps and bounds despite some potentially difficult legal questions. Some current issues / risks in e contracts are described as follows:
a) Adoption of legal infrastructure for e commerce : This includes existence of laws in

some countries that mandate use of digital signatures in certain type of electronic transactions
b) Lack of synchronization between different countries for developing e contract laws :

There is scope for harmony between countries for developing laws affecting e commerce. The most influential effort to date is the Model Law of Electronic Commerce published by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and its accompanying Guide to Enactment. However, there is scope of improved coordination.
c) Issue of assent: Although it is clear that one can validly assent electronically, the rules

governing assent are still not well defined. Specific rules to implement each of the modes of contract formation (shrink wrap, click wrap, and browse wrap) are required. The extent of
policing of the terms of the resulting agreement also needs to be established.

Another question related to assent is the types of conduct that constitute assent to terms and conditions. The question is also concerned with timing. There are issues about how to treat terms that are not proposed or disclosed until after the user has already agreed to go forward with the transaction and has tendered the required consideration. There are also questions related to disclosure about whether there was assent, when was it manifested, is it only for terms about which the user had knowledge or awareness, or does it extend to terms and conditions which the user had not read or understood. A reference of some US cases related to assent is as follows :
1) ProCD Inc. v. Zeidenberg - use of shrink wrap was upheld as a means of binding a purchaser to contractual terms. The user had purchased software and the vendor argued that the purchase was subject to license terms found in the software box and presented on the screen at the time of use, which required the user to indicate his assent. Rejecting the users argument that the contract was formed at the time of purchase, and adopting what has now been dubbed a rolling contract theory, the court held the consumer was bound by the terms of the license, even though he had not seen them at the time of paying for the product.

2) In re Real Networks, Inc. Privacy Litigation - the court held that Internet users had agreed to a license agreement requiring arbitration via click wrap. 3) Hotmail Corp. v. Van $ Money Pie, Inc. - a court upheld the validity of restrictions on the use of free e-mail accounts for sending advertisements, as the same was agreed upon by users via the click wrap.

4) Specht v. Netscape Communications Corp. - a computer user downloaded software from a web site that contained a message saying, Please review and agree to the terms of the Netscape Smart Download software license agreement before downloading and using the software, but did not otherwise require the user to review or click agreement to the terms of the agreement. The court held that this scheme did not suffice to creation of a contract. There was no manifestation of assent on the users part, as the only act (downloading the software) was not an unambiguous indication of assent. The court pointed out that the case was neither like ProCD (where, according to the court, the purchaser was confronted with conspicuous, mandatory license terms every time he ran the software on his computer) nor like typical click-wrap cases (where there was much clearer notice than in the present case that a users act would manifest assent to contract terms.) Note that these click wrap agreements in 2, 3 are less controversial than the shrink wrap agreement involved in 1. Where the clicking occurs online before or during the consummation of the transaction, rather than after payment as was the case in ProCD, the purchaser has arguably had the opportunity to see the terms of the contract before assenting and before parting with any money. This feature greatly diminishes the possibility of disappointed expectations. Nonetheless, there remains the challenge of assuring that the user clearly and expressly manifests assent to the stated terms. A task force of the American Bar Association has released a set of fifteen strategies in five areas: opportunity to review terms display of terms acceptance or rejection of terms

opportunity to correct errors and keeping records to prove assent

Courts in the United States have once again split on the enforceability of browse wrap agreements and whether adequate assent is given.
d) Consumer protection

The online environment raises consumer concerns about - The merchants identity - Use of technology in completing transactions - Ability to seek redress across borders - Misuse personal information. The APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Coordination) ministers recommended voluntary guidelines for consumer protection, which include: (a) transparent and effective consumer protection to at least the same level afforded in other forms of commerce (b) international cooperation among economies, businesses and consumer representatives to establish the confidence and trust in e-commerce (c) education of businesses and consumers about the risks and benefits when conducting transactions online.

(d) Recommendation of private sector leadership that includes the participation of consumer representatives to develop transparent and effective self-regulatory mechanisms containing specific, substantive rules for dispute resolution, and compliance mechanisms. Private sector leadership would also be needed to develop technology as a tool to protect and empower consumers. The APEC guidelines on consumer protection made several recommendations to business :
-

Businesses engaged in e-commerce should not make any representation or omission or engage in any practice that is likely to be deceptive, misleading, fraudulent or unfair to consumers, and would be encouraged to join transparent and effective self-regulatory schemes that promote fair and ethical business practices. Businesses should give consumers sufficient information to identify the business and to enable prompt and effective consumer communication with the business. Businesses should provide accurate, clear and easily accessible information about the goods or services they offer and information about terms, conditions, and costs relevant to the transaction sufficient to enable consumers to make an informed decision; and should make available information in all appropriate languages. In their relations with customers, businesses should provide consumers with measures that provide an opportunity for review before entering into a transaction. Businesses should provide consumers with fair and timely means to settle disputes and obtain redress without undue cost or burden. Dispute resolution mechanisms should include internal mechanisms to address consumer complaints and participation by the business in third party dispute resolution programmes. Consumers personal information should be private, and businesses should take reasonable steps to ensure the security of consumer information. Consumers should be provided with easy-to-use, secure payment mechanisms and information on the level of security such mechanisms afford. The final element in the guidelines states that electronic commerce transactions are subject to the existing legal frameworks in APEC economies respecting choice of law and jurisdiction. The guidelines should consider economies domestic frameworks regarding choice of law and jurisdiction when sharing information about consumer protection in the future.

In 1990, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) identified four reasons why in general terms that contracts were commonly evidenced in writing. These were - Expectation that written contracts are able to reduce the possibility of disputes - Make parties aware of the consequences of their dealings - Provide evidence upon which third parties might rely upon the agreement - To facilitate tax, accounting and regulatory purposes.

With the proper safeguards, electronic contracts should be able to address these concerns as well.
e) Occurance of errors in e contracting process: Occurance of errors is common across electronic transactions. It is a factual problem to determine who of the following committed the error: the sender, the recipient or an intermediary. Rescission is usually permitted only if the other party knew or had reason to know of the error or mistake. When dealing with an individual, it may be possible to prove that the other party knew or should have known of a mistake. With an automated information processing system designed to automatically process transmissions without review by any human being, proving what the other side knew or should have known when the mistake occurs while in electronic communication is a challenge.

6.

E Contracts laws of other countries

China: In China in the last two decades three generations of electronic acts have appeared. The first mandated the utilization of only the digital signature, and no other form of e-signature. AT this time, parties relied on general contract act of 1999. The Contract Law recognizes that contracts may be concluded in written, oral or other forms.Other forms is significant because it opened the door to consideration of the validity of the electronic form. Under the Contract Law, if the parties have agreed that the contract in writing, then that agreement controls. The second reversed the first and took an open-minded attitude toward allowance of any type of e-signature. The third adopted a moderate position between the two extremes of the first and second, recognizing many forms of e-signatures but granting preferred status to the digital signature. Under its new statute, China grants a degree of privileged-status to the digital signature. Hence, it is appropriate at this point to consider some of the characteristics of a digital signature system. If the parties to an e-commerce transaction decide to use a digital signature, there is a need for two underlying technologies and a third party: (1) asymmetric cryptology (2) public key infrastructure (PKI) (3) a Certification Authority (CA). The Electronic Signature Law (ESL)was enacted and disseminated on August 28, 2004 and was implemented on April 1, 2005.According to Chinas Ministry of Justice, the writers of the ESL considered the following sources in the drafting process: legal and ecommerce experts, the

UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce, he UNCITRAL Model Law on E-Signatures, 138 the European Unions E-Commerce Law, the European Unions E-Signatures Directive, and e-signature statutes of the United States, Japan, Korea, Singapore and other countries. The ESL was enacted for these reasons: (1) to grant e-signatures the same legal status as the handwritten or sealed signature (2) to regulate the procedures undertaken when using e-signatures; (3) to delineate the rights and responsibilities of the parties, i.e., the subscriber, the CA, and relying third parties. China implemented the ESL on April 1, 2005 to provide for legal recognition of signatures in ecommerce transactions. The ESL gave an e-signature the same legal effect as if it were a handwritten one, or one made with a seal. This removal of the legal impediments toward electronic signing should facilitate the development of e-commerce in China. China recognizes all forms of e-signatures (including digital signatures), as long as they meet basic standards of reliability. If the transacting parties choose to use a digital signature, they will be employing asymmetric cryptology, public key infrastructure, and will be interacting with Certification Authorities (CA). Singapore: The Singapore Electronic Transactions Act 1998 (No. 25 of 1998) (the ETA), passed on 10 July 1998, was specifically adopted with the intent of resolving the legal concerns arising from new technologies that affect online business. The ETA is a hybrid piece of legislation that was influenced by legislation from several countries. These guiding principles were adopted when the ETA was drafted: (i) The need to conform to international standards and international models in order to be integrated with the global e-commerce framework; (ii) The need to avoid over regulation; (iii) The need to be flexible and technologically neutral to adapt quickly to a fluid global environment; and (iv) The need for transparency and predictability in our laws. In general, the ETA seeks to enact a Commercial Code to support e-commerce transactions; enable the use of electronic applications and electronic licences for the public sector; clarify Internet Service Providers' (ISPs) liability for third party content; and, provide for a Public Key Infrastructure. Salient Features of the Electronic Transactions Act 1998
a) Commercial Code for E-Commerce Transactions :

A commercial code to support e-commerce transactions is required to clearly define the rights and obligations of transacting parties. Therefore, the first objective of the ETA is to set out a commercial code that combines the best features of international models.

The ETA contains provisions dealing with how a contract can be formed electronically by addressing issues of time and place of sending and receipt of electronic messages. It provides legal status on the use of electronic records and signatures and their secure counterparts. The Evidence Act was also amended in 1997 to allow the use of electronic records as evidence in the courts.
b) Electronic Applications and Licences for the Public Sector :

In order to facilitate the use of electronic transactions in the public sector, the ETA contains an omnibus provision through which government departments and statutory boards can accept electronic filings without having to amend their respective Acts. It allows public bodies to issue permits and licences electronically. The ETA also provides that government departments and statutory boards can specify as regulations, and additional requirements for the retention of electronic records under their purview.

7. Conclusion
The fast development of information technology and inadequacy of existing laws in meeting legal issues in e- commerce, in line with the need of business entrepreneurs and users, calls for security and legal certainty. This underlines the need to recognize customary and trade practices as well as contracts in virtual world, as long as they do not offend other laws including third parties laws. Harmonising e- commerce laws throughout the world should be encouraged. Emerging electronic contracting technologies offer the promise of greater ease of use, economic efficiency and access to global markets. However, they also share the peril of de facto lawmaking outside any recognized framework of accountability or traditional legal institutions. One of the challenges for law reform is be to make standards as broad as possible, in order to accommodate the widest possible range of interests. Regulatory intervention in the standard developing process today should be directed at increasing transparency and accountability. If regulators monitor developments in this area, theyll be able to create standards and applications much before markets become locked-in to restrictive and unfair norms.

8. References
Asian school of cyber laws (asianlaws.org)

Electronic Communication Law Review 9: 85112, 2002. 2002 Kluwer Law International.

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

Cooperative research centre for construction innovation www.constructioninnovation.info)