https://tidbits.com/2023/07/22/the-unbearable-ambiguity-of-emoji/
"A picture is said to be worth a thousand words, implying you’d need a thousand
words to describe a single image. Emoji are much simpler—maybe just ten words
would suffice. But there’s still plenty of room for interpretation within the
picture/text exchange rate, as a recent Canadian court case shows.
A grain buyer in Saskatchewan, Canada, texted farmers asking to buy flax at $17
per bushel, and one farmer indicated he could deliver on that. The buyer texted
a photo of the contract, as it had done numerous times before, and asked,
“Please confirm flax contract.” The farmer replied with a thumbs-up 👍 emoji.
But when prices for flax jumped to $41 per bushel and the farmer failed to
deliver on the less-lucrative contract, the buyer sued for breach.
The facts of the case aren’t in question; the nut of the issue is whether the
farmer’s 👍 response had the legal meaning of “I accept the contract that you
just texted me” or merely implied “I’m acknowledging receipt of the contract.”
Judge Timothy Keene ruled that the farmer’s 👍 counted as a signature and the
farmer had thus breached the contract:
This court readily acknowledges that a 👍 emoji is a non-traditional means to
“sign” a document but nevertheless under these circumstances this was a
valid way to convey the two purposes of a “signature” – to identify the
signator (Chris using his unique cell phone number) and as I have found
above – to convey Achter’s acceptance of the flax contract."
Via Wayne Radinsky.
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
