DocuSign doesn't provide anything other than convenience. Generally, in the law, either a signature must be notarized or it doesn't. Docusign isn't a notary, it's really just an electronic document courier. If the legitimacy of a signature is challenged, Docusign isn't going to hire a forensic expert to testify that John Smith was actually the person who logged in and clicked the link. All they can say is that someone with access to the link from IP address 1.1.1.1 clicked Agree.
Interesting, my mom just sold her house and there was no verification.
My point stands, legally either a signature has to be notarized or it doesn't. If it doesn't, any signature can be effective. I'll agree that 3rd party hosting provides an element of independence, however, legally it's not required, and could be done by anyone. E.g., a self-hosting a solution that required the signer to upload a video of them clicking I AGREE would provide just as much certainty as anything Docusign can.
Where is that required? Maybe POAs? At least Florida and Georgia real estate law (the only ones I'm familiar with) don't require anything of the sort for any of the paperwork (before closing).
And my memory of Florida law (when I was signing an apartment rental contract 4 years ago) was that any electronic signature agreed to by the contracting parties was valid. So I simply typed my name in the contract, emailed it to my landlord, and we were done.
Of course, I also used https:/.opentimestamps.org to store the hash of our contract on bitcoin's block chain, because that way we both had proof that the contract existed in a certain form on that date. (I never needed that proof, because he was a good landlord, and I paid rent on time.)
While probably enough to prove it existed, you'd probably need to pay a lot for an expert witness to testify to "hash of file on blockchain means it existed" if you did have to go to court over the existence of the contract.
