(a) Operations of an electronic agent constitute the authentication or manifestation of assent of a party if a the party used, selected, or programmed the electronic agent for the purpose of achieving results of that type.

(b) Compliance with a commercially reasonable n attribution procedure for authenticating a record authenticates the record as a matter of law. Otherwise, authentication may be proven in any manner, including by showing that a procedure existed by which a party or an electronic agent must have engaged in conduct or operations that authenticated the record or term in order to proceed further in the use it made of the information or informational property rights.

"Contract". Section 1-201. "Electronic agent". Section 2B-102. "Electronic message". Section 2B-102. "Information". Section 2B-102. "Notice". Section 1-201. "Party." Section 1-201. "Receive". Section 2B-102.

1. Subsection (a) contains a specific application of the general principle that actions of an electronic agent bind the party that selected and deployed the agent for that purpose. An electronic agent is an automated system of response or originating messages or performances. A party that intend to use such systems is bound by its operations. This includes where the operations yield authentication of a record.

2. Under subsection (b), compliance with an attribution procedure for that purpose removes fact questions about whether an authentication occurred. The procedure exists and is used because of an affirmative choice by the party. In addition, the stated effect occurs only if the procedure is commercially reasonable Section 2B-102. Commercial reasonableness is an element of the definition of an authentication procedure.

3. In the absence of use of an authentication procedure, proof of an authentication can occur in any manner. Included in the methods of proving authentication is proof that shows that a process exists that required an authentication in order to enable an automated system to proceed further in use or other operations. This rule reflect on-line and on-screen methodologies that are increasingly common and removes doubt about whether that type of proof is sufficient.