The term click-through contract refers to "the situation where one calls up a provider on the Internet. The person determines to purchase the goods or services offered and is walked through a series of displayed buttons requesting the purchaser to agree to certain terms and conditions in order to obtain the goods and services. With each click on screen, the purchaser is indicating assent to that term in order to obtain the desired results. So long as the action of clicking in each case relates to a discreet term, or follows the full presentation of all terms, the actions of the purchaser can be said to clearly indicate assent to the terms available for review. As with the exchange of standard paper forms, there is no requirement that the terms be read before the on screen click occurs, so long as they were available to be read." (in [1] at reporter's note to section 107). Obviously, if the Internet provider later wants to enforce the contract under formation, the person who clicks through should be identified. At a minimum, the Internet provider would record an audit trail of activities on the web site, e.g. including the name and address to which the goods should be delivered. If this is not sufficient, then the provider might request a contract confirmation through an alternate channel like telephone, fax, or mail. The customer might also feel more confident to send payment information through the alternate channel.
Sometimes, regularoty restrictions apply to the formalities for contract formation. With the electronic distribution channels (e.g. Internet), the challenge is to adapt the new procedures to both a) the user interactive session for the selection and decision process and b) the regulatory requirements for formalities and evidence collection (e.g. manisfesting assent through an alternate channel). To meet this challenge, the SAKEM procedure offers interesting opportunities.
The case of consumer protection regulations for electronic funds transfers has been studied in order to adapt the SAKEM procedure details to an actual reguatory environment (the EFTA in the United Stated, [2]). The issue at stake is the issuance, delivery, and consumer acceptance of an "access device" (broadly defined by the FETA regulation but allowing the consumer to later on initiate electronic payments).
Whenever an enrollment, standing authorization, or the opening of an account can concievably be assisted by electronic means, it is wise to investigate SAKEM for ways to meet the regularoty requirements for client authentication.
References
[1] NCCUSL, Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, (UETA) with prefatory notes and reporter's notes, September 18, 1998, "draft for discussion only", National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Chicago, Illinois 60611, U.S.A., posted on the web at http://www.law.upenn.edu/library/ulc/uecicta/eta1098.htm
[2] EFTA, Electronic Fund Transfer Act, Title IX of the Customer Credit Protection Act, (15 U.S.C. §1601 et seq.) and Regulation E: Electronic Fund Transfers, (12 C.F.R. §205)