durch maschinelle Bearbeitung beglaubigt

17:42 Nov 9, 2015 

I think one should forget about "machine imprint." As far as I can tell, this is not going into the right direction (as in electronically stored signatures printed on documents). So, I'll stick with the rest of my explanation and posted it as an answer.

15:06 Nov 8, 2015 

The paragraph in question reads:
"A copy to be served in paper format may also be certified by machine processing. Instead of being signed by hand, the copy is to be furnished with the court seal. The same shall apply if a copy is served by telefax."
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_zpo/englisch_zpo....

Why move away from the seemingly official translation? I guess "certified by machine processing - valid without signature" works then. People may look up what it means online.

PS: The suggestion of "automatically certified" pertains to a whole other realm of issues. The link given as reference is from the music industry and counts singles, albums, etc. sold until reaching a certain limit to be "automatically certified." I have no idea how this warrants an inclusion here.

14:58 Nov 8, 2015 

14:58 Nov 8, 2015 

Yes, it does. There are already people making fun of it:
https://newstopaktuell.wordpress.com/2015/02/18/tageswitz-so...

See an example (scroll down to end):
http://files.vogel.de/iww/iww/quellenmaterial/dokumente/1428...

There is no signature, just an official stamp. Yes, I'll have to correct myself here, in essence, "maschinelle Bearbeitung" means the document is created by means of a typewriter or PC - but what if the stamp is missing?

I know the phrase "...ist elektronisch erstellt worden und daher ohne Unterschrift gültig," for invoices, although legally, its validity is in dispute.

I do agree, Ed, with your notion about "but" - it is the point of this entire paragraph to say that because of the document being a copy created by means of a machine it is indeed valid without a signature - not in spite of it.

Hence, if you want to make it clear to non-ENS, I guess you should say something such as "duly certified by machine imprint," as they do here: (next post)

14:31 Nov 8, 2015 

Ah ha. That sounds like it might actually be what we're after. The notion of electronic signatures did cross my mind, too, but had a good dig and couldn't find sources to back up my suspicions. Good work, Björn. I still think maschinelle Bearbeitung sounds very odd!

14:14 Nov 8, 2015 

Sorry, but TechLawDC's answer seems to be highly misleading and wrong.

Please see the following paragraph of the ZPO:
"Eine in Papierform zuzustellende Abschrift kann auch durch maschinelle Bearbeitung beglaubigt werden. Anstelle der handschriftlichen Unterzeichnung ist die Abschrift mit dem Gerichtssiegel zu versehen. Dasselbe gilt, wenn eine Abschrift per Telekopie zugestellt wird."

This seems to have nothing to do with electronically generated; that is dealt with in the next paragraph:
"Ein Schriftstück kann in beglaubigter elektronischer Abschrift zugestellt werden. Die Abschrift ist mit einer qualifizierten elektronischen Signatur des Urkundsbeamten der Geschäftsstelle zu versehen."
http://dejure.org/gesetze/ZPO/169.html

13:09 Nov 8, 2015 

To my mind, 'maschinell beglaubigt' and 'gültig ohne Unterschrift' amount to the same thing. And I agree with TechLawDC that 'automatically certified' sounds confusing.