Public evidence note

Foreign-signer pricing turns an abstract legal issue into a real workflow question.

This evidence note preserves public NotaryCam pricing language showing international-signer and no-SSN workflows as paid offerings, then separates what that supports from what it does not prove by itself.

Why this matters

The workflow was marketed and monetized, not merely discussed.

The preserved pricing page shows that international-signer and no-SSN workflows were sold as real offerings. That matters because the legal question is no longer theoretical once the platform is charging for those sessions.

The careful question is not “does this page prove a violation.” The careful question is: what exact legal identity path was the platform expecting the notary to rely on for those sessions, in that state, on that date?

Use this note for

Timeline arguments, foreign-signer workflow analysis, Virginia identity-method questions, and Florida provider/compliance comparisons where public pricing and availability language matter.

Quoted lines

Preserved public pricing language.

Real-estate lane

Added charges are explicit

$50 International surcharge

$50 signer(s) without SSN add-on

Non-real-estate lane

International signer pricing is explicit

$79 International signer

145 countries

24/7 notary network

Compliance-adjacent language

Public compliance framing exists too

Bristol West Leverages NotaryCam to Ensure Compliance with Florida’s RON Law

This page is provided for informational purposes only...

What this supports

What the page helps establish.

  • Foreign-signer and no-SSN workflows were marketed as paid offerings.
  • The issue was commercialized and monetized, not merely theoretical.
  • Customers could reasonably read the workflow as operationally available.
  • The identity-method question becomes sharper because the platform was charging for the workflow.

What it does not prove by itself

  • It does not prove every session was unlawful.
  • It does not prove a regulator or court already made a formal finding.
  • It does not prove what statutory method was actually used in a specific session.