The methods of authentication listed in codified rules such as Federal Rule of Evidence 901(b) are merely illustrations: such enumerated methods are only examples. Any method of authentication that provides sufficient evidence of authenticity is permissible.

Cf. Fed. R. Evid. 103(d) advisory committee's note ("This wording of the plain error principle is from Rule 52(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. While judicial unwillingness to be constructed by mechanical breakdowns of the adversary system has been more pronounced in criminal cases, there is no scarcity of decisions to...Unless the admission of evidence constitutes plain error, it is improper for the trial court to exclude evidence in the absence of an objection by an opposing party when the trial court by doing so preempts the adversarial role of a party. The making of an objection -- the decision to attempt to prevent an opponent from introducing evidence -- is ordinarily the function of a party rather than the trial court.

Reagan v. Brock, 628 F.2d 721, pin? (1st Cir. 1980).An objection ordinarily must be contemporaneous with the offer of evidence; that is, ordinarily an objection must be made after an offer of evidence is made but before the the trial court rules on the admissibility of the offered evidence.

United States v. McCulley, 178 F.3d 872, 876 (7th Cir. 1999) (upholding trial court's exclusion of portion of defendant's adopted, written statement about incorrect bearings used in starter generators as inadmissible....A "statement" for purposes of the hearsay prohibition against the admission of hearsay statements is (1) an oral or written assertion or (2) nonverbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by the person as an assertion.