During the last year, we have seen a significant shift to “as a service” models and cloud solutions, as well as heightened attention on outsourcing as a strategic business tool to enable scalability, improved service, and accelerated access to in-demand technology and resources. This increased reliance on vendor performance to enable business operations has underscored the importance of implementing a solid service level methodology in order to: establish performance metrics that align with the customer’s expectations and business requirements; measure, monitor, and report performance against the metrics; set out the remedies for service level defaults, including service level credits and termination rights; and agree to events that may excuse performance resulting in missed service levels.
Tech & Sourcing @ Morgan Lewis
TECHNOLOGY TRANSACTIONS, OUTSOURCING, AND COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS NEWS FOR LAWYERS AND SOURCING PROFESSIONALS
The Chancery Lane Project, a UK-based nonprofit network of legal professionals, has published a “Net Zero Toolkit” to help organizations achieve net zero goals. The toolkit includes 100 “climate clauses” aligned with the 2015 Paris Agreement goals.
Over the last year, companies implemented new digital technology solutions at record levels, looking to implement emerging technologies, improve the user digital experience, leverage cloud solutions to store the massive amounts of data being generated, and test the waters on how to transact using digital assets. And we don’t see things slowing down.
Are you a customer negotiating a services agreement that will grant you access to use certain technology? Have you read through the agreement or accompanying links to determine if you need to adhere to an acceptable use policy (AUP) for such technology? In this post, we’ll discuss some of the items a customer should consider when reviewing AUPs within services agreements.
Following an initial announcement in early 2021, the UK government has recently launched its first National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Strategy. This new strategy indicates that the United Kingdom may be planning on diverging from the legislative approach taken by the EU Commission in its “AI package.”
The United Kingdom (UK) government on September 22 launched the country’s first National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Strategy to build on the UK’s strengths in the area and maximize new AI opportunities.
The inclusion of transition-out obligations within service agreements should not be overlooked in the contract drafting process because they help to provide a game plan if the service provider/customer relationship winds down. In this post, we discuss some of the items a contract drafter should consider when drafting clauses to address transition-out obligations.
If you are just wrapping your head around the concepts of virtual reality and augmented reality, it may be time to get past the learning curve, as more technology companies are talking about creating the “metaverse.”
In our January 2021 blog post The Right to Repair in Massachusetts Rolls Forward, we discussed how Massachusetts voters in November 2021 approved Question One, a ballot initiative amending the commonwealth’s 2012 Right to Repair Law. The amendment provides that motor vehicles sold in Massachusetts, beginning with 2022 models, be required “to equip any such vehicles that use telematics systems—systems that collect and wirelessly transmit mechanical data to a remote server—with a standardized open access data platform. Owners of motor vehicles with telematics systems would get access to mechanical data through a mobile device application.” With authorization of the owner, such telematics data will be available to independent repair facilities and dealerships not otherwise affiliated with the manufacturer of the vehicle, who will “send commands to the vehicle for repair, maintenance, and diagnostic testing.” In turn, a contractual relationship between the manufacturer and the independent repair facility will no longer be required in order for such data to be shared.
On September 2, 2021, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) motion for summary judgement, finding that an artificial intelligence (AI) system cannot be named as an inventor on a patent.