Taft was a sponsor of the ITechLaw World Technology Law Conference, which took place at the end of May in San Francisco. In addition, Taft Chicago partner Daniel Saeedi presented “Face Scans, Fingerprints and Voice Recognition – The Current U.S. Regulatory Framework for Biometric Privacy.”

The International Technology Law Association (ITechLaw) has been serving the technology law community worldwide since 1971 and is one of the most widely established and largest associations of its kind. It has a global membership base representing six continents and spanning more than 60 countries.

Does an ERP vendor’s fiscal year matter in the discount you get as a customer? Absolutely. Oracle’s fiscal year ended in May, and Oracle’s salespeople are notorious for pressuring customers into signing deals with significant discounts prior to year-end under the notion that the discount will disappear after the year-end. Customers need to take into consideration the vendor’s year-end and its impact on the vendor’s willingness to provide discounts. However, only focusing on year-end discounts is misguided.

While it is true some discounts will no longer be available, it is unlikely that the vendor will walk away or that all discounts will disappear. While a salesperson may want to close a deal prior to the year-end, salespeople are under constant pressure to make their numbers. In our experience, the discount being offered as an incentive to sign by year-end will change, but it is unlikely to disappear entirely.

Moreover, buying around a vendor’s year-end is not the most effective strategy for securing meaningful discounts. Customers should be methodical and creative to properly motivate sales representatives to achieve the discounts and concessions the customer seeks while focusing on managing the cost of operating the ERP system over the lifecycle of the customer’s relationship with the vendor.

While focusing on upfront discounts, price caps, future options, and the ability to swap out functionality are all important, focusing on flexibility helps reduce the likelihood of a breach of the contract, reduces the likelihood of an audit, and reduces the cost to operate the ERP software over time. Instead of only focusing on upfront discounts, customers should focus on obtaining the greatest amount of flexibility in using the software. The goal should be to minimize unexpected fees and costs. A customer also needs to think about the cost of hardware required to use the software, the training needed to use the software, and any changes required to the customer’s infrastructure to use the software.

ERP vendors do not play fair. The discounts they offer are heavily tilted to favor the ERP vendor over time. The goal is to get you to sign, and then sell you as much software as possible. As a customer, it is important to assemble a negotiation team, focus on specific aspects of the deal, and negotiate the contract so that the contract is tailored to your business needs.

Understanding how to utilize a vendor’s year-end during negotiation can be a useful tool, but focusing only on upfront discounts is short-sighted. A focus on upfront discounts will most likely cost a customer more over the lifecycle of the software product vs. a focus on flexibility.

Drafting, reviewing, and negotiating software license agreements is challenging. In this video, Taft Chicago partner Marcus Harris breaks down three issues to focus on during any review or negotiation of a software license agreement

Three Issues to Focus on When Negotiating a Software License Agreement

Taft Chicago partner Marcus Harris will be one of the featured speakers during the 2022 Digital Stratosphere Conference Live Online Edition, Feb. 8-10, 2022. Harris will present, “Digital Transformation and Contracting” on Feb. 9 at 2:00 pm EST. This event offers insight from the industry’s leading experts for organizations embarking on a digital transformation.

For more information or to register, click here.

Taft Chicago partner Marcus Harris will be a featured panelist during iTechLaw’s 2021 World Technology Law Conference. Harris will speak on “Tips & Tricks for Successfully Negotiating Your ERP Contract,” an interactive session that will address key ERP contractual provisions, common vendor tactics, and strategies for negotiating a contract that increases the likelihood of implementation success.

The virtual conference is June 8-10, 2021. Harris will present on June 8 at 2 pm EDT. Click here to view the full agenda or to register.

iTechLaw has been serving the technology law community worldwide since 1971 and is one of the most widely established and largest associations of its kind. It has a global membership base representing six continents and spanning more than 60 countries. Its members and officials reflect a broad spectrum of expertise in the technology law field.

Harris has established one of the country’s leading practices devoted to drafting and negotiating Enterprise Software related license, implementation and SaaS agreements, as well as litigating failed software implementations in courts and before arbitration panels across the country. He is one of the foremost attorneys in the country representing government entities, distributors and manufacturers in recovering damages arising out of failed Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software implementations.

On April 1, 2021, the Supreme Court decided Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, which narrowed the scope of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA). The Court unanimously ruled that Facebook did not violate the TCPA by sending unsolicited text messages to individuals without their consent, overturning the Ninth Circuit’s decision to broadly define automatic telephone dialing systems (“autodialers”) under the federal statute. The case boiled down to everyone’s favorite subject—grammar.

To read more, visit the Taft Privacy & Data Security Insights blog post.

Taft Chicago partner Marcus Harris will be one of the featured speakers during Digital Stratosphere Live Online Edition, April 20-22, 2021. The event offers independent advice and lessons learned for organizations embarking on a digital transformation. The sessions on April 20 are open to all and the other days require registration. Click here for more information.

Harris will present the following sessions. All times are ET.

  • April 20, 12:00 pm – Lessons from Digital Transformation Failures
  • April 21, 3:00 pm – Defending Cyber Warfare in the 2020s: Data and Cybersecurity in Digital Transformation
  • April 22, 3:00 pm – Best Practices and Legal Advice for M&A Integration

Harris has established one of the country’s leading practices devoted to drafting and negotiating Enterprise Software related license, implementation and SaaS agreements, as well as litigating failed software implementations in courts and before arbitration panels across the country. Harris also has extensive experience dealing with cybersecurity issues. He advises clients on complying with the new General Data Protection Regulations (GDRP) being implemented and enforced by the European Union.

The U.S. Court of Federal Appeals (CAFC) just released its decision in another breach of software license case. Bitmanagement Software GMBH v. United States, Fed. Cir. 2020-1139 (Feb. 25, 2021). This is the second case where the court recently found for the contractor and held the Government to have overextended its use of a software license. (For a similar case at the Contract Board of Appeals, please see here).

As factual background, the Navy was using Bitmanagement’s software through a third party reseller agreement. The Navy was having trouble tracking the seat licenses and transferring them when needed (i.e. when Navy personnel transitioned). So the Navy and Bitmanagement directly discussed solutions.

Together, they decided (1) Bitmanagement would allow the Navy to use a web-based version of the software, hosted on a Navy server, and replicated for users; and (2) the Navy would run the software through an intermediate mechanism: an independently contracted and licensed software called Flex Wrap, that tracked floating licenses in order to limit the number of programs being used at any one time. Contrary to its agreement to do so, the Navy never actually implemented the Flex Wrap.

To read the full Taft law bulletin, click here.

In our prior articles on artificial intelligence (AI) in construction, we discussed machine learningimage recognition, sensors-on-sitebuilding information modeling, and smart contracts. As we noted, significant legal issues will arise with the increasing implementation of these technologies. These issues can be grouped generally into: (1) risk allocation; (2) ownership and protection of the technology, as well as the data input and outputs; and (3) the applicable standard of liability.

In this concluding article of this series, we discuss those issues briefly in our full law bulletin, available here.

As we noted in our first article on artificial intelligence in construction, artificial intelligence (AI) is a broad term that generally refers to technology that uses algorithms to process data and simulate human intelligence. In our first two articles, we discussed machine learning and then image recognition and sensors-on-site. In this article, we discuss two more AI-related topics: (1) building information modeling; and (2) smart contracts.

To read the full law bulletin authored by Cincinnati partner Joe Cleves, Jr., click here.