The United States and the United Kingdom entered into the world’s first ever Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act (CLOUD Act) agreement on October 3, 2019 (the Agreement). The Agreement, which will enter into force later this year after review by lawmakers in both countries, allows each country’s law enforcement agencies to demand, with proper authorization, electronic data regarding serious crime (defined in Article 1 of the Agreement as an offense punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least three years) directly from technology companies based in the other country.
NEWS FOR LAWYERS AND SOURCING PROFESSIONALS
You signed a long-term deal. It would be embarrassing if, in a few years after signing, the pricing is significantly higher or your service levels are significantly lower than market. Benchmarking provisions are intended to provide a mechanism for ensuring that your pricing and/or service levels are within market (taking into consideration the unique factors applicable to your deal). Set out below are some of the key components of a meaningful benchmarking provision.
Open Banking is an initiative mandated by the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) in 2017. It is intended to facilitate better competition in the banking sector by mandating protocols that facilitate the secure sharing of customer-related data of the nine largest banks in the United Kingdom (CMA9) with third-party providers (TPPs).
Open Banking is developed and delivered in the United Kingdom by the Open Banking Implementation Entity (OBIE). The OBIE was established by the CMA and is funded by the CMA9. The CMA’s UK Retail Banking Market Investigation Order 2017 (Order), which applies only to the CMA9, requires the CMA9 to provide their customers with the ability to access and share their account data on an ongoing basis with TPPs through the use of specified application programme interfaces (APIs). This compliments the reforms under the EU’s Second Payment Directive (as transposed in the United Kingdom primarily by the Payment Services Regulations 2017), which requires all payment account providers to permit open access to payment accounts for authorized TPPs, but which does not specify the means of access or prescribe the scope of access in any detail.
In this contract corner, we consider the concepts of “good faith” in commercial contracts under English law.
The General Position Under English Law
The notion of good faith is a complex and evolving concept under English law, and it has important implications for those drafting commercial contracts. In contrast to many other civil (e.g., France and Germany) and common (e.g., United States and Australia) law jurisdictions, there is no general doctrine of good faith either in negotiating or in performing a contract. Instead, parties are free to pursue their own self-interests, so long as they do not act in breach of contract. However, the notion of good faith can still impact commercial contracts in three main ways:
We have all heard the horror stories: system implementation deals costing 300% more than the original budget, go-live dates for development projects being way past the scheduled dates, and deliverables that do not meet the customer’s expectations. These are the stories that keep us lawyers up at night. So what can we do in the contract to incent timely, on-budget performance by the vendor? First, there is no substitute for a detailed and well-thought-out requirements document, which provides the roadmap that shapes the design, build, and deployment. Then, while there is no magic bullet, there are numerous contractual mechanisms to be considered that are designed to provide guideposts and checkpoints to enable success.
Set out below are 10 contractual mechanisms for providing meaningful performance commitments and consequences if the commitments are not met. Maybe you will not need to invoke these mechanisms, but having firm rules may help drive good behavior (you know the old adage, “good fences make good neighbors”). As is always the case, the appropriate mechanisms to be used are deal specific, and not all deals or relationships require the full spectrum of contractual commitments set out below (but some do!).
As our loyal Tech & Sourcing readers know, we have been doing our best to keep you informed about the requirements of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and what you can do to prepare as its January 1, 2020, effective date draws near. Continuing that vein, we invite you to an upcoming webinar wherein Morgan Lewis partners Reese Hirsch, Mark Krotoski, and Carla Oakley and associate Kristin Hadgis will provide an overview of the latest amendments to the CCPA, the state of the law and related regulations, and practical perspectives on CCPA compliance.
The Morgan Lewis team will discuss the following topics:
- The new one-year exemption for employee data*
- The new one-year exemption for B2B communications*
- Other new amendments, including those related to the use of toll-free numbers and verifiable consumer requests*
- Failed amendments and other issues to watch
- Status of California attorney general regulations and a possible new ballot initiative
- Other state laws influenced by the CCPA
- Preparing for the January 1 effective date and 2020 enforcement date
We hope you will join us for the one-hour webinar on Tuesday, October 22 at 1:00 pm ET.
*Indicates an amendment to the CCPA that has passed the California Legislature but, as of this writing, has not yet been signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom.
Companies that use app-based technology platforms to connect consumers directly with service providers have faced an important question of whether the individuals providing the services are contractors or employees. California recently passed legislation that requires companies to treat contract workers that perform core company functions as employees.
The California legislature passed five bills on September 13 to amend and clarify the scope of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). If the amendments are signed by the California governor by the October 13 deadline, they will become part of the CCPA, set to take effect on January 1, 2020. A LawFlash by Morgan Lewis partner Reese Hirsch and associates Kristin Hadgis, Lauren Groebe, and Terese Schireson discusses the key proposals in each amendment, such as:
Partner Barbara Melby, the leader of our technology, outsourcing, and commercial transactions practice, will be presenting “Intellectual Property Issues in Outsourcing” at Practising Law Institute’s (PLI’s) upcoming Outsourcing 2019: Innovation and Disruption program in New York. Barbara’s one-hour presentation will take place on Thursday, October 31 at 1:15 pm ET. She will discuss intellectual property (IP) issues in outsourcing, including the following topics:
- Recognizing and avoiding common IP pitfalls
- Copyright, patent, and trade secret issues from vendors’ and customers’ perspectives
- IP representations, warranties, and indemnities in outsourcing transactions
- Open source considerations
- IP issues in cloud deals
A recent LawFlash by Morgan Lewis partners Ksenia Andreeva and Vasilisa Strizh and associate Anna Pirogova discusses a draft law proposed in Russia that would introduce heavy fines for violations of Russia’s data protection law and a variety of internet activity laws.
The primary federal data privacy law in Russia, On Personal Data, dated July 28, 2006 (the Personal Data Law), applies to “personal data operators,” which are entities that organize and carry out the processing of personal data and determine the purpose of individuals’ personal data processing. The proposed draft law, On Amending the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation, relates to the “localization requirement” of the Personal Data Law, which creates on obligation for personal data operators to collect, store, and otherwise process personal data of Russian citizens using databases and servers located in Russia.