Tech & Sourcing @ Morgan Lewis

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.

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.

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.

Last week, we started to take a look at key issues sponsors should be mindful of when entering into a sponsorship agreement, particularly for sponsorship of a team, event, venue, individual influencer or player, or similar arrangements.

With many sports, music, and other events returning to in-person attendance after a prolonged hiatus for pandemic-related reasons, and others continuing to be conducted in front of huge virtual audiences, we think it’s a good time to run through some of the most common issues we encounter in sponsorship agreements.

With the recent onslaught of ransomware attacks, it’s time to revisit force majeure clauses (again). Earlier in the pandemic, we reviewed how COVID-19 could impact force majeure provisions. Since then, there has been a flurry of analyzing, renegotiating, and testing contractual language, as parties work through, or anticipate, pandemic-related difficulties. While contracting parties focus on striking a balance of when, and to what extent, a party’s performance will be excused due to pandemic-related circumstances, a different threat could follow a similar trajectory.

Exceptions to confidentiality obligations are largely standardized, but in some contracts a copy-and-paste approach could, at best, lead to uncertainty and, at worst, undermine key aims of the transaction.

Planning for major service disruptions and disasters, such as prolonged power failures, fires, flooding, and other extreme weather events, is an important element of strategic technology and service agreements.

Changes to complex commercial contracts are inevitable. These contracts, such as large outsourcing agreements, typically include a master services agreement (MSA) and a high number of exhibits and attachments describing the scope, performance standards, financials, and other contractual requirements in detail. Some deals can end up containing over 50–75 documents (or more!) in total. Given their strategic importance, these agreements often require numerous amendments as the relationship evolves over time and changes need to be formally documented.