<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><!-- generator="WordPress/2.8.1" --><rss xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>OnTechnologyContracts</title>
	<link>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com</link>
	<description>Clauses, commentary, and case notes. By D. C. Toedt.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 18:38:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	
	<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DraftersChoice" type="application/rss+xml" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com" /><item>
		<title>Wells Fargo bank sues itself …</title>
		<description>I shook my head in bemusement over this story.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/O4_2QfhQ2EM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/O4_2QfhQ2EM/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/wells-fargo-bank-sues-itself/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>After dodging a bullet, maybe Wal-Mart will tweak its language to say “we reserve the right” instead of “we will”</title>
		<description>Wal-Mart requires its suppliers to agree to a code of conduct. It was sued, in California, by employees of suppliers in various Third World countries, on grounds that • the retail giant had failed to police the suppliers' compliance with the code's standards, and • the employees were allegedly third-party beneficiaries of ...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/PuKXgUdVyrM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/PuKXgUdVyrM/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/after-dodging-a-bullet-maybe-wal-mart-will-tweak-its-language-to-say-we-reserve-the-right-instead-of-we-will/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>When the customer is a government, the right paperwork can mean the difference between getting paid, and not</title>
		<description>Two cases illustrate that if you want to get paid by a government customer, you have to comply with the legal formalities, quite possibly more so than when dealing with a commercial customer.

• U.S. NeuroSurgical, Inc. v. City of Chicago, No. 07-3520 (7th Cir. Jul. 9, 2009) (affirming district court judgment ...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/Ol72CfCH6tc" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/Ol72CfCH6tc/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/when-the-customer-is-a-government-the-right-paperwork-can-mean-the-difference-between-getting-paid-and-not/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Electrical utility’s failure to invoke mandatory but non-binding dispute resolution procedure before filing lawsuit doesn’t save power-turbine vendor from big damage award</title>
		<description>See South Tex. Elec. Cooperative v. Dresser-Rand Co., No. 08-40715 (5th Cir. July 9, 2009) (affirming judgment on jury verdict for $700K for warranty problems in electrical generating turbine).&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/OMJHfjMfBhY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/OMJHfjMfBhY/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/electrical-utilitys-failure-to-invoke-mandatory-but-non-binding-dispute-resolution-procedure-before-filing-lawsuit-doesnt-save-power-turbine-vendor-from-big-damage-award/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Defendant tries to compel arbitration after trial judge adopts plaintiff’s contract interpretation – no dice, says Fifth Circuit</title>
		<description>Use it or lose it — "it" being an arbitration clause in a contract dispute: That's the lesson of Petroleum Pipe Americas Corp. v. Jindal Saw Ltd., No. 08-20461 (5th Cir. Jul. 9, 2009) (affirming denial of motion to stay and to compel arbitration). 


After the plaintiff filed its breach-of-contract lawsuit in ...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/DC0tfWncHtM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/DC0tfWncHtM/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/defendant-tries-to-compel-arbitration-after-trial-judge-adopts-plaintiffs-contract-interpretation-no-dice-says-fifth-circuit/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Federal government is increasingly wanting unlimited rights in data, say commentators</title>
		<description>Bid solicitations by the federal government are increasingly seeking unlimited rights in ‘data’ produced pursuant to the contract, using the FAR 52.227-17 Rights in Data clause under the Federal Acquisition Regulations. This is according to a client memo by Thomas J. Madden and James Y. Boland of the Venable firm. ...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/v4KnWDiGIMw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/v4KnWDiGIMw/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/federal-government-is-increasingly-wanting-unlimited-rights-in-data-commentators/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Inadequate consumer opt-in language could cost Simon &amp; Schuster $100 million in class-action damages for text-message advertising campaign</title>
		<description>Here’s an object lesson about the importance of double-checking the consumer opt-in language before committing to a big spam-type marketing campaign.  Simon &amp; Schuster hired a marketing firm to send out text-message advertisements for a Steven King horror novel. A subscriber received one of these text-message ads on her ...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/z8sTb7dj6ic" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/z8sTb7dj6ic/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/inadequate-consumer-opt-in-language-could-cost-simon-schuster-100-million-in-class-action-damages-for-text-message-advertising-campaign/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Google Chrome sound goes out – how I fixed it</title>
		<description>My Google Chrome browser mysteriously lost its sound. I found various possible fixes at the Google support forum. What did the trick was this suggestion: “open the chrome task manager (shift+esc) on the page where a video is not playing sound, end the shockwave flash plug-in, and then refresh the ...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/iUT28LgO6T4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/iUT28LgO6T4/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/google-chrome-sound-goes-out-how-i-fixed-it/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Vendor sends its standard T&amp;Cs after the deal is struck by email – and later finds the T&amp;C protections aren’t part of the contract</title>
		<description>See this memo by a UK solicitors firm.   (In the U.S., the picture may be complicated by UCC § 2-207.)&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/5z-8hza1f-Q" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/5z-8hza1f-Q/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/vendor-sends-its-standard-tcs-after-the-deal-is-struck-by-email-and-later-finds-the-tc-protections-arent-part-of-the-contract/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>State law peculiarities – things to keep in mind in negotiating a choice-of-law clause</title>
		<description>It occurred to me that it’d be great to have a state-by-state crib sheet or ‘gouge’ of useful things to know when negotiating a choice-of-law clause. I couldn’t find anything like that either Google or Bing. So I’ve started a set of such crib sheets, and will attempt to update ...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~4/L3lIpyi9nWU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DraftersChoice/~3/L3lIpyi9nWU/</link>
			<feedburner:origLink>http://www.ontechnologycontracts.com/2009/07/state-law-peculiarities-things-to-keep-in-mind-in-negotiating-a-choice-of-law-clause/</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss>
