Issue #4 of Harry Boadwee’s Technology Law Letter is now available.

The lead article is: Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 4 - Myths and Realities of Bankruptcy.  For a free subscription, please visit www.BoadweeLaw.com/subscribe.

I welcome your comments and suggestions!

Update: Issue #4 appears below:

In this Newsletter

  • Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 4  – Myths and Realities of Bankruptcy

Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 4  – Myths and Realities of Bankruptcy

Bankruptcy is a clear and present danger to many business contracts, especially in our difficult economy.  Of course, companies can go bankrupt at any time and with little warning.  Good negotiators always will plan around this risk, even when times are good.  With the credit crunch and cash flow crises in many industries, the risk of bankruptcy now is seen as a burning issue, and not an insignificant “theoretical” risk.

The U.S. Bankruptcy Code and bankruptcy system are very complex.  So complex, in fact, that bankruptcy cases even have their own separate court system.  I am not a bankruptcy lawyer, and this brief article touches only on a few high points.  However, being aware of even these high points can save you a lot of grief and expense!

Often, when a company’s debts exceed its assets (in legal terms, when it is “insolvent”), it may file for bankruptcy.  Companies generally can file under two chapters of the Bankruptcy Code.  First, they may file under Chapter 7, which is solely for liquidation and in which an independent trustee will be appointed.  Alternatively, they may file under Chapter 11 and the company’s management will stay in control.  Chapter 11 can be used to conduct an orderly liquidation or to reorganize by eliminating or restructuring claims against the company.  Those claims can include claims for loans extended by lenders, for salaries earned by employees, for taxes, and for amounts due from sales of goods, rendering of services, leasing of equipment or real property to the company or for the company’s other contractual relationships.  If the company is liquidated, its assets are transferred to others and it disappears.  If it is restructured, some claims may be reduced and others paid over time, equity may be restructured and it gets a “fresh start” to continue business.

There are many common myths about what can happen if the other party to your contract goes bankrupt.  (If you or your company go bankrupt, you will face a host of issues, but I don’t cover them here.)  Here they are:

Myth: “I’m set.  They paid me two months before they filed for bankruptcy.” Reality:  You probably aren’t set.  The bankruptcy laws are written to prevent companies from paying off one creditor in preference to other creditors.  You may have to return this kind of early payment, known as a “preferential transfer,” if the payment was made on account of a debt outstanding at the time, was made less than 90 days (three months) before the bankruptcy was filed (or less than one year if made to certain “insiders” of the company) and if the company was insolvent at the time of payment to you.

Myth: “I’ll collect what they owe me – probably at pennies on the dollar – but everything else will stay the same as before.” Reality:  Collecting at pennies on the dollar (or even nothing on the dollar) is probably correct, unless your debt is entitled to priority under the Bankruptcy Code (e.g., certain types of unpaid wages) or your contract provides you with a “security interest” or mortgage on the bankrupt company’s property (which is common only in equipment leases and real estate transactions).  But everything may not stay the same as before.  Bankruptcy permits the trustee to “assume” (agree to perform) or “reject” (terminate) the “executory” (unperformed) contracts of the bankrupt company so that the bankrupt company may free itself from burdensome contracts and perform only those that are profitable.  In other words, the trustee may terminate your contract.  Even if termination is acceptable to you, the trustee can take other actions, discussed below. Any damages due to this termination will be paid as with general unsecured creditors, usually at pennies on the dollar.

Myth:  “If they go bankrupt, I’ll just get out of the contract.  The contract says I can.” Reality:  This myth is widespread.  Many contracts have a clause that says the contract can be terminated or modified if the other party files for bankruptcy.  Here’s the catch: under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, this clause (known as an “ipso facto” clause) is generally not enforceable, i.e., the court won’t let you terminate.  This is why, if bankruptcy could be an issue, you should make your contract term as short as possible (so that the contract can expire on its own, which the court generally will observe) and limit any automatic renewals.  Also, it is helpful for your contract to specify events that can result in contract termination (also called “defaults”).  For the company to agree to perform the agreement (i.e., to “assume” it as stated above), the bankruptcy trustee must cure defaults and pay damages for any breach (to reinstate the contract) or get you to waive them, and provide adequate assurances of future performance.  If uncurable defaults exist in the contract, you may convince the bankruptcy court to force the company to let you get out of the contract.

Myth: “They can’t transfer my contract to someone else.  The contract says so.” Reality:  The bankruptcy court can override this contract clause as well in most cases.  The Bankruptcy Code assumes that the bankrupt company may need to transfer assets (including contracts) in order to bring in as much money as possible for the company’s creditors.  The court may prohibit certain “personal service” contracts from being transferred, where the performance is truly unique to the parties, but that is cold comfort in most commercial contracts between businesses.  However, if you granted the other party a license to intellectual property, in many cases you will be able to block the transfer of the license.

Myth: “They licensed some intellectual property to me.  If they cancel that license contract, then my company, my distributors and my customers will be harmed.” Reality:  Finally, some good news.  If you received a license from a bankrupt company, you may be able to prevent it from terminating the license to you.  The Bankruptcy Code has a specific section (365(n)) that permits you to keep the license as it existed at the time of the bankruptcy filing, to enforce exclusivity and, if your contract has proper legal provisions, to access supplementary rights (such as computer source code in escrow).  However, there is no free lunch.  To keep the license, you must continue to pay any royalties provided for in your contract and you cannot obtain ongoing positive performance from the bankrupt company, such as ongoing software updates or maintenance.   Also, Section 365(n) has gaps.  It covers trade secrets and U.S. patents and copyrights.  Oddly, it does not cover trademarks, most other intellectual property or most foreign intellectual property, or any future improvements and modifications (e.g. future software upgrades).  If your business depends on ongoing performance from the company, and not merely a “bare” license of intellectual property, then Section 365(n) may not provide enough protection.  You may want to consult bankruptcy counsel at the planning stages, especially to avoid potential loopholes in Section 365(n).  Also, in some transactions where the value involved merits it, it is better to take ownership or joint ownership of the intellectual property instead of a license.

Many bankruptcy concepts are not intuitive. Under- standing the realities, and not falling victim to the myths, is a key to staying ahead of the game.

I would like to thank bankruptcy attorney Mark E. Porter of Fenwick & West LLP for his comments in the preparation of this article.

All the best,

-  Harry

Please visit my newsletter archives at www.BoadweeLaw.com/newsletter.html

Harry Boadwee’s Technology Law Letter is published by the Boadwee Law Office, legal advisers to innovative companies in the fields of technology transactions, software and internet law.

I appreciate your referrals.  Please pass along or forward this newsletter (without modification).  For other uses, contact me.

To receive your own subscription to this newsletter, visit www.BoadweeLaw.com/subscribe or send an email to Subscribe@BoadweeLaw.com

Copyright © 2009 Boadwee Law Office.  All rights reserved.  20370 Town Center Lane, Suite 100, Cupertino, CA 95014.  Tel: (408) 253-6100.  Fax: (408) 253-6200.

This Newsletter is for general information purposes only, and is not provided in connection with rendering of legal or other professional advice.  It is subject to the Terms of Use of the Boadwee Law Office (www.BoadweeLaw.com/terms.html) and may be Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions.

{ 0 comments }

Big Ideas in Business and Law

by Harry on March 17, 2009

Here are some of the big ideas in business over the past 100 years, according to a short feature in BusinessWeek.  Many were fads, but most — even the early ones — have had staying power:

  • Open Innovation - 2000
  • Reengineering - 19990
  • Outsourcing - 1989
  • Six Sigma - 1987
  • 360-Degree Performance Reviews - 1973
  • Scenario Planning - 1967
  • Lean Manufacturing - 1950’s
  • Skunk Works - 1943
  • Brand Management - 1931
  • Market Segmentation - 1920
  • The Assembly Line - 1910

I haven’t found a comparable list of ideas in Law, but I’m intrigued by a book, The Little Book of Big Ideas: Law by Robert Hockett, forthcoming this spring.

{ 0 comments }

How much would you pay for this software program:

  • It determines what 300 million Yahoo users see each month, and helps Yahoo customize its home page content.
  • Facebook uses it to manage 40 billion stored photographs.
  • Microsoft changed its internal policies so that its team could develop on this software

The software is Hadoop, named after a stuffed toy elephant.  Hadoop was developed by a consultant, Doug Cutting, based on papers published by Google concerning its extremely valuable MapReduce technology.  According to Google, MapReduce is used to distribute searches and information-intensive processing across batteries of commodity computers, and is intended to enable even inexperienced programmers to easily use a large distributed system — terabytes of data on thousands of machines.

The price is zero — it is open source under the relatively lenient Apache License.

[Source: "Hadoop, a Free Software Program Finds Uses beyond Search, by Ashee Vance, The New York Times, March 17, 2009. The name "Hadoop" and depictions of the Hadoop logo and mascot are reserved for use by The Apache Software Foundation.]

{ 0 comments }

Issue #3 of Harry Boadwee’s Technology Law Letter is now available.

The lead article is: Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 3 - How Third Parties Can Assure Performance.

For a free subscription, please visit www.BoadweeLaw.com/subscribe.

I welcome your comments and suggestions!

Update: Issue #3 appears below:

In this Newsletter

  • Contract Protections for Troubled Times: Part 3 – How Third Parties Can Assure Performance
  • Harry Boadwee Appointed to Bar Committee on Cyberspace Law
  • Ask Harry Boadwee

Contract Protections for Troubled Times: Part 3 – How Third Parties Can Assure Performance

For practical and legal reasons, you may want a third party to assure the performance of a contract that you have with someone else.

The practical reason is that it will give you another place to turn, and another point of leverage on your contract party.  The legal reason is that if your contract party becomes insolvent or files for bankruptcy, those events may not impair the third party and you can look to the third party to perform or to cover you for non-performance.

Here are some typical third-party protections:

  • Guarantee by a Third Party. A third party, such as an investor or parent company, can guarantee the obligations of the other party.  Most often, this is a payment guarantee. For example, banks often require an entrepreneur to personally guarantee any loans made to a startup.  Or, a controlling shareholder might guarantee the obligations of one of its portfolio companies.  These guarantees can provide a financial backstop if your contract party has financial difficulties.  In addition, a personal guarantee makes the entrepreneur or controlling shareholder take direct financial risk, and this “skin in the game” is designed to make sure that they pay enough attention to performing the contract, without the ability to walk away.
  • Letter of Credit by a Financial Institution. This is a type of guarantee.  It typically is issued by a bank.  If you receive a letter of credit (also called an “L/C”) and the other party breaches, then the bank pays the “face amount” of the L/C to you.  The bank treats that payment as a loan from the bank to the other party, and looks to the other party to get paid back.  The bank collects fees for each L/C, even if the L/C is not drawn.  Letters of credit are typically used in international sales of goods, where the buyer and seller are in different countries and there is a risk of shoddy goods or non-payment.  However, L/C’s can also be used in domestic transactions where money changes hands, and one party wants to make sure it is paid, even if the other party faces severe financial problems.  Rarely is an L/C needed for domestic transactions, but I have used them on occasion.  Of course, in this economic environment, you also need to consider the creditworthiness of the bank issuing the L/C.
  • Required Insurance. Many contracts require the other party to obtain and maintain insurance in favor of the other party, such as commercial general liability insurance.  In effect, this is a guarantee by a third party (the insurance company), with that third party paying off clams that the principal party cannot pay.  For example, assume that Company A (such as a manufacturer) supplies a product to Company B (such as a distributor), but the product harms the customers and Company B is sued.  Company A may not have enough assets to pay the product liability claims.  To prevent this problem, Company B could require Company A to purchase insurance, with Company B as an “additional insured” on Company A’s insurance policy.  That way, if Company B is sued, and Company A does not have enough assets of its own to pay the claims of the injured customers, the insurance company pays the claims.  In effect, the insurance company has guaranteed certain obligations of Company A to Company B.  This type of protection generally involves: (a) an indemnity from Company A to Company B, (b) a requirement that Company A purchase specific insurance coverages with specific policy limits in favor of Company B, and (c) having Company B named as an “additional insured” on Company A’s insurance policy, which enables Company B to make a claim directly to Company A’s insurance company.

In the next issue, I’ll discuss some myths and realities of bankruptcy in business transactions.

Harry Boadwee Appointed to Bar Committee on Cyberspace Law

I have recently been appointed to the Cyberspace Law Committee of the Business Law Section of the California State Bar, http://tinyurl.com/d7gfho

The mission of the Cyberspace Law Committee is to:

  • Identify cyberspace law issues that impact businesses and commercial transactions in California.
  • Make recommendations on relevant legislation.
  • Develop programs, studies and reports on how cyberspace law affects the practice of business law.
  • Develop a web site for the collection and dissemination of current developments in cyberspace law.

Participating on the Committee gives me insights and access to some of the most cutting-edge thinking on technology transactions and technology law, which I’ll be sharing with you in this newsletter.

Ask Harry Boadwee

I invite your questions, comments and suggestions for this newsletter!

If you have a general question about technology transactions, contracts, negotiations, or software or internet law, please [contact me].  I’ll try to answer as many questions as I can in the newsletter, in particular, short questions that may interest many readers.

All the best,

-  Harry

Please visit my newsletter archives at www.BoadweeLaw.com/newsletter.html

Harry Boadwee’s Technology Law Letter is published by the Boadwee Law Office, legal advisers to innovative companies for technology transactions, software and internet law.

I appreciate your referrals.  Please forward a copy of this newsletter (without modification).  For other uses, contact me.

To receive your own subscription to this newsletter, please sign up at www.BoadweeLaw.com/subscribe and add News@BoadweeLaw.com to your email address book.

Copyright © 2009 Boadwee Law Office.  All rights reserved.  20370 Town Center Lane, Suite 100, Cupertino, CA 95014.  Tel: (408) 253-6100.  Fax: (408) 253-6200.

This Newsletter is for general information purposes only, and is not provided in connection with legal or other professional advice.  It is subject to the Terms of Use (www.BoadweeLaw.com/terms.html) of the Boadwee Law Office, and may be Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions.

{ 0 comments }

Issue #2 of Harry Boadwee’s Technology Law Letter is now available.

The lead article is: Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 2 - Making Sure the Other Party Performs.

For a free subscription, please visit www.BoadweeLaw.com/subscribe.

I welcome your comments and suggestions!

Update: Issue #2 appears below:

In this Newsletter

  • Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 2 – Making Sure the Other Party Performs
  • From My Blog
  • Ask Harry Boadwee

Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 2 – Making Sure the Other Party Performs

In addition to getting paid, in troubled times, you also want to monitor and manage the other activities of the parties to your contracts.

Here’s how to put that approach to work in your contracts:

  • Try to perform your part of the deal only if and as the other party performs its part of the deal. Some contracts are opportunistic, one-sided or poorly written, so you won’t always be able to do this.  But strive for it in high-risk or significant relationships.  One example is “pay for performance.”   Another example is making sure that you have the right to test and accept the goods and services delivered to you, and perhaps obtain a warranty for a reasonable period.  Think of the two parties on a see-saw.  Ideally, you would want a constant, balanced back and forth in performance by the parties.  For a sustainable, win-win, long-term relationship, one party should not be “down” and the other “up” and hanging in the air, for a lengthy period.
  • Tightly monitor and manage deliveries, payments, reporting and other contract activities. This is obvious, but very often ignored.  Don’t let your risks get out of hand.  Even if you have the legal rights to demand performance under a contract, if you don’t manage them closely you may end up with a “right without a remedy.”   Don’t let a problem (such as an overdue receivable) grow and grow while you keep performing your end of the bargain.  It’s less expensive and distracting to deal with a small problem, rather than let it grow large and have to go to court.   Don’t allow yourself or the other party to get too deep “in the hole” on the transaction.
  • Watch out for possible modifications to your contracts by the parties’ actions via a “course of performance” in a single transaction or “course of dealing” across several transactions. For example, a “course of performance” can be created by a sequence of conduct “if the agreement of the parties with respect to the transaction involves repeated occasions for performance by a party; and the other party, with knowledge of the nature of the performance and opportunity for objection to it, accepts the performance or acquiesces in it without objection.”  (California Commercial Code, Section 1301, http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/com/1301-1310.html) Well-written contracts include a provision to prevent this issue.  This is another good reason not to ignore problems as they mount higher and higher.
  • Try to secure the performance in other ways. As I mentioned in the previous issue of this newsletter (Issue No. 1), if you are expecting to receive a payment, then try to get paid up front, or have the payment made into escrow.  You can apply this principle to other types of performance.  For example, in licenses of proprietary software, the buyer may require the developer to place the source code of the software into a “source code escrow.”  Some companies try to secure the other party’s performance by means of onerous legal provisions, such as exclusivity and the threat of obtaining an injunction (court order prohibiting specified behavior).
  • Always have a “Plan B.” You should be prepared for non-performance, apart from thinking, “I’ll just take it to court.”  Even if you think one outcome is almost certain to occur, consider a range of alternatives, including some that may be unlikely.  For example, as a buyer, hedge your risks by having a second source (or even several sources).  Be alert for attempts at “vendor lock-in” (http://tinyurl.com/2ro9yf).  Open source software and open business models provide a new type of “Plan B” for many businesses.  Open source software can reduce your risk of being locked into a particular vendor or contract relationship, since the code base and changes are public (no need for an escrow), and other vendors can be hired to step in and fix a problem with the code.   (Nothing is perfect, and open source software raises its own practical and legal issues, which I discuss on my blog, www.BoadweeLaw.com/blog.)  Similarly, an “open” business approach in other areas of your business can offer similar benefits.  See the book, Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams, for examples.

In the next issue, I’ll discuss the ways to use third parties to assure contract performance.

From My Blog

Annual Legal Checkup for Web Sites And Services
(http://tinyurl.com/ay4wlc)

•    Re-enter the Title Office for Copyrights
(http://tinyurl.com/7m4fze)

•    Patent Factoids
(http://tinyurl.com/7fzf4l)

Ask Harry Boadwee

I invite your questions, comments and suggestions for this newsletter!

If you have a general question about technology transactions, contracts, negotiations, or software or internet law, please [contact me].

I’ll try to answer as many questions as I can in the newsletter, in particular, short questions that may interest many readers.

All the best,

-  Harry

——————————————————–

Please visit my newsletter archives at www.BoadweeLaw.com/newsletter.html

Harry Boadwee’s Technology Law Letter is published by the Boadwee Law Office, legal advisers to innovative companies for technology transactions, software and internet law.

I appreciate your referrals.  Please forward a copy of this newsletter (without modification).  For other uses, contact me.

To receive your own subscription to this newsletter, please sign up at www.BoadweeLaw.com/subscribe and add News@BoadweeLaw.com to your email address book.

Copyright © 2009 Boadwee Law Office.  All rights reserved.  20370 Town Center Lane, Suite 100, Cupertino, CA 95014.  Tel: (408) 253-6100.  Fax: (408) 253-6200.

This Newsletter is for general information purposes only, and is not provided in connection with legal or other professional advice.  It is subject to the Terms of Use (www.BoadweeLaw.com/terms.html) of the Boadwee Law Office, and may be Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions.

{ 0 comments }

With the new year, you should review your web sites and offerings to see if they need any updates on the legal side.

Consider this 6 point list.  These are the most common updates I see, not a complete list.  Your business may need more.

  • Updating the site’s copyright notice to include the new year, if you are creating new content this year.  If you continue to publish content from prior years, you’ll want to include those prior years too.  For example, you might update “Copyright © 2006-2008 YourCompanyName, Inc.” to “Copyright © 2006-2009 YourCompanyName, Inc.”
  • Revising your site’s terms of use to reflect any changes in your offerings, terms, conditions and pricing.
  • Updating your privacy policy to reflect any new data collected or changes in your privacy practices, such as using cookies or web beacons.
  • If your site includes user generated content, you may want to register your company as a designated agent with the U.S. Copyright Office per the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).  See my previous posting on Business Tips for Providers of User-generated Content.
  • If you are planning to use new distribution channels, such as an affiliate program, you should start considering what rights and support you’ll need to provide to your new channels.  For example, you may need separate legal documents, policies and web pages to support them.
  • Think about whether you need to upgrade your insurance.  For example, if your business has changed, you may need to raise your policy limits, or even consider obtaining media liability insurance, errors & omissions insurance or umbrella coverage.  If your company plans to work with large corporations, keep in mind that large companies often require smaller partners to hold insurance policies, to reduce the risk of claims against the large company’s “deep pockets.”  Speak to a good commercial insurance agent to get a better understanding of the policy coverages and costs.

{ 0 comments }

Lifting the Lid on Open Source Hardware

by Harry on December 16, 2008

Clive Thompson describes how an Italian group applied open source principles to hardware for the Arduino microcontroller circuit board, a device that can monitor and respond to sensors, control small motors and the like.  Over 50,000 units have been sold worldwide since mass production began.

This is NOT open source software that runs inside of the hardware.  Instead, the Arduino group is open-sourcing all of the schematics and hardware design files for its circuit board, in addition to the software for it.  Anyone is free to build or modify their own hardware based on these schematics and designs.  It’s another example of the trend among tech-savvy consumers to reverse engineer, hack and customize their consumer devices (such as iPhones, Tivo’s and Furby toys).

Although open sourcing is well established for software, it would be considered heresy or even suicide in the hardware business.

How can the Arduino group take this approach?

  • They are academics in Italy, and want to build a reputation.  They don’t answer to a board of directors or shareholders.
  • Manufacturing is now a commodity, and it’s extremely easy for foreign low-cost manufacturers to knock off any hardware.  The Arduino approach beats the counterfeiters at their own game, by treating ALL manufacturing as a commodity.
  • The Arduino circuit board is a low-function simple device.  In isolation, it doesn’t provide a huge value-add.
  • The hardware designs are licensed under an open license that requires all user modifications and improvements to be licensed under the same license terms.  Specifically, the license to the hardware designs is a Creative Commons “Attribution - Share Alike” license.  This Share Alike condition is the dreaded “reciprocity clause” that concerns many businesses.  It prevents other businesses from making proprietary modifications, and taking all the value of an improved device.
  • The group reserved to itself a critical piece of intellectual property, namely the trademark and trade name ARDUINO, so that the Arduino group can make sure its brand is not harmed by low-quality copies of its circuit board.
  • Hobbyists and others contribute bug fixes and improvements without pay, and the Arduino group receives early learning of new and unique uses of the hardware.

The article describes two economic models:

  1. “Sell your expertise as the inventor,” in the form of consulting and support.  This is a familiar open-source model, long used in the software world by companies such as Red Hat, a major supplier of the Linux open source operating system.
  2. “Sell your device by trying to keep ahead of the competition.”  This it the age-old time-to-market strategy.  Thompson’s article points out that, in practice, the foreign knock-offs using the Arduino open source schematics and designs have low quality.  The Arduino group stays on top of of the competition by developing know-how that keeps it ahead of others.

Thompson presents a tantalizing vision going forward. The media have evolved from one-way offline broadcasts into vast collaborative communities (e.g., blogs and their readers’ comments; WikiPedia).  Similarly, hardware design will become community-driven, with the actual fabrication of hardware becoming a mere commodity.

The Arduino project is an interesting first step, but there is still a long way to go.

(Source: Build It. Share It. Profit. Can Open Source Hardware Work? by Clive Thompson, Wired Magazine)

{ 0 comments }

Search Engine Land uncovers on a new wiki containing a directory of blogs and twitter accounts used by Fortune 500 companies.

The Fortune 500 Business Blogging Wiki is located here.  It began as collaborative project between Chris Anderson of Wired Magazine and Ross Mayfield of Socialtext.

{ 0 comments }

I’ve just launched my newsletter, Harry Boadwee’s Technology Law Letter.

The lead article is titled: Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 1 - Getting Paid.

To subscribe, please sign up on the form on my blog, or on the home page of my web site.

I welcome your comments and suggestions!

Update: Issue #1 appears below:

In this Issue

  • Welcome to my Technology Law Letter
  • Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 1 – Getting Paid
  • Re-launch of My Blog
  • Ask Harry Boadwee

Welcome to my Technology Law Letter

My newsletter will be a reflection of my law practice, which focuses on technology transactions and intellectual property licenses. In other words, contracts and deals involving technology and intellectual property, such as patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets.

This newsletter will cover many of the fundamentals of contracts and deals, as well as intellectual property. Even though many of these topics may seem basic or simple, they often are ignored by business people (and even lawyers). I frequently get deals on track by applying the principles that I will discuss in this newsletter. I’ll also discuss new developments in the law. I aim to tell you the practical implications.

Contract Provisions for Troubled Times: Part 1 – Getting Paid

Successful business people know that the activities they monitor and manage are the ones most likely to succeed.

Getting paid is the top priority of almost all businesses. In a difficult economy, this means that, more than ever, you have to focus on making sure your revenue actually comes in the door. Get paid up front. If you can’t obtain the entire amount up front, then get a partial down payment. If the other party objects to a full up front payment, perhaps they can put some of the money into an escrow account held by a third party, or even an online service such as escrow.com. (Escrows for some industries and professions, such as law practice, are regulated, however.) Vague standards for release of payment from an escrow won’t work well. The standards should be very clear.

Ask for smaller, more frequent payments instead of a large payment at the end.The other party also could perform in smaller, more frequent increments. A “pay as you go” relationship could be fairer and create less risk than one in which one party holds all the risk for a long period of time. In addition, smaller payments may be easier for large companies to make without red tape and
bureaucracy. Smaller payments can be approved at a lower level of purchase authorization or even via credit cards (known as “purchasing cards,” “procurement cards,” or “p-cards”). Here is an example pcard policy: http://able.harvard.edu/pcard/manual/.

If you are paid for performance, make sure the performance is clearly measurable For example, many independent contractor agreements tie payments to performance by listing a schedule of “milestones” (goals that must be met) and “deliverables” (products or services to be delivered to the hiring party), along with required dates, and corresponding payments due at each milestone. As with clear standards for release of escrow payments, the standards for performance payments (milestones, deliverables and any acceptance criteria) should be very clear. You can reduce risk even further by making the milestones and payments more “granular” (i.e., smaller, more detailed and more frequent).

Watch out for excessive delays in receiving payment. Many large companies now are trying to pay on Net 45 or even Net 60 terms, instead of Net 30, with no flexibility. Some now require a 2% discount if they make payments within 10 days, when this formerly was the vendor’s choice.

For late payments, charge interest, and have the right to charge for costs of collection (attorneys’ fees and/or collection agency fees). Rightly or wrongly, many businesses choose to treat their vendors as a source of financing. If you want to be a lender, that’s fine. Just don’t become a lender inadvertently, and without proper protections. In California, the interest you can charge is limited by the “usury” (http://tinyurl.com/hz45v) provision in Article 15 of the state Constitution (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_15). Regulated financial institutions benefit from exceptions to this provision, but you may not. It continually amazes me how many “form” contracts omit the basic protection of accruing interest on late payments.

In the next issue, I’ll discuss contract provisions to ensure the other party performs obligations other than payment.

Re-launch of My Blog

I recently re-launched my blog on the leading open source blogging platform, WordPress.

If you haven’t visited my blog lately, please take a look!
(www.BoadweeLaw.com/blog).

Here are some of my early postings that may interest you:

• Marketer Bitten by Creative Commons License?
(http://tinyurl.com/5pgc2h)

• How to Draft a Specification or Requirements Document for a Contract
(http://tinyurl.com/6emzb6)

• Intellectual Property Bankers, Exchanges & Others: An Overview
(http://tinyurl.com/5znwxv)

Ask Harry Boadwee

I invite your questions, comments and suggestions for this newsletter! If you have a general question about, technology transactions, contracts, negotiations, or software or internet law, please please [contact me].  I’ll try to answer as many questions as I can in the newsletter, in particular, short questions that may interest many readers.

All the best,

- Harry

——————————————————–

Please visit my newsletter archives at www.BoadweeLaw.com/newsletter.html

Harry Boadwee’s Technology Law Letter is published by the Boadwee Law Office, legal advisers to innovative companies for technology transactions, software and internet law.

I appreciate your referrals. Please forward a copy of this newsletter (without modification). For other uses, contact me.

To receive your own subscription to this newsletter, please sign up at www.BoadweeLaw.com/subscribe and add News [at] BoadweeLaw.com to your email address book (replace the [at] with the @ sign).

Copyright © 2008 Boadwee Law Office. All rights reserved. 20370 Town Center Lane, Suite 100, Cupertino, CA 95014. Tel: (408) 253-6100. Fax: (408) 253-6200.

This Newsletter is for general information purposes only, and is not provided in connection with legal or other professional advice. It is subject to the Terms of Use (www.BoadweeLaw.com/terms.html) of the Boadwee Law Office, and may be Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions.

{ 1 comment }

New Development in Location Privacy

by Harry on October 12, 2008

This Washington Post article discusses a federal district court ruling last month, which apparently is the first to hold that the government must obtain a warrant based on probable cause of criminal activity before seeking location-based cell phone records.

According to an update to the article, two other district court rulings previously found that the government may obtain the data on a standard lower than probable cause.

The article goes on to say that the ruling could begin to establish the standard for such requests.

{ 0 comments }

-->