Prime Pulls Rug Out From Under Subcontractor Appeal
Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.08.14
The ASBCA's dismissal of an appeal in Binghamton Simulator Co. provides a stark reminder that subcontractors generally do not have privity of contract with the government and therefore cannot appeal contracting officer final decisions – even those that directly affect the sub's rights – unless that appeal is in the name of the prime and with the prime's consent and cooperation. The substantive dispute in this appeal related to the extent of government rights in software provided by Binghamton, and Binghamton had a provision in its subcontract that may have required the prime to sponsor the appeal, but the ASBCA held these were irrelevant because the prime refused to confirm its sponsorship of the appeal to the Board.
Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 06.30.25
AI Companies Prevail in Path-Breaking Decisions on Fair Use
Last week, artificial intelligence companies won two significant copyright infringement lawsuits brought by copyright holders, marking an important milestone in the development of the law around AI. These decisions – Bartz v. Anthropic and Kadrey v. Meta (decided on June 23 and 25, 2025, respectively), along with a February 2025 decision in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence – suggest that AI companies have plausible defenses to the intellectual property claims that have dogged them since generative AI technologies became widely available several years ago. Whether AI companies can, in all cases, successfully assert that their use of copyrighted content is “fair” will depend on their circumstances and further development of the law by the courts and Congress.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
FDA Targets Gene Editing Clinical Trials in China and other “Hostile Countries”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
