We are pleased to present you with Tafts Technology Insights newsletter, a collection of insights from our team to yours. For more information on our Technology practice, please visit www.taftlaw.com.

Is there a subject youd like to see in the next newsletter? Contact the editor here.

How Senior Management Causes Its Own ERP Problems
By: Marcus Harris

We often write about the mounting number of failed digital transformations, especially those involving an ERP software system. More often than not, the underlying cause of the failures involve either the vendor or integrator biting off more than they can chew. They misrepresent the capability of their ERP system or their experience at integrating a system into the user's existing software and hardware.

>> Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down a Longstanding U.S. Ban on “Immoral” and “Scandalous” Trademark
By: Lindsey Rothrock

The U.S. government no longer has the authority to bar federal trademark registration for words or symbols that it determines to be immoral, obscene, vulgar or profane. On Monday, June 24, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court (the Court) struck down a longstanding federal prohibition on the registration of “immoral or scandalous” trademarks, holding that such a prohibition violates the First Amendment right to free expression.

>> Read More

The Cost to Comply With DoD’s Cybersecurity Requirements to Be Reimbursable
By: Bill Wagner

Law360 published an article recently with the title, “DoD Official Says Cyber is an Allowable Contractor Cost.” The article states that the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) will allow defense contractors to treat the costs of bringing their cybersecurity programs in line with DoD requirements as an allowable cost and, therefore, reimbursable. Specifically, at the June 14, 2019 Professional Services Council’s Federal Acquisition Conference, DoD special assistant for cybersecurity Katie Arrington said, “security is an allowable cost.”

>> Read More

A Win for Browsewrap?
By: Mike Etienne

Offer and Acceptance . . . by Inquiry Notice. This is not a traditional understanding of contract law, but then again, internet sites do not always provide traditional contracts. Recently, a district court cited 9th Circuit precedent in deciding that because an online user had “at least inquiry notice of his need to comply with the Terms in using the website, and he continued to use the site knowing he was bound by the Terms, the user accepted the Terms by using the site.” Gutierrez v. FriendFinder Networks Inc., No. 18-CV-05918-BLF, 2019 WL 1974900, at *8 (N.D. Cal. May 3, 2019).

>> Read More

Supreme Court Brings Clarity to Trademark Licensing Risks
By: Paul McGrady

The U.S. Supreme Court provided much-needed clarity on the effect bankruptcy has on the licensor’s right to revoke a trademark license. On May 20, 2019, SCOTUS decided, in an 8-1 decision, that “A debtor’s rejection of an executory contract under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code has the same effect as a breach of that contract outside bankruptcy. Such an act cannot rescind rights that the contract previously granted.” Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC NKA Old Cold LLC No. 17-1657 (U.S. May 20, 2019).

>> Read More

Reducing the Cost and Problems of an SAP S/4 HANA Software Implementation
By: Marcus Harris

Corporate financial wizards are expert at creating realistic expense budgets that project exactly how much will be spent on everything from paper clips to building a new facility and expanding into new markets. But even the best MBA analysts from the best grad schools have trouble accurately budgeting the cost and time for an SAP S/4 HANA installation whether it is for upgrading a legacy ERP software system or bringing a totally new one onstream.

>> Read More

We encourage you to visit our Technology Insights blog, where additional blog posts are published.
Visit the Blog
Tafts Technology Insights Newsletter is used to inform our clients and friends of significant new developments and current issues in Technology law. For more information about Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, please visit http://www.taftlaw.com.

These materials have been prepared by Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. No person or organization should act upon this information without first seeking professional counsel.

We cannot and do not represent you until our client intake process is completed. Further, we reserve the right to accept or decline representing any person or organization in any matter. Accordingly, please do not send us any confidential information about any matter until you receive a written statement from us advising you that we represent you (an
engagement letter). When you receive an engagement letter from one of our attorneys, you will be our client, and we may exchange confidential information freely. Again, do not send us unsolicited confidential information until you speak with one of our attorneys and get authorization to send that information to us.

Some aspects of this Web site may allow you to register for newsletters, events, functions, or seminars hosted by, sponsored by, or associated with Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP. The transmission or receipt of any information related to registration for any event or service does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP's Web site and associated materials may provide links to other websites that may be useful or informative.These links to third party sites or information are not intended, and should not be interpreted by readers, as constituting or implying our endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation of the third party information, products or services found there.

The following statement is required by many states, including Kentucky: "THIS IS AN ADVERTISEMENT."