1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Confidentiality Agreement FAR Provision Does Not Permit Employee Theft

Confidentiality Agreement FAR Provision Does Not Permit Employee Theft

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.13.17

Crowell & Moring attorneys David Robbins and Trina Fairley Barlow published an article entitled “FAR Confidentiality Rule Doesn’t Authorize Employee Theft” that dispels common myths about the FAR’s confidentiality agreement provisions at 3.909 and the related contract clauses at FAR 52.203-18 and -19. Although purported whistleblowers are more commonly arguing they are entitled to take contractor documents in support of an enforcement proceeding, this article explains why such arguments are well beyond the scope of the regulation and suggests ways to respond if such a situation arises.

A copy of the article may be found here.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 10 min read | 03.19.26

Emotional Perception Redefines AI Patents: The UK Supreme Court’s Groundbreaking Shift in Computer-Implemented Inventions

[1] In a recent development, the UK Supreme Court ruled that Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) are not excluded from patentability due to being a computer program “as such.” In doing so, the Court set out the framework of a new test for the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to use when evaluating the patentability of computer. The ruling breaks down barriers to the patenting of AI algorithms in the UK and paves the way for a wider change in the UK IPO’s approach to assessing excluded subject matter....