1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Technology Replacement Clause Requires Actual Replacement

Technology Replacement Clause Requires Actual Replacement

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 09.28.10

Some technology contracts have included "replacement" clauses which put limits on the agency's use of its termination for convenience power to flip to another vendor simply to get a better price. The Federal Circuit in McHugh v. DLT Solutions, Inc. (Sept. 23, 2010), held that, when the agency in such a clause had only agreed not to "replace" the leased software with "functionally similar equipment and/or software" for one year after termination or expiration of the lease, it did not breach when it did not install the leased software and continued to use its prior software.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.13.26

Massachusetts Trade Secret Preliminary Injunctions: Prove the Harm, Tailor the Relief

A strong trade secret claim is not a substitute for proof of irreparable harm. In Daikin Applied Americas Inc. v. Russo, No. SJC-13881 (Mass. Oct. 14, 2026), the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that likely success on a misappropriation claim does not create a presumption of irreparable harm. The court grounded its ruling in both the Massachusetts Uniform Trade Secrets Act and the traditional equitable principles the statute incorporates. It required a case-specific showing that the requested relief would prevent harm that a final judgment could not adequately remedy. ...