Undocumented Clarifications Mean Undone State Award
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 02.09.05
In a dramatic saga in the highly competitive market for state Medicaid IS contracts, a North Carolina administrative judge upheld a protest of the state’s award of a $180 million contract, holding that the state cannot base its award on clarifications that the awardee made during an unrecorded, undocumented meeting, and that the state improperly relaxed RFP technical requirements only for the awardee. The judge found the procurement so flawed that the state should start all over again, ruling for protester, EDS Information Services, which was represented jointly by Crowell & Moring and Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jernigan of North Carolina.
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
