"//signed//" Doesn't Cut It
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.30.08
A claim certification was invalid, and the ASBCA had no jurisdiction to decide the case, when the contractor's president submitted it by email and simply typed "//signed//" above his name. The Board in Teknocraft Inc. (Apr. 3, 2008) acknowledged that both the contractor and the government had used the typed designation "//signed//" in their emails during performance, but held that "//signed//" was not a "discrete, verifiable symbol of an individual" and constituted an "incurable defect" in the certification.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 08.03.26
The Pipe, Not the Posts: How Section 230’s Protections Extend to Generative AI Platforms
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (“Section 230”) protects online platforms from liability for user-generated speech. Based on the premise that platforms generally do not create original content but instead curate their users’ own speech, Section 230’s protections have historically applied to a platform’s algorithmically assembled, selected or sequenced content; algorithms or features that amplified or directed user generated speech to particular users were generally protected. Indeed, the old rule of thumb was the more a platform used algorithms or automation, the more likely user generated speech remained user generated speech. GenAI has the potential to change that calculus. A platform that ingests user generated content and publishes a transformed output, can blur Section 230’s line between publication and creation. The central question is whether Section 230 protects GenAI, which analyzes, but does not alter, user-created content to produce an outcome, and its corresponding outputs.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.31.26
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.31.26
Client Alert | 5 min read | 07.28.26
Data Centers in the Crosshairs: The Plaintiffs' Bar Has Begun Filing New Claims Using Old Tricks
