GSA Finalizes Rule Declaring Certain Commercial Supplier Agreement Terms Unenforceable
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.26.18
On February 22, 2018, GSA published a final rule amending its acquisition regulation and declaring certain common Commercial Supplier Agreement (CSA) terms—such as indemnification and arbitration provisions, provisions that subject the U.S. Government to state law, and automatic renewal provisions—unenforceable in government contracts as inconsistent with federal procurement law. GSA published the proposed rule in June 2016 (discussed here) and related class deviation (discussed here) in August 2015.
The final rule makes several noteworthy changes to GSA’s proposed rule, including: (1) it reverts the order of precedence of contract terms to give precedence to “[a]ddenda to [the] solicitation or contract, including any commercial supplier agreements as amended by the Commercial Supplier Agreements—Unenforceable Clauses provision” over “[s]olicitation provisions” and “[o]ther paragraphs of [the] clause”; and (2) it removes the previously proposed requirement to provide full text CSA terms with the offer, paving the way for CSA terms to be incorporated by reference. As GSA maintains, this final rule will eliminate the need for negotiation on the identified unenforceable terms and could facilitate faster procurements.
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