Plain Meaning Of Statute Restricts Competition
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.02.06
In Crane & Co. (Jan. 18, 2006, http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/297398.pdf), GAO held that the plain language of a 1916 statute limiting to four years contracts for “distinctive currency paper” precluded the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (“BEP”) from encouraging competition by issuing an RFP for four years of production following a two-year “mobilization” period to allow new entrants to make required investments and amortize that investment over the production term of the contract. Recognizing that BEP was attempting to respond to criticisms of the absence of competition, including GAO reports, GAO held it still had to enforce the plain meaning of the statute, anti-competitive as that interpretation was, and the only remedy was for Congress to amend the statute.
Insights
Client Alert | 13 min read | 10.30.25
Federal and State Regulators Target AI Chatbots and Intimate Imagery
In the first few years following the public launch of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in the autumn of 2022, litigation related to AI focused primarily on claims of copyright infringement. Suits revolved around allegations that the data on which AI models train, and/or the output they produce, infringe upon the intellectual property rights of others. (While some of these cases have settled or reached preliminary judgments, many remain ongoing.)
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.30.25
Is Course Hero Heading to Summer School After Summary Judgment Loss?
Client Alert | 6 min read | 10.29.25
Enhancing UK cyber security resilience and leadership engagement
Client Alert | 9 min read | 10.28.25
Key Takeaways from a Consequential Month of Russia-Related Sanctions
