
The article argues that the traditional notion of market language in technology contracts no longer applies to AI agreements, where terms are still evolving. Because regulatory, insurance, and liability frameworks remain unsettled, parties craft varied clauses focused on transparency, data provenance, and auditability rather than copying templates. The piece advises negotiators to evaluate market claims by asking what risk each provision addresses and how it functions if the AI system changes. It highlights that this risk‑focused approach can accelerate negotiations despite more detailed contracts.

Eight years after GDPR’s rollout, joint controller agreements remain a complex, under‑defined area for privacy teams. Article 26 creates joint controllership when multiple parties jointly decide the purposes and means of processing, making the arrangement inseparable. Unlike standard DPAs, these agreements...