
George A. McGowan, III
Partner
732-568-8377 gmcgowan@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: George A. McGowan, III
Date: May 12, 2026

Partner
732-568-8377 gmcgowan@sh-law.com
In today’s digital economy, New Jersey businesses of all sizes rely heavily on technology vendors, software providers, cloud platforms, and managed IT services. Whether your company is purchasing software, migrating data to the cloud, engaging a cybersecurity consultant, or entering into a long-term managed services agreement, a careful IT contract review can have significant operational, financial, and legal consequences for your business.
Too often, New Jersey businesses sign technology contracts without fully understanding the allocation of risk, the scope of services, and other key provisions of the agreement. A careful IT contract review is essential to help organizations avoid disputes, protect sensitive information, and ensure that the technology relationship aligns with their overall business objectives.
Many technology agreements are drafted by vendors and, therefore, heavily favor their interests. These contracts frequently contain broad limitations of liability, narrow warranties, automatic renewal provisions, and restrictive termination clauses.
While New Jersey businesses may assume that standard form agreements are non-negotiable, that is not the case. A thorough IT contract review can identify problematic provisions and create opportunities to negotiate more balanced terms. Common IT agreements that warrant close scrutiny include:
One of the most common sources of disputes in IT relationships is ambiguity regarding the services being provided. Contracts should clearly define:
Vague or incomplete descriptions can lead to disagreements about whether the vendor fulfilled its obligations. Detailed statements of work and service level agreements (SLAs) can help establish measurable expectations and accountability.
For example, if a business relies on a cloud provider for mission-critical operations, downtime provisions and support response times may have substantial operational implications. Without carefully negotiated SLAs, the customer may have limited remedies in the event of service disruptions.
Technology contracts increasingly involve the handling, storage, or transmission of sensitive information, including customer data, employee records, financial information, and proprietary business data. As a result, data security and privacy provisions deserve particular attention.
Key issues may include:
Businesses should also review whether vendors are permitted to share data with subcontractors or third parties, and whether adequate safeguards are in place.
In some industries, regulatory compliance obligations may require heightened contractual protections. Notably, healthcare, financial services, and companies handling consumer data may face significant exposure if vendor agreements fail to comply with applicable legal requirements. Many businesses also reference established standards such as the NIST Cybersecurity Framework when evaluating whether vendor security commitments are adequate.
Many IT contracts contain aggressive limitations of liability that substantially restrict the vendor’s legal exposure, even in situations involving negligence, service failures, or data breaches. For instance, provisions may:
While some limitation provisions are customary, businesses should carefully evaluate whether the proposed allocation of risk is reasonable given the nature of the services involved. For example, a contract involving sensitive customer information or critical infrastructure may warrant broader indemnification protections and higher liability caps.
Intellectual property ownership is a further critical issue in technology agreements. Contracts should clearly address:
In the absence of clear contractual language, disputes may arise over ownership of software code, databases, configurations, and other deliverables created during the engagement. This issue is particularly important for businesses investing in customized technology solutions or proprietary systems.
Businesses are often so focused on developing a business relationship that they overlook addressing how it ends. Careful review of termination provisions can help avert unexpected costs and operational disruptions. Important considerations may include:
Exit planning is especially important in cloud computing and SaaS arrangements, where a business’s data and operations may become deeply integrated with the vendor’s systems. Without clear provisions governing data migration and post-termination support, switching to a new provider can become expensive and disruptive.
Technology agreements are often complex and highly technical, and a proactive IT contract review can help businesses identify hidden risks before problems arise, negotiate more favorable terms, and align contractual obligations with operational realities. George A. McGowan, III, a Partner in the firm’s Red Bank, NJ office, brings more than 32 years of experience advising privately held companies on commercial contracts, technology and IT agreements, and related corporate matters. Earlier in his career, he served in the Finance and IT departments of the General Counsel for two publicly traded companies and has represented technology startups and data center clients in their corporate and commercial legal matters.
George and the attorneys of Scarinci Hollenbeck’s Corporate Transactions & Business Practice routinely advise New York and New Jersey businesses of all sizes on vendor agreements. A timely IT contract review before execution can reduce the likelihood of costly disputes, service interruptions, regulatory exposure, and cybersecurity-related liabilities.
To discuss your IT contracts or other vendor agreements, contact us.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

As battery energy storage system (BESS) projects move from planning to construction, developers and property owners must address an issue that extends well beyond zoning approvals and interconnection agreements: what happens when something goes wrong? To avoid unforeseen liability, developers should address fire code compliance, emergency response planning, contractual risk allocation, and environmental liability before […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!