 |
By Paul W.
Berning
Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLPThe
construction industry is becoming increasingly reliant on new electronic technology,
ranging from project-specific Web sites and online equipment auctioning to bid
analysis software and negotiation tools. Although the construction industry has
been slow to warm up to the technology, 1/ usage is increasing every day.
Surveys indicate that 80 percent of contractors and owners use Web-based communications,
25 percent purchase or sell products over the Internet and 17 percent bid for
jobs online. 2/ Fifty-eight percent of owners report they have used a project
management Web site. 3/ The
Internet is not without its problems. Hidden behind the technology's promise of
greater efficiency, accountability and speed are traditional issues of contract
formation and enforcement, project relationships and assessment of liability.
Plus, new technology raises new concerns about security, reliability and data
integrity. This
article will address the major legal and practical concerns facing the construction
industry as it embraces new technology, with emphasis on three major areas: online
purchasing and sales; project management Web sites and extranets; and Web-based
bidding tools. It will identify significant areas of concern and, when possible,
suggest steps for diminishing potential problems and limiting liability.
Online Purchasing and Sales
The
Internet is the world's largest marketplace, growing dramatically as more vendors
and consumers go online everyday. For the construction industry, the Internet
presents a novel opportunity to negotiate bulk prices with, purchase hard-to-find
products from and sell surplus materials to a market that expands well beyond
traditional regional boundaries. Ideally, the results are more opportunities for
sellers and better selection and prices for consumers. For
those looking to buy or sell equipment and materials, the selection of Web sites
is nearly endless, with varying choices and features. Many Web sites provide contractors
with real-time access to the inventories of suppliers. 4/ Contractors can
chose from a list of vendors, locate those with available supplies and negotiate
price and delivery terms. Some sites provide users with access from their desktops
to photographs and specifications from vendors across the country or around the
globe. 5/ Other sites allow contractors to post requests for quotations
and receive replies online. 6/ Overall, e-commerce promises the industry
faster deliveries, cheaper prices, improved procurement tracking and more informed
purchasing decisions. Despite
these prospects, the construction industry has been slow to adopt online purchasing
and sales. In fact, a recent survey found only one-quarter of owners and contractors
bought or sold via the Internet, with most, 61 percent, using it to purchase office
supplies rather than buying or selling construction materials. 7/ However,
as more dot-com companies target the construction industry, the numbers are certain
to grow. One study predicts 11 percent, or $141 billion worth, of construction
industry spending will be online by 2004. 8/ However,
more online spending means more legal and practical concerns: Contracting.
Construction companies looking to purchase and sell online may find the Internet
ideal in many ways for contracting. 9/ Online contracting actually eliminates
some of the ambiguities and other problems inherent in conventional written agreements.
For example, many businesses traditionally contracted with each other through
the exchange of preprinted contracts. This exchange often resulted in a "battle
of the forms," where the basic terms of the two contracts would be the same,
but the boilerplate provisions covering such issues as warranties and dispute
resolution would be different. If a dispute arose under the contract, it often
was difficult to ascertain which contract terms controlled. Many e-commerce sites
eliminate this problem by setting up standard forms through which all contracting
must take place. The terms are set -- the other party cannot change provisions
and then claim those are the terms of the contract. Sites that feature controls
requiring the seller or purchaser to "click" his or her acceptance of
terms also help preclude such ambiguity. This specific consent mechanism minimizes
concerns over whether the parties were made aware of the provisions of the contract. Sometimes
online contracts are formed via e-mail communications rather than through standard
forms on Web sites. In these cases, the parties commonly agree upon the basic
terms of the contract, such as product information and price, without mentioning
other provisions normally found in boilerplate language. Such terms often can
be implied from past dealings or from the Uniform Commercial Code. However, this
still may leave issues open to interpretation and debate. A company can avoid
this problem by adopting a trading partner agreement that establishes the terms
for all transactions with the other party. Such agreements are becoming increasingly
common and can be drafted to apply to both electronic and hard copy contracts.
Such agreements are particularly useful in the Internet marketplace because they
can speed up contracting and delivery. Despite
its benefits, online contracting is a relatively new venture that may pose risks,
particularly in the area of jurisdiction and enforcement. Because the Internet
marketplace is global, e-commerce participants potentially are subjecting themselves
to the laws of distant states and countries. A simple solution is to use forum
selection and choice of law provisions in online contracts. However, there is
no guarantee that a court always will enforce such language. As an enforcement
safeguard, a party should take steps to ensure that the other party knows of and
understands the impacts of such provisions when entering the contract. As always,
a buyer must read the contract and understand that, because of forum selection
provisions, enforcing an online deal may require greater legal and travel costs
than handling a dispute with a regional vendor. Under
the Uniform Commercial Code and related state laws, a contract for the sale of
goods of $500 or more must be in writing, which raises concerns about the validity
of such transactions over the Internet. However, a recently enacted federal law
eliminates this uncertainty as to the validity of online contracts. On June 30,
President Clinton signed the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce
Act ("E-SIGN"), which gives electronic contracts the same legal effect
as hard copy forms. 10/ E-SIGN does not change existing law governing rights
or obligations under contracts; it simply provides for the legitimacy and enforcement
of contracts in electronic form. In other words, a contract cannot be denied validity
just because it was created online or signed electronically. The
new federal law applies to any contract for the sale of goods or lease of personal
property under Articles 2 and 2a of the Uniform Commercial Code, which covers
most e-commerce transactions. However, the law does not affect other documents,
such as court papers, wills, family law documents, utility service cancellations,
eviction or foreclosure notices, health and life insurance cancellations, certain
health and safety notifications, and contracts under other provisions of the Uniform
Commercial Code. 11/ E-SIGN
brings other changes as well. 12/ The new law pre-empts inconsistent state
laws or laws that are not technology-neutral. For example, a state law no longer
can require that parties enter an electronic contract by using a certain application
or technology. Also, the law establishes certain procedures for consumer transactions.
When written notices are required by federal or state law, consumers must be able
to choose whether electronic communications will suffice and to demonstrate their
ability to access the electronic information. Consumers also must be told how
to obtain hard copies of electronic records and contracts. Finally, if a law requires
retention of contracts or records, E-SIGN permits the maintenance of such documentation
in electronic format. As
a result, the construction industry will feel the effects of E-SIGN in areas beyond
e-commerce. For example, the new law allows for the retention of records in electronic
form, eliminating the need for hard copies of documents and paving the way for
a truly electronic workplace and project site. In contrast, companies using e-mail
to communicate and negotiate deals need to be aware that an e-mail message easily
may be interpreted as an offer that, under the new law, can result in a binding
contract. A court will look at the communications to determine whether a contract
was formed applying the classic test of offer, acceptance and consideration. If
such factors are present, there is a contract. Thus, as always, employees must
be careful to maintain proper business etiquette and to clearly convey intentions
when communicating by e-mail. Careless or inadvertent words traveling on the Internet
may be more binding or carry more consequences than those traveling by mouth.
Nevertheless, the true impacts of E-SIGN are yet to be seen, and companies will
have to wait to see how the courts interpret the law's provisions before understanding
its full impact. Antitrust
Issues. E-commerce participants should keep in mind that business-to-business
("B2B") Web sites have sparked government scrutiny because of antitrust
concerns. 13/ Industry-driven marketplaces are fertile ground for collusion
and price fixing. The federal government worries that B2B exchanges provide opportunities
for suppliers to float trial balloons to signal each other about price increases,
for competitors to band together to keep down costs of supplies, and for industry
players to exclude smaller companies and possibly drive them out of business.
The B2B sites also are hosts to huge amounts of data that companies can use to
instantaneously track sales and coordinate pricing strategies "without ever
speaking to each other about it." 14/ The Federal Trade Commission
still is unsure how to address new technology issues, but companies should consult
with antitrust lawyers before setting up or buying into exchanges to avoid potential
pitfalls. Practical
Concerns. For buyers, there are many practical concerns. Staleness is a significant
problem with Web-based information. Product specifications may not be as comprehensive
or up-to-date as the latest printed version, 15/ but a buyer may not know
this unless he or she does the necessary homework. Furthermore, information usually
is not provided in a standard format, so comparing products and Web sites can
be a difficult and time-consuming process. 16/ The lack of a standard catalog
of SKU numbers for the industry defeats the ease and efficiency of estimating
systems that pull data from online databases. 17/ Purchasing
used equipment online brings up issues of buyer confidence and seller guarantees.
Many Web sites that specialize in used equipment sales and auctions have "dispute
mechanisms" in place to handle differences between buyers and sellers. 18/
This may include reserving final determination of equipment condition, appointing
third-party inspectors and adopting an authorized certification program. However,
having dealers certify equipment raises other questions of whether a certification
opinion is trustworthy or informative and whether a dealer is able to conduct
a worthwhile inspection outside his or her brand specialty. 19/ These are
issues that arise in all used equipment transactions, but where the parties are
spread across the country, a common e-commerce scenario, these problems become
more complex, costly and time-consuming. The parties should anticipate these problems
before entering into a contract. The available dispute mechanisms should be investigated
and analyzed -- will they help or protect you in case of a dispute? -- before
a buyer or seller decides to deal in used equipment online. If
problems with a purchase do arise, the buyer's likely recourse will be the traditional
route -- against the seller. Web sites that are conduits for used equipment sales
usually post explicit terms and conditions absolving them of liability for sales
gone bad or user misconduct, and some reserve authority to call off a sale if
a party is suspected of wrongdoing. 20/ Thus, while the Internet may change
where and how construction companies do business, it does not change the adage
of buyer beware.
Project Web Sites and Extranets
Project-specific
Web sites and extranets may present the biggest change to how construction companies
conduct day-to-day business. These systems promise reduced paper consumption,
lower costs, improved communications, quicker turnaround on requests and timely
(or even early) project completion. 21/ Such technology is a natural for
the country's building industry, where Federal Express deliveries cost more than
$500 million annually, where mistakes frequently result from use of outdated drawings
and where projects may involve hundreds of players spread out over a large geographic
region. 22/ Many
companies have been using computerized systems for years to manage and schedule
projects. However, today's project Web sites and extranets claim to provide more
opportunities for consistent document review, multi-party collaboration and expanded
communications, both on the site and in the office. 23/ For example, companies
can post drawings and documents on the system so everyone can easily access and
share the latest changes and additions. With many programs (known as interactive
collaboration), users can mark up documents online without changing the original
drawings, allowing for resolution of design and engineering conflicts in the field
without expensive and cumbersome CAD software. Other online applications are more
complex, combining the interactive collaboration features with a workflow tracker
that posts and records communications and other documents between architects,
engineers, contractors and subcontractors. These systems provide for lightening-quick
(compared to traditional methods) responses to requests for information and change
orders, streamlining the field process, thwarting disputes and speeding up the
project. Furthermore, the Web site or extranet becomes a common depository for
communications, creating an accurate and comprehensive virtual paper trail for
the project. Some
applications operate exclusively through an in-house server that runs the system
and stores the data. These systems are accessible only by parties within company.
To allow remote access to the system, the company must add on Web-enabling software
and a Web server. Other applications run entirely offsite via application service
providers ("ASP"). ASPs house and maintain the system, so all users
must use the Internet to access it. The
Web-based systems generally are available as either Web sites or extranets. 24/
A Web site is a public venue where parties can post and view documents and, with
optional software, add privacy features and storage capacity, track document revisions
and host private discussions. A single Webmaster controls the content. An extranet
has these same features but with added security, making it off-limits to the public.
An extranet either can be a private area of a public Web site or a portion of
an internal "intranet" accessible by outside members. Also, any member
with the proper access and password can post documents and alter content, not
just a Webmaster. In this section, "Web site" generally refers to both
types of systems, but it is important to remember there are differences between
the two. Many
vendors extol project Web sites as the answer to the litigatious construction
industry. Because these systems create a record of all requests, orders, submittals
and other communications during a project, the Web sites supposedly create a greater
sense of accountability and ward off disputes. However, before project Web sites
are embraced as a solution for all of the industry's problems, there are several
significant legal and practical concerns to keep in mind. Data
Ownership and Archiving. Because the Web sites create a record of the entire
project, actual ownership and control of the data is of considerable importance.
Many software vendors stress the need for their clients to clarify ownership of
documents and drawings with all parties involved with the project before initiating
a project. 25/ These issues should be handled contractually before the
project begins. What
happens to the system after the project is completed is largely up to the party
that initiates the Web site. 26/ Some owners keep the Web site operational
after project completion as a segue into facilities management. However, the owner
or the general contractor usually archives the entire record on CD-ROM. Again,
the parties should agree contractually before the project begins on who should
get copies of the record and what information should be included or excluded from
each party's version. Archiving
the record on CD-ROM brings up special concerns of future accessibility. For example,
in California, the statute of limitations for latent construction defects is 10
years. 27/ By the time a suit is brought or discovery begins, the technology
for accessing the information on the CD-ROM no longer may be readily available.
Imagine today trying to access material on a 5¼-inch floppy disk, in Wang
format, or on a Beta videotape. Keeping a record of a project is useless if it
is unreadable, so companies must take steps to ensure the continued availability
of project information. System
Reliability. Whether a system is kept on- or off-site, companies must be aware
of potential reliability problems that could disrupt or stop a project. If the
Internet connection goes down, remote users or even all users, if housed off-site,
can become disconnected and unable to work online. If equipment is kept onsite,
data can become corrupted or irretrievable because of pollutants, dust and dirt.
In-house systems also may suffer from too many users or poor technological infrastructure,
causing crashes in the system and stalling a project for hours or even days. Data
can be lost if the system is not backed up or is improperly housed. In
many ways, off-site systems present fewer issues of reliability. Most hosted products
are serviced with much more dependable technology than in-house operations. The
physical security of the system is better as well because many providers house
systems in highly secured buildings with heightened protection against fires and
earthquakes. Plus, most providers automatically back up data daily, easing concerns
about lost information. However,
other reliability concerns may arise with off-site systems. A service provider
or Web host no longer may be able to adequately take care of a company's needs
or could even go out of business, leaving a company caught in the middle of a
project. With hundreds of new ventures competing for the industry's attention,
companies need to be aware of the financial backing and technical capabilities
of an ASP or software provider before entering into an agreement for service or
products. Beware especially of free offers or beta tests without learning more
about the background of the provider. Although it may cost more, companies may
want to stick to providers with major pieces of the market or at least an established
presence. With so many new ventures flooding the marketplace, not everyone will
be able to survive the long haul. If
a project Web site or extranet does go down, a company's recourse may be limited.
A company possibly can seek relief from the software provider or ASP, but read
the service contract or licensing agreement carefully. Many contracts significantly
limit the liability of providers for damages that can be awarded for such problems.
Also, such a course of action is viable only if the provider has funds to pay
damages -- something to think about before contracting with an upstart ASP. If
the source of the problem is an Internet connection or otherwise Web-related,
the company may try to seek relief from its Internet service provider ("ISP").
However, most ISPs explicitly state in their service contracts that they are not
responsible for delays or system failures beyond their control. Thus, a company
may not be able to pursue this route when seeking damages or compensation for
losses due to an Internet breakdown. A
company looking to its insurance policy's property damage or business interruption
coverage for help with a computer-related loss may face problems as well. 28/
Many insurance companies may not consider damage to data, information or program
functions as damage or loss to the insured's property and, therefore, may not
extend coverage to such incidents. Furthermore, a company that is using an off-site
system may face more problems if the damage to the data or programming took place
off-site -- this may not be considered the insured's property. Similarly, business
interruption coverage usually only provides compensation for loss due to damage
or loss to the insured's property, so the same problems arise. In the end, a company
should review its policies carefully and expect to battle with its insurance carrier
if it decides to seek relief through this route. Or, consider getting a separate
policy designed specifically to cover Internet-related incidents. Most
importantly, a company should expect its project Web site to go down or perform
inadequately at some point during the project and have a contingency plan in place
before it happens. All parties participating in the site should be aware of and
be expected to conform to the contingency procedures to mitigate possible work
stoppages and other problems. By having contingency measures in place before the
project begins, companies hopefully can avoid the courthouse in the end. Security.
Possibly the most significant concern general contractors have with project Web
sites is the safekeeping and confidentiality of the information posted. A company
may worry about the value of computer equipment if stolen or damaged, but it is
the data stored on the computer that is of the most consequence. 29/ Information
kept both on- and off-site are susceptible to user misuse and "spying." To
alleviate concerns about the security of confidential data, most Web sites are
designed so parties have limited access to information, depending up the level
and type of job. For example, a subcontractor may only have access to drawings
and communications relating to its part of a project while other information may
be shared with all parties involved. A general contractor may use the Web site
to perform budget analysis and communicate with its employees regarding costs,
information that it may not want the owner or subcontractors to access. Accordingly,
project Web sites must have a strong security system to limit access and prevent
breaches. Passwords
are the most common security device and are extremely susceptible to breaches.
Too many users adopt common passwords, making it easy for an infiltrator to break
into the system or access restricted information. Do not use names, birthdates,
company names, phone numbers or other identifiable personal attributes. And, definitely
never use "password." Many
off-site systems also feature encryption mechanisms so information transmitted
between parties cannot be read if intercepted. However, companies should plan
for security issues in advance and have procedures for handling breaches. If information
is extremely confidential, companies should consider not using a Web site or extranet
for its dissemination -- especially if system users are among those that would
benefit most from clandestine access to it. Project
Web sites and extranets also are susceptible to outside computer viruses and hacker
attacks, which can slow down operations, tie up applications or even destroy data.
30/ Traditional antivirus programs can prevent some infections, but such
programs may not detect some of the new tactics being used. For example, someone
could send a "Trojan horse" as an e-mail attachment or Internet download
to a company employee. The Trojan Horse allows an outside computer to take temporary
control of the company's system, flood it with data and cut off communication
in and out of the network. Such an attack usually is not detectable with the traditional
antivirus software although there are other programs on the market that search
out and destroy such intruders. A firewall is a good mechanism for preventing
communication and data passage from unknown, and possibly dangerous, sources from
penetrating a company's private system. Other
Concerns. Allowing users to access and post information raises concerns about
whether documents can be improperly or unwittingly changed by parties. Already,
companies have witnessed accusations fly between engineers, architects, contractors
and subcontractors that drawings and documents are being changed to hide mistakes
or place blame on others for mishaps. The system administrator, the party who
identifies and provides the access levels and revision rights to the users, is
the gatekeeper and must delegate responsibility wisely. The system administrator
also must use its authority conscientiously and take steadfast steps to earn the
trust and confidence of the other users on the system. Once the system administrator
uses its power to cover its tracks or others' mistakes -- even for a seemingly
innocent or relatively benign reason -- it always will be susceptible to allegations
of impropriety. If
a legal dispute arises because of alleged changes or omissions in electronically
published documents and drawings, the system itself may play a major role in the
ultimate outcome of the issue. As already noted, many project Web sites and extranets
keep a comprehensive record of project documents and communications, including
the tracking of changes to the data. Even if not obvious from the public interface
of a system, the application may be able to pinpoint when documents are changed
and by whom. Such information likely is discoverable in a legal proceeding. As
a result, while the project Web site may present the opportunity for the system
administrator or other parties to hide mistakes and place blame on others, the
Web site may be equally capable of uncovering the culprits. However, do not rely
entirely on the system to sniff out improprieties -- tampering is not always noticeable,
and new technology still needs to be developed to assist evidence-gathering in
this area. 31/ Another
major practical concern is price. According to one consultant, project Web sites
that track workflow start at $25 a user or $260 a project, with additional costs
for data storage, server maintenance, Internet connections and bandwidth, and
equipment upgrades. 32/ Many contractors are "renting" the systems
on a per-project basis -- to the tune of $1,250 to $1,500 a project -- so they
can work the application price into the project costs and invite an unlimited
number of parties to participate. 33/ Others purchase the software outright,
but this can be considerably more expensive, starting at $30,000 to $89,000, depending
on the operating system. Systems that feature only interactive collaboration --
document posting and access -- are available for less or even for free although
such sites generally have limited storage capacities and do not produce the comprehensive
record of communication as the project workflow applications. 34/ Having
adequate technology infrastructure is crucial to the effectiveness of the systems.
The software for most of these applications is extremely powerful and will crash
older computers with inadequate processing speeds and memory capacities. When
using systems that require an Internet connection, rather than just an in-house
network, companies are strongly encouraged to upgrade to a DSL line or better
to ensure rapid transmission of information. A dial-up modem will not suffice
when transmitting large documents and drawings. Also,
project-specific Web sites only perform at their fullest capacity if the team
is committed to using it and using it properly. Some subcontractors have declined
to use the applications, making it necessary for contractors to employ dual systems
of electronic and hard copy communications and data. 35/ This duplicative
process may significantly undermine the effectiveness of the technology. Proper
training also is important. Employees need to understand how to use the software
and what the parties expect from the system. Users must learn to identify and
alert others to important items and to include all necessary information in communications.
36/
Web-Based Bidding Tools
More
and more, companies and governments are looking to the Internet and related electronic
avenues to streamline bidding and procurement practices. Many entities now use
online means for posting solicitations for bids on contracts and for receiving
proposals. In fact, many solicitations and accompanying materials are available
only in electronic forms, including some of those issued by the federal government.
37/ For
parties putting projects and requests out for bid, the world of e-commerce promises
many advantages over traditional methods of procurement, such as real-time posting
of requests and amendments, efficient dissemination of materials and lower costs.
38/ The Internet also makes it easier for contractors to obtain estimates
and quotations from suppliers. If a contractor needs to obtain multiple estimates
for a major purchase, he or she can go to e-commerce sites and often get numbers
fast and anonymously. 39/ Or, he or she can issue requests for quotations
or invitations to bid and receive responses online. 40/ Bidders, too, may
reap the benefits of the Internet by obtaining RFP information more quickly and
in easier-to-use formats. Often drawings and specifications are sent electronically,
allowing bidders to receive information instantly. Bid analysis applications also
help parties on both sides formulate quotations and analyze proposals, again saving
time and money. There
is a flip side to the advantages offered by Web-based bidding tools. Two common
worries about the Internet -- reliability and security -- particularly vex online
bidding and procurement systems. Many contractors shy away from fully utilizing
online bidding applications because of uncertainty over whether proprietary and
time-sensitive information will safely reach the proper party. They may research
and receive bid solicitations online, but many contractors will not transmit proposals
or quotations by the same media. 41/ These
fears have some validity. Bids can disappear in cyberspace, leaving a company
with few options for relief. For example, in Matter of American Material Handling,
Inc., 42/ the U.S. Comptroller General denied the protest of a government
contractor whose electronic bid to the Air Force was lost because of a computer
malfunction. The Air Force issued its solicitation for a boom lift through the
Federal Acquisition Computer Network (FACNET), an electronic procurement system
that transmits information through a government gateway, then to privately run
value-added networks (VANs). VANs provide government procurement information to
companies registered to do business with the federal government. American Material
submitted its bid electronically to its VAN, which transmitted it to the federal
government through FACNET. The VAN confirmed the transmission of the quote by
issuing the company a hard copy record. However, the Air Force's computer that
receives the quotations malfunctioned and lost all of the bids received the day
American Material submitted its bid. To remedy this problem, the Air Force re-posted
the request for bids on FACNET and extended the deadline date. It also attempted
to post a notice to all previous bidders to resubmit quotations lost due to the
malfunction, but the notice mistakenly was not transmitted over FACNET. American
Material did not resubmit its bid, contending it was unaware that its quotation
was lost. When the contract was awarded to a company that submitted a higher quotation,
American Material protested, asserting it was "unfairly penalized for the
computer failure." The Comptroller General disagreed, noting "as a practical
matter, even with appropriate procedures in place, an agency may lose or misplace
a bid or quotation, and the occasional loss of a bid or quotation -- even if through
the negligence of the agency -- generally does not entitle the bidder or vendor
to relief." 43/ However,
government contractors are not entirely at the mercy of the federal government's
computers. If the company can show the loss of the bid was part of a "systemic
failure" by the federal agency to adequately receive and safeguard the quotes,
then a protest may be sustained. 44/ The loss cannot be an isolated incident,
as in Material Handling. Instead, it must "involve
more than
mere occasional negligent loss of a quotation" and point to an unreasonable
breakdown in procedure by the agency. This is high burden to meet for government
contractors to meet, so it is best to anticipate problems and confirm receipt
of electronic bids. Security
of the information also is a major concern. "Contractor executives talk about
zealous procurement officials disseminating contract awardees or short lists before
individual winners are notified or of proprietary information inadvertently posted."
45/ Many agencies are trying to battle this lack of confidence by using
encryption technology for Internet transactions. 46/ Federal regulations
also require agencies using e-commerce to "ensure that the agency systems
are capable of ensuring authentication and confidentiality commensurate with the
risk and magnitude of the harm from loss, misuse, or unauthorized access to or
modification of the information." 47/ To
comply with this requirement, agencies are looking to public key infrastructure
("PKI"), which establishes a process for third-party verification of
online identities and for dual decoding of digital signatures by both parties
engaging in the contract. 48/ Nevertheless, contractors need to ensure
such steps are being taken when transmitting confidential information via the
Internet, especially when dealing with private parties. These requirements are
for the federal government only and are not applicable to private transactions.
As a result, it may be up to the contractor to impose restrictions and security
mechanisms on the other party before engaging in online bidding. Security concerns
will remain, but these steps are significant in protecting online bidding process. Contractors
also need to take precautions to protect any data submitted to the government
or private parties with copyright or restricted rights notices. 49/ Under
federal regulations, the federal government takes no responsibility "for
the disclosure, use, or reproduction of such data." 50/ As result,
a company may lose its exclusive use of the data unless appropriate steps are
taken when submitting information, either by them or by their subcontractors.
51/ Contractors
also may encounter problems on their own end, particularly when relying on bidding
applications. In M.A. Mortenson Co., Inc., v. Timberline Software Corp.,
52/ the Washington Supreme Court ruled that a license agreement containing
language that limited the liability of a software company prevented a contractor
from receiving consequential damages due to a "bug" in the application.
Mortenson purchased the bidding software from Timberline, which had been providing
the general contractor with software for a number of years. When the software
was shipped to the company, each package bore a printed license agreement that
limited Timberline's liability to the license fee paid by the purchaser. Mortenson
used the software to prepare a successful bid on a construction project. It later
discovered that a bug in the software allegedly resulted in an underbid of about
$2 million. Timberline knew about the software problem, but considered it too
obscure to affect performance. The
court ruled the license agreement on the package governed the dispute and limited
the liability of Timberline despite any other agreement between the parties. The
court determined that the limitation provision of a "shrink-wrap license"
became part of the original agreement between the parties, and "Mortenson's
use of the software constituted its assent to the agreement, including the license
terms." 53/ Again, the lesson here is to read the contract and understand
the risks before entering the contract or using the product. As much as bidding
software or project-specific applications will streamline operations and lower
costs, the risks are there, and companies must enter the e-commerce world with
open eyes.
Conclusion
The
Internet is changing the construction industry. Companies are contracting by e-mail,
surfing the Net for supplies and equipment, and looking online to complete projects
faster and cheaper. The pace is slow -- construction ranks 87th globally among
industries in adopting technology 54/ -- but steady, as companies approach
the move differently. Some blindly race online and others embrace it more timidly.
Regardless of the approach, all companies should keep in mind a few pointers to
reduce the risks and ease the transition: 1.
Don't forget the old rules. While the Internet may make doing business
faster, easier and even cheaper, it does not change the old precautions -- read
the contract, understand the risks and buyer beware. 2.
Anticipate problems. Even the best technology will fail sometimes, and
companies must plan for this by including liability provisions in contracts, establishing
contingency plans for project participants and requiring security precautions
in online transactions. 3.
Invest in good infrastructure and training. Project Web sites and extranets
can streamline an operation, but only if a company has the technology and employee
knowledge base to use it. As
the industry moves online, unforeseen legal and practical issues undoubtedly will
emerge, not to mention the concerns that will accompany the significant cultural
and behavioral changes the Internet will bring to the industry. However, companies
that understand and anticipate the risks of e-commerce will thrive in this new
environment and become leaders of the revolution.
If you would like to receive legal reports and updates more quickly, by e-mail,
click
here and fill out the mailing list form.
For more information about the issues covered in this report, please contact Paul Berning in our San Francisco office at 415-369-7229 or at pwberning@thelen.com, John Ralls in our San Francisco office at 415-369-7210 or at jralls@thelen.com or contact your Thelen attorney. For more information about Thelen's Construction and Government Contracts Department, click here. 
ENDNOTES
1/
Steve Woodward, Portland, Ore., Firm Leaps into Web-Based Commercial Construction
Management, The Portland Oregonian, August 14, 2000 [noting that the construction
industry tied with the manufacturing, mining, agriculture and forestry sectors
for having "the nation's lowest percentage of users of the Internet for purchasing
and sales"]. 2/
Web Creeping into Owners' Operations, Engineering News-Record, May 1, 2000,
at 27. 3/
Id. 4/
Joe Stoddard, E-Commerce Boom or Bust?, Construction Business Computing,
November 1999, at 15. 5/
Matthew Phair et al., Portal Providers Propose Changes for Equipment Buyers
and Sellers, Engineering News-Record, June 5, 2000, at 28. 6/
Thomas Hernandez Jr., E-Commerce and A/E/C, Building Design and Construction,
June 2000. 7/
Web Creeping into Owners' Operations, Engineering News-Record, May 1, 2000,
at 27. A survey conducted by the Construction Industry Manufacturer's Association
and the Associated General Contractors came up with similar numbers, with only
28 percent of those surveyed using the Internet for material procurement. Matthew
Phair, Technology Issues Are High on Manufacturers' Agenda, Engineering
News-Record, December 6, 1999, at 33. However, 61 percent of respondents said
they used the Internet to purchase airline tickets. Id. 8/
Bob Tedeschi, Construction Heads into the Internet Age, New York Times,
February 21, 2000, at C1. 9/
For more information on contracting on the Internet, see Karl D. Belgum, Legal
Issues in Contracting on the Internet, June 1999,
<www.constructionweblinks.com/Resources/
Industry_Reports_Newsletters/june_1999.html>. 10/
Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, Pub. L. 106-229, 114
Stat. 464 (2000), < frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/
getdoc.cgi?dbname=106_cong_public_ laws&docid=f:publ229.106>
For
more information on the new federal law, see President Signs Electronic Signature
Act to Facilitate E-Commerce, July 17, 2000, <www.costructionweblinks.com/
Resources/Industry_Reports__Newsletters/ July 17, 2000/e_signature.htm>.
11/
Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, §103. 12/
Id. §101. 13/
David Leonhardt, Business Links on Web Raise Antitrust Issues, Wall Street
Journal, July 7, 2000, at 1. 14/
Id. 15/
Matthew Phair et al., Portal Providers Propose Changes for Equipment Buyers
and Sellers, Engineering News-Record, June 5, 2000, at 28. 16/
Id. 17/
Joe Stoddard, E-Commerce Boom or Bust?, Construction Business Computing,
November 1999, at 15. 18/
Matthew Phair et al., Portal Providers Propose Changes for Equipment Buyers
and Sellers, Engineering News-Record, June 5, 2000, at 28. 19/
Id. 20/
Richard Korman, E-Terms and Conditions: "We Want to Be Switzerland,"
Engineering News-Record, June 5, 2000, at 34. 21/
Some reports say project Web sites and extranets can shave up to 30 percent off
a project's costs. Georgie Raik-Allen, Merger Reinforces Construction E-Commerce,
Red Herring, January 20, 2000. 22/
John Bodrozic, Meridian Project Systems, online project management, collaboration
and e-business, address at the Center for Integrated Facility Engineering Conference
on E-Commerce and E-Business in Design and Construction: Getting Started and Staying
in Business, April 8, 2000. 23/
Paul Levin, Web-Based Project Controls, Construction Claims Monthly, July
2000. 24/
Geoffrey Moore Langdon and Arnie Williams, A Trend to Be Reckoned With -- AEC
Project Webs, Cadence, February 2000, <www.cadenceweb.com/2000/0200/issuefocus0200.html >. 25/
Id. 26/
Id. 27/
California Code of Civil Procedure §337.15. 28/
For more information on insurance risks and the Internet, see Internet Poses New Insurance Challenges and Concerns, May 22, 2000, <www.constructionweblinks.com/Resources/
Industry_Reports__Newsletters/ May_22_2000/5_22_00_Insurance_Risks.htm>. 29/
Chad Jones, How Thin Client/Server Platform Solved One California Contractor's
Computing Woes, Construction Business Computing, December 1998, at 1. 30/
The Eve of Destruction, 3 Constructech, No. 2, 2000. 31/
Matthew Phair et al., Buying and Selling Go On Line, Engineering News-Record,
October 27, 1997, at 26. 32/
Paul Levin, Web-Based Project Controls, Construction Claims Monthly, July
2000. 33/
Geoffrey Moore Langdon and Arnie Williams, A Trend to Be Reckoned With -- AEC
Project Webs, Cadence, February 2000. 34/
Paul Levin, Web-Based Project Controls, Construction Claims Monthly, July
2000. 35/
Bob Tedeschi, Construction Heads into the Internet Age, N.Y. Times, February
21, 2000, at C1. 36/
Project-Specific Web Sites, Constructor, December 1998, at 72. 37/
Matter of NuWestern Constructors, Inc., Comp. Gen. No. B-275514 (Feb. 27,
1997) [ruling that decision by the Army of Corps of Engineers to issue a bid solicitation
for a design-build contract exclusively in CD-ROM format did not unfairly discriminate
against small companies or otherwise restrain competition]. 38/
Matthew Phair et al., Buying and Selling Go On Line, Engineering News-Record,
October 27, 1997, at 26. 39/
Matthew Phair et al., Portal Providers Propose Changes for Equipment Buyers
and Sellers, Engineering News-Record, June 5, 2000, at 28. 40/
Thomas Hernandez, Jr., E-Commerce and A/E/C, Building Design and Construction,
June 2000. 41/
Matthew Phair et al., Buying and Selling Go On Line, Engineering News-Record,
October 27, 1997, at 26. 42/
Matter of American Material Handling, Inc., Comp. Gen. No. B-281556 (Feb.
24, 1999). 43/
Id. 44/
Matter of S.D.M. Supply, Inc., Comp. Gen. No. B-271492 (June 26, 1996). 45/
Matthew Phair et al., Buying and Selling Go On Line, Engineering News-Record,
October 27, 1997, at 26. 46/
Id. 47/
48 Code of Federal Regulations §4.502 (c). 48/
Rand L. Allen et al., E-Contracting in the USA, Agency Purchases Are Increasingly
Paperless Transactions, Legal Times, February 28, 2000, at 34. 49/
Id. 50/
48 Code of Federal Regulations §52.227-14 (f). 51/
Rand L. Allen et al., E-Contracting in the USA, Agency Purchases Are Increasingly
Paperless Transactions, Legal Times, February 28, 2000, at 34. 52/
M.A. Mortenson Co., Inc., v. Timberline Software Corp., 140 Wn.2d 568,
998 P.2d 305 (2000). 53/
Id. 54/
David B. Rosenbaum and Judy Schriener, Company Cultures Viewed as Threat to
Web Collaboration, Engineering News-Record, May 15, 2000, at 19.
©2000 Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP
|