This chapter introduces the subject matter of the book, provides the core problem statement and defines the central terms used in the book. The introduction also explains the focus on governmental adoption of cloud computing services, legal sources, and the research approach.

The introduction explains how cloud computing has made it possible and desirable for users, such as businesses and governments, to migrate their data to be hosted on infrastructure managed by third parties. The chapter further outlines why aspects of migration to cloud services pose specific legal, contractual, and technical challenges for governments.

The chapter further outlines the challenge of addressing contracting and procurement requirements, data privacy and jurisdictional obligations when using an opaque, global, multi-tenant technology such as cloud computing.

This chapter contains the first part of the book’s study on cloud computing contracts evaluating the organization and structure of cloud computing contracts in addition to their content. This includes an evaluation of Service Level Agreements (SLAs), the use of master-service and framework agreements, issues related to subcontractors and subcontracting, third-party rights, and liability considerations.

The study applies a qualitative analysis of based on both secondary and original data. Secondary data is derived from various research projects in the EU and elsewhere. Original study data is derived from contracts obtained by the author through Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. This study is original in its method and scope in the governmental context. Additionally, the chapter applies government cloud audits and other guidance form the UK G-Cloud and US FedRAMP programs.

This chapter focuses on obtaining information and documents other than through interparty discovery. As for interparty discovery,1 this chapter concerns the pre-trial collection of information and potential evidence which is critical to all four of the key balancing themes in civil procedure, particularly balancing efficiency with due process and balancing privacy and openness.2 The ability of parties to access relevant information to prove their case is essential for due process, but can be costly and inefficient if not managed well and can impose unfair burdens on unrelated parties whose only involvement is their possession of relevant information. The processes discussed in this chapter (other than FOI applications) are all interlocutory procedures which are commonly commenced through motions in court or as part of agreed court timetables.