Blog

Why 2026 Demands a Fresh Look at Ad-Tech Contracts

Nearly 20 states have comprehensive privacy regimes in place.  The contract governing data collection and processing is now the first place liability attaches. (And where regulators will look)

Obligations can arise simply because data crosses a state boundary or touches a resident of a newly regulated jurisdiction. You need to be prepared and protected from all enforcement actions that could stem from shifting obligations.

Ad-Tech Contracts Matter More Than Ever

The previous ad-tech ecosystem grew around two assumptions:

(1) third-party technologies were largely self-governed, and

(2) user-level tracking happened at a scale and speed that contracts couldn’t police.

Most companies relied on broad “compliance representations.”

But that model didn’t survive.

State privacy laws impose obligations that attach not only to the company that directly collects the data, but also to every downstream partner who touches, enriches, or interprets it.

The moment you involve a DSP, DMP, SSP, analytics provider, data broker, or AI inference tool, there’s shared liability.

This is why contracts suddenly matter in a way they never did before. The statute doesn’t care about which party is “supposed” to process signals, delete data, or honor opt-outs. It requires the obligation to be met. Point blank period.

The only enforceable way to allocate responsibility is through binding contract terms that apply to every contributing partner. That way, should issues arise, you’ll know where to look.

Technical compliance now depends on contractual obligations, and contractual commitments must anticipate technical change.

How IAB’s 2025 Updates Reshape Vendor Relationships

IAB Tech Lab’s updates to the Global Privacy Platform in late 2025 included new state modules for Maryland, Indiana, Kentucky, and Rhode Island.

Equally significant, the GPP will move to a twice-per-year release schedule in 2026.

DDRF v2 introduces additional requirements around transmitting and processing deletion requests.

At a high level, that includes:

1. Requiring compliance with all GPP specifications.
2. Mandating that vendors honor deletion promptly.
3. Binding flow-down obligations.
4. Mechanisms to adopt future IAB updates without renegotiation.
5. Allocating responsibility for errors.

These measures reduce the risk that a vendor’s technical failure becomes your statutory exposure. Also, they keep every party informed of their role in data protection.

The less ambiguity, the better off you’ll be.

Modern Ad-Tech Contract “Must-Haves”

1. Explicit GPP alignment and vendor obligations.
2. Signal-handling and consent-transmission requirements.
3. Binding flow-down language extending to all sub-processors.
4. Data minimization and deletion timelines tied to statutory rights.
5. Purpose restrictions on inference-based profiling or AI-driven enrichment.
6. Audit, reporting, and verification mechanisms.
7. Transparent liability allocation for signal errors or unlawful processing.

Updating Now = Protecting Revenue Later

The fast movers in 2026 will breeze through diligence with fewer delays and avoid last-minute emergency renegotiations. The holdouts will lengthen their contracting cycle and waste precious time on expensive enforcement measures.

Fortunately, you don’t have to (and shouldn’t) go at it alone.

Uncommon Counsel helps clients translate shifting legal obligations into contract terms that work in the real world. Reach out today at (917) 768-0166 to ensure your ad-tech transactions remain compliant.