Monthly Archives: June 2012

Susan Kelly quotes me in her article, “Cloudy Coverage? Cyber policies may fall short for cloud computing” in Treasury & Risk.


In her article, Cloudy Coverage? Cyber policies may fall short for cloud computing, author  writes about insurance coverage for cloud computing risks for Treasury & Risk.  She also discusses whether insurance and cyber insurance policies provide coverage for cloud computing risks.

The article opens:

The ability to outsource a company’s technology infrastructure to a third party via cloud computing may seem like a dream come true—until the cloud arrangement breaks down. In April 2011, many Web sites that used Amazon’s cloud services business for hosting went down when Amazon encountered technical difficulties.

The article then discusses insurance coverage for cloud computing risks.  Ms. Kelly quotes me in the article:

One tricky question is the extent to which companies’ insurance covers losses caused by cloud computing problems. Scott Godes, [formerly] counsel at the law firm of Dickstein Shapiro, calls cyber coverage “the Wild West of insurance.”

“It’s a new marketplace . . . .”  . . . Godes notes that it’s rare to see the term “cloud computing” in a cyber policy and advises that companies look carefully at the wording of their policies. “It’s important to pay attention to things like what is the scope of the term ‘network,’” he says. “If that term is written in a way where it could encompass the outsourcing of hosting or support, you have a strong argument that cloud services are covered.”

Want to read the other opinions and thoughts offered on the subject?  Then click on over to Cloudy Coverage? Cyber policies may fall short for cloud computing to read the entire article.

Disclaimer:

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s law firm and/or the author’s past and/or present clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. The opinions expressed here belong only the individual contributor(s). © All rights reserved. 2012.

Advertisements

Bibeka Shrethsa quotes me in her article, “Michaels Has Edge In Data Theft Coverage Suit, Attys Say”


PIN pad terminalIn her article, Michaels Has Edge In Data Theft Coverage Suit, Attys Say, author Bibeka Shrestha writes about an insurance coverage dispute relating to cyber risks, including coverage for putative class actions allegedly relating to the theft of credit card and debit card information. The policyholder and the insurance company dispute whether there is insurance coverage for the claim under commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policies.

The article opens:

Arch Insurance Co. told an Illinois federal court Friday that it doesn’t have to defend Michaels Stores Inc. against a slew of putative data breach class actions because no private information was published, but policyholder attorneys say courts have in the past broadly interpreted what counts as “publication.”

The article then explains the basis of the dispute: “The coverage dispute involves seven putative class actions claiming that Michaels failed to prevent criminals from tampering with PIN pad terminals at its stores and stealing customers’ credit and debit card information.”

Ms. Shrestha quotes me in the article. She also notes my views that there is favorable, “policyholder-friendly” rulings regarding personal and advertising injury coverage for privacy, cybersecurity, and data breach claims under CGL insurance policies. The quotes and references all are after the jump, and the full content is available if you or your firm subscribe to the Insurance Law360 site and its content.

Want to read the other opinions and thoughts offered on the subject? Then click on over to Michaels Has Edge In Data Theft Coverage Suit, Attys Say to read the entire article.

Disclaimer:

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s law firm and/or the author’s past and/or present clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. The opinions expressed here belong only the individual contributor(s). © All rights reserved. 2012.

Bibeka Shrethsa quotes me in her article, “Crate & Barrel Hammers Out Deal Ending ZIP Code Suits”


In her article, Crate & Barrel Hammers Out Deal Ending ZIP Code Suits, author Bibeka Shrestha writes about a settlement of privacy class actions and a related insurance coverage dispute regarding the potential insurance coverage for those privacy claims.  The putative privacy class actions were filed in California and related to alleged requests for and alleged recording of ZIP codes.

The article opens:

Crate & Barrel has tentatively resolved seven proposed class actions over its collection of customers’ ZIP codes and a related coverage dispute with Hartford Fire Insurance Co. in Illinois federal court.

According to a notice posted May 16, a settlement has been reached that would end the underlying actions in California state and federal courts accusing Euromarket Designs Inc., better known as Crate & Barrel, of requesting and recording customers’ ZIP codes during credit card transactions.

The article then gives details about the lawsuits and the insurance coverage action, including efforts to persuade Hartford to honor its duty to defend the privacy claims.  I have written about and presented on this topic before.

Ms. Shresthsa quotes me in her article, with my comments regarding the import of the settlement.  To read the entire article, including my quotes, click on over to Crate & Barrel Hammers Out Deal Ending ZIP Code Suits.

Disclaimer:

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s law firm and/or the author’s past and/or present clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. The opinions expressed here belong only the individual contributor(s). © All rights reserved. 2012.