Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
3D Printing, Sharing Economy, and Other Emerging Industries
In an industry predicated on stability and predictability, new industries and technologies test industry tolerances and procedures. When loss occurs, policyholders in new or evolving industries often discover — by chance — gaps in the coverage offered by their legacy products, leading to costly disputes with their insurers. For example, 3D printing has evolved from emerging risk to manufacturing staple. As the industry grows however, it faces increased risk exposures including professional liability, products liability, workers' compensation and employers liability, business interruption and supply chain risks, intellectual property challenges, and, like all businesses, an increasing cyber risk. However, most traditional or “legacy” insurance products fail to provide sufficient coverage for these risk exposures vis-à-vis the 3D printing industry, just as they fail to adequately protect businesses in other emerging industries that, along with their concomitant risks, simply did not exist when the legacy insurance products covering them were formulated.
Another example subject to similar coverage challenges involves the “sharing economy,” such as ridesharing or home-sharing services. Here, too, policyholders and additional insureds face significant coverage issues and gaps in coverage as their risk profiles grow and evolve.
This article addresses three key coverage concerns related to these and other emerging and evolving industries. Policyholders should consider these issues now, when procuring or renewing their insurance policies, to ensure that these potential gaps are adequately filled prior to a claim.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.