Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In several recent cases, companies with cyber insurance discovered that provisions in these policies led their insurers to limit coverage. Courts have been strictly construing cyber policies, and have found that the coverage provided is narrow. These decisions hinged upon whether an event constituted a covered "direct" loss and whether intervening actions precluded coverage, like an employee responding to fraudulent communications.
In February 2021, a Texas federal court determined that a payment processor for rental property management companies was not covered for losses from a phishing event. See, RealPage v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Case No. 3:19-cv-1350-B, United States District Court, Northern District of Texas (Feb. 24, 2021). Hackers used a fishing scam to gain access to funds held by RealPage's third-party payment processor, Stripe. RealPage made a business decision to reimburse its clients. The policy required that RealPage "hold" funds as a prerequisite to coverage for any funds stolen through cyber fraud. The insurer denied the claim because, while RealPage could direct the transfer of those funds in the Stripe accounts, RealPage never "held" the funds that were lost.
In September, a Minnesota federal court determined that there was no computer fraud coverage for a social engineering loss. Social engineering is a term used for certain types of security incidents where malicious actors trick someone into giving away sensitive information or transferring company funds. See, SJ Computers v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, Case No. 21-CV-2482, United States District Court, District of Minnesota (Aug. 12, 2022). "Spoofed" emails were sent from an outside vendor to the purchasing manager at SJ Computers. The "spoofed" emails contained updated wire transfer instructions for the payment of the vendors' invoices. SJ Computers paid invoices totaling nearly $600,000, but the payments went to the hackers' bank accounts.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
The business-law issue of whether and when a corporate defendant is considered distinct from its affiliated entities emerged on December 11 at the U.S. Supreme Court, with the justices confronting whether a non-defendant’s affiliate’s revenue can be part of a judge’s calculation of the monetary remedy for the corporate defendant’s infringement of a trademark.
The most forward-thinking companies embrace AI with complete confidence because they have created governance programs that serve as guardrails for this incredible new technology. Effective governance ensures AI consistently aligns with an organization’s best interests, safeguarding against potential risks while unlocking its full potential.
It’s time for our annual poll of experts on what they expect 2025 to bring in legal tech, including generative AI (of course), e-discovery, and more.
AI’s rapid market proliferation and regulatory expansion mirrors privacy’s, and businesses should model their contractual AI compliance on the successes of privacy law’s DPA and BAA.
Traditional keyword strategies and ranking tactics are losing ground to a more dynamic approach in which optimizing for search now means optimizing for every platform and user interaction. This evolution is appropriately being called “Search Everywhere Optimization.” The redefined SEO reflects how AI is not just changing how people find information but also how businesses need to think about visibility in an increasingly connected digital ecosystem.