Understanding Advertising Injury Insurance: Application to Protect against Business Torts: This Coverage Is Invaluable for Businesses, but Policy Forms Change and Courts Render Varied Rulings, Making It Necessary for Counsel to Be Alert

By Kardassakis, Jon P. | Defense Counsel Journal, April 2004 | Go to article overview

Understanding Advertising Injury Insurance: Application to Protect against Business Torts: This Coverage Is Invaluable for Businesses, but Policy Forms Change and Courts Render Varied Rulings, Making It Necessary for Counsel to Be Alert


Kardassakis, Jon P., Defense Counsel Journal


MOST businesses in the United States buy commercial general liability (CGL) insurance. From 1985 through at least 1998, the most commonly used forms for this insurance included coverage for "advertising injury" offenses committed in the course of "advertising your goods, products or services." In policies issued in and after 1998, the policies often provide coverage for "personal and advertising injury" liability, with a definition restricting the coverage for some of the offenses to those committed "in your advertisement." Unlike the more familiar coverage for bodily injury and property damage liability, this so-called "advertising injury" coverage is not triggered by the type of damage but instead applies to all damage caused by covered offenses.

This insurance can be of great benefit to a business sued for damages because of libel or slander, trademark, trade name or trade dress infringement, or suits alleging copyright infringement caused by the insured's advertising. There remains disagreement on certain key issues regarding the scope of the coverage, including intellectual property disputes, but recent cases seem to be establishing trends on some issues of broad significance.

WHAT IS "ADVERTISING"?

A fundamental question, which arose from the earliest form of the coverage, is: What is advertising? More particularly, does advertising include one-on-one solicitation of customers for--example, in person, by phone or mail? The strong trend is for courts to follow the common dictionary definition that "advertising" requires wide spread distribution to the public at large.

The California Supreme Court in 2003 held in Hameid v. National Fire Insurance of Hartford that "advertising injury" as used in the CGL policy "requires widespread promotion to the public such that one-on-one solicitation of a few customers does not give rise to the insurer's duty to defend" an underlying suit. (1) In Hameid, the insured opened a beauty salon and hired hairdressers who previously had worked for a competitor. On learning that its former employees were telephoning and sending mailers to its customers and that this was effective to cause them to switch to Hameid's salon, the competitor filed suit alleging, among other things, misappropriation of trade secrets, including use of the competitor's customer list. The insured's policy included coverage for "advertising injury" arising from "misappropriation of advertising ideas or style of doing business."

The insurer refused to defend, and the insured sued. The trial court granted summary judgment to the insurer, concluding that the underlying suit did not involve advertising. The California Court of Appeal reversed. (2) Relying on New Hampshire Insurance Co. v. Foxfire Inc., (3) it concluded that in the context of a "start-up beauty salon," the solicitation of customers through telephone calls and mailers was sufficient to trigger a duty to defend.

Recognizing that this was contrary to the weight of authority from other jurisdictions, the California Supreme Court reversed, rejected Foxfire and joined the growing majority of courts holding that one-on-one solicitation is not "advertising." This decision likely will prove to be very influential in American courts.

The Supreme Court of Vermont reached a similar conclusion in 1996 in Select Designs Ltd. v. Union Mutual Fire Insurance Co. (4) A competitor sued the insured and several of its officers and employees, alleging that one of the competitor's former employees took proprietary information, including a customer list, then joined the insured's business and tried to lure the competitor's customers to the new employer by using the proprietary information. The insured argued that the term "advertising" is broad enough to include soliciting customers and that there was a misappropriation of advertising ideas via use of its customer list.

The court reviewed cases from numerous jurisdictions that had defined "advertising" as "the widespread distribution of promotional material to the public at large," and it adopted this "majority view. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Understanding Advertising Injury Insurance: Application to Protect against Business Torts: This Coverage Is Invaluable for Businesses, but Policy Forms Change and Courts Render Varied Rulings, Making It Necessary for Counsel to Be Alert
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.