Given what seems to be a never-ending flood of intellectual property litigation, it is important to remember that insurance coverage is available for some types of claims. For example, coverage may be available through the "advertising injury" provisions contained in commercial general liability (CGL) policies.
However, the analysis of "advertising injury" claims can be tricky. A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, Interstate Bakeries Corp. v. OneBeacon Insurance Co., shows why.
First, these claims tend to be fact-sensitive, and the analysis can be difficult if the policy leaves key terms undefined, or defines them in ways that are confusing to the average policyholder.
Second, there seems to be a tendency toward narrow interpretations of advertising injury provisions, despite the existence of well-established rules of insurance policy interpretation that favor the policyholder in close cases.
