Losses or charges related to personal injury or property damage are excluded, as they are likely to be covered by a CGL directive. Also excluded are losses resulting from intentional offences, remedies for findings, anti-competitive or anti-competitive behaviour, and any circumstances that the policyholder could reasonably believe, at the time the policy came into force, ”that this may lead to a civil proceeding in which a violation is reprimanded.” (By adding) Therefore, the coverage is highly adjusted and must be managed responsibly by the policyholder in order to include all the valuable intellectual property rights of the policyholder and to list all licensees as additional policyholders. Intellectual property owners, licensees and their advisors should therefore ask themselves some key questions regarding the insurance of contractual claims. As companies place more emphasis on IT solutions, it is increasingly likely that some software solutions will be critical to the business. As a result, the stakes are much higher if the software fails or doesn`t work as promised. Contractual claims may result from a software provider`s breach of its obligations under the software license agreement, for example. B in case of non-compliance or defects of products or services. Losses may result from data loss, loss of delivery to major customers, or a late pay due to software products or services gone wrong. Error and exit insurance systems can lead to low-capitalized software providers to protect their customers from potentially catastrophic losses. Companies need to know what insurance may be available to protect them from contractual claims when such claims occur. Both customers and computer software providers should consider what insurance products are available on the market, whether they should have certain insurance in their own portfolio, and whether they should require other contracting parties to have special insurance to protect themselves against the significant risks that may arise in the course of their contracts. Tessera subsequently filed a lawsuit against PTI`s customers by the International Trade Commission (ITC) claiming that products packaged by PTI and sold to their customers infringed Tessera`s patents.

See Powertech, 4:11-cv- 06121, point 124, p. 2. In response, PTI opened a separate proceeding in federal court, in which some of Tessera`s allegations of infringement were raised, including: (i) the ITC complaint violated the selection clause of the licensing forum, which required dispute resolution in the Northern District of California; (ii) Tessera does not have 60 days of ITP to remedy the infringement, as stipulated in the licensing agreement; and (iii) Tessera attempted to block the importation of PTI products which it stated were not properly authorized. See Powertech, 4:11-cv-06121, cf. 176, 2-21. In addition, the PTI issued a judgment of finding in which it invoked ”patent abuse”. Id., 56-78. Standard insurance for general liability insurance, which offered the main form of insurance coverage to businesses, proved insufficient with respect to intellectual property risks, which are generally included in contractual compensation clauses in software licenses. Many software providers are not ideal insurers from the insurance company`s point of view. They generally have no experience in insurance and business risk management, and tend to be risk takers rather than inconsistent.

As a result, insurance companies have begun to market new policies offering broader ip coverage and coverage for defamation, invasions of privacy, piracy and viruses.