MINIMIZING EXPOSURE:
Most Intellectual Property litigation is complicated
factually, and can be very costly. Availability of funds for
defense against claims often dictates the success or failure of
such a defense. Moreover, in the Intellectual Property arena,
the corporate form does not always provide protection against
personal liability, as least for those who are actively managing
the business. The risks involved are very real. This risk
should be covered by insurance. As explained herein,
Intellectual Property coverage is often available under the
Advertising Injury clause of the Commercial General Liability
policies, offered by many insurance carriers. It is absolutely
necessary for the executive to periodically review the adequacy
of his Intellectual Property insurance coverage, especially at
time of renewal.
A Corporation is a fictitious legal person. It can
only operate pursuant to the terms of its Articles of
Incorporation and Bylaws. Such Bylaws generally require that all
major decisions require a resolution of the directors and/or
shareholders, either at noticed meetings or by unanimous written
consent of the directors and/or shareholders. Such resolutions
must be recorded and kept as part of the corporate records. An
inadequate corporate record is often raised as grounds for
"piercing the corporate veil", i.e. for holding shareholders
liable corporate liabilities.
Examples of major corporate decisions requiring
meetings or unanimous written consent include:
Your corporate Bylaws usually provide for annual
meetings of the Shareholders and Directors. It is important that
you observe this annual requirement, and keep proper records of
any resolutions made at the meeting.
For a California corporation with 35 shareholders or
less, the corporation may be formed as, or be converted into, a
statutory close corporation. This confers upon the shareholders
much greater power and flexibility in managing the business. The
shareholders could function pretty much as owners of the business
- like partners, while retaining corporate limited liability
protection.
In other corporations, the failure to observe corporate
procedures and formalities (e.g., re holding meetings of
shareholders and Board of Directors) may result in the
shareholders being held personally liable for the debts and
liabilities of the corporation. The failure to observe such
formalities in a close corporation cannot be considered as
tending to establish shareholder liability for corporate debts,
if there is a properly drafted Shareholders Agreement in place
[California Corporations Code Section 300(e)].
The reality of running a busy business sometimes
dictates the unwitting neglect of meetings, minutes, notices,
etc., and other record keeping duties for maintaining the
corporate formalities. The Close Corporation is an advantageous
vehicle for limiting your liability by dispensing with such
formalities as much as possible.
However, there are limitations and contravening
considerations in deciding whether to go the close corporation
route. Consult your attorney before you make the conversion.
Other common caveats in maintaining corporate
separateness, and limited liabilities for the shareholders,
include at least the following:
The following are two common coverage forms for
Advertising Injury coverage, found in Broad Form CGL policies:
This coverage form, which is currently used only
by a few major insurance carriers (either in a special
endorsement, or as part of the broad form CGL policy), defines
"Advertising Injury" to mean "injury arising out of an offense
committed during the policy period occurring in the course of the
insured's advertising activities, if such an injury arises out of
libel, slander, defamation, violation of right of privacy,
piracy, unfair competition, or infringement of copyright, title
or slogan".
Copyright infringement is expressly covered. Unfair
competition, which typically is undefined in the policy, has been
held by the Courts to have the broad statutory meaning set forth
in California Business and Professions Code Section 17200. Under
this interpretation, unfair competition could cover most
Intellectual Property claim. Further, at least some California
Courts have ruled that the term "piracy" covers patent
infringement.
Most carriers who currently use this pre-1986 ISO form,
also include exclusionary clauses purporting to exclude trademark
and trade name cases. However, it is questionable whether such
exclusion is effective, if the term "unfair competition" still
remains.
Sometimes an "Umbrella" or Excess Liability Policy,
having this broad pre-1986 ISO form language, could be purchased
over a more restrictive underlying policy.
A substantial number of insurance carriers have now
adopted the new ISO form, where "Advertising Injury" is defined
as follows:
It is therefore apparent that not all policies are the
same: some are more favorable than others.
The insurance policy should also be examined with
respect to "Property Damage", and "Contractual Liability"
coverage, for application towards Intellectual Property claims.
Insurance coverage law is contract law. At least in
California, contract law favors the "unsophisticated" insured,
vis-a-vis a sophisticated entity such as an insurance carrier,
when the carrier sells the insured a standard, pre-printed
policy, on a "take it or leave it", and non-negotiable basis.
Under this scenario, whenever there is ambiguity in the
insurance policy, the policy language would be interpreted in a
way most favorable to the "unsophisticated" insured. This
premise dictates special caution when dealing with the insurance
companies, and its agents and representatives. Ignorance could
indeed be bliss in some cases. Get help if you do not know what
you are doing.
Not all policies are the same: often one with better
coverage can be purchased for a lower premium. Carriers adjust
their premiums in part based on historical experience. Get
quotes, ask for sample policies and compare them before you buy.
Carriers could, and do, change their coverage forms
over time. It is up to the insureds to remain vigilant, and
review all riders and notices received from the carrier. At
least one local insurance carrier that we know of has attempted
to remove "Advertising Injury" coverage by a disclaimer in the
form of a rider.
Most policies provide that the carrier also has a duty
to defend. The California Courts have generally ruled that the
duty to defend is very broad. Whenever there is a possibility
for coverage, the carrier will need to tender a defense for the
entire case, at least until it has been determined that there is
no coverage (e.g. in a Declaratory Judgment action by the
carrier).
In general, insurance covers "occurrences", where the
harm caused is unintended. The law is unsettled in this area.
Please beware that the policy may not ultimately cover all
claims, especially those related to willful infringement.
Insurance carriers are sensitive to the fact that
Intellectual Property litigation could get very expensive. They
will at times agree to "buy out" a policy, by payment to the
insured.
The duty to defend is usually triggered only if the
opponent asks for damages in the Complaint. It could be argued
that demand for attorney fees (typical boiler-plate language in
most complaint and counterclaims include such a demand) is a
demand for damages. On the offensive end, if an injunction alone
would serve the interest of the plaintiff, you may wish to
narrowly tailor the claim, so as to avoid triggering insurance
coverage for your opponent.
Under the CUMIS decision in California, the insured has
the right to select his own counsel, whenever there is a
potential conflict of interest between the carrier and the
insured. As an oversimplification, such potential for conflict
exists whenever the carrier is providing the defense under a
"reservation of rights" (where they send you a letter saying that
the defense is provided only on a conditional basis). This is an
important right: it is your case, and you need to be comfortable
working with your own attorney, whose competence you know about,
instead of some faceless lawyer assigned by the insurance
company.
Some carriers are fighting this interpretation. The
insurance lobby has also successfully caused the enactment of
California Civil Code 2860, which in certain cases allow the
carrier to pay for only a portion of what the insured's counsel
charges. The application of $2860 is still an unsettled area of
the law.
You can buy the appropriate insurance or go bare. In
the latter case, the net effect is that you are insuring
yourself. Availability of appropriate coverage allows much more
flexibility in planning the business, and in remaining
competitive.
It is an easy choice.
CORPORATE FORMALITIES AND INSURANCE COVERAGE
by
Sheldon Mak Rose & Anderson
Please review your corporate records. Were there any
unrecorded corporate transactions? If you need help in
completing your corporate records, go see your attorney.
"Advertising Injury" means injury arising out of one or
more of the following offenses:
Copyright infringement is covered. It could also be
argued (although the success could not be predicted) that both
paragraphs 1.a and 1.c both cover trademark and trade name
infringement. This coverage form also does not have coverage for
unfair competition, and/or piracy. Moreover, some commercial
general liability policies based on this ISO form, also carries a
specific exclusion of trademark and trade name cases. Some
carriers have recently modified their 1986 ISO form based policy,
to further restrict the Copyright coverage to "advertising
activities" only.
Sheldon Mak Rose & Anderson PC
100 E. Corson Street, Third Floor
Pasadena, California 91103-3842
626-796-4000
626-795-6321 fax