Restoring Balance to the IP/Insurance Interface
While some counsel may object that there is less predictability associated with the active pursuit of intellectual property interests, then true of product launches that create liability exposure, the differences are simply matters of degree. New product launches that create exposure are driven by a company’s marketing programs, as are core advertisements that create liability for intellectual property and antitrust risks. While some companies may elect to self-insure at high levels to reduce premium expense in this area, before that decision is made, it makes sense to look at what benefits might have already been available under existing policies for previously litigated antitrust and intellectual property claims.
Most major corporations have procedures, either through existing personnel or through the aid of consultants, that:
• Identify and evaluate the full range of IP;
• Determine the level of patent, copyright or trademark infringement by the company or others;
• Reduce exposure to legal action by managing risk;
• Protect residual risk through insurance.
The challenge comes in the last component through identifying products in the marketplace that can create similar opportunities for reimbursement and designing protocols to assure that the maximum policy benefits available to the company are properly secured.
Most major corporations have procedures, either through existing personnel or through the aid of consultants, that:
• Identify and evaluate the full range of IP;
• Determine the level of patent, copyright or trademark infringement by the company or others;
• Reduce exposure to legal action by managing risk;
• Protect residual risk through insurance.
The challenge comes in the last component through identifying products in the marketplace that can create similar opportunities for reimbursement and designing protocols to assure that the maximum policy benefits available to the company are properly secured.
