Ensuring Adequate Coverage for 3D Printing, Sharing Economy and Other Emerging Industries
In an industry predicated on stability and predictability, new industries and technologies test industry tolerances and procedures. When loss occurs, policyholders in new or evolving industries often discover—by chance—gaps in the coverage offered by their legacy products, leading to costly disputes with their insurers.
August 18, 2017 at 01:15 PM
16 minute read
In an industry predicated on stability and predictability, new industries and technologies test industry tolerances and procedures. When loss occurs, policyholders in new or evolving industries often discover—by chance—gaps in the coverage offered by their legacy products, leading to costly disputes with their insurers. For example, 3D printing has evolved from emerging risk to manufacturing staple. As the industry grows however, it faces increased risk exposures including professional liability, products liability, workers' compensation and employers liability, business interruption and supply chain risks, intellectual property challenges, and, like all businesses, an increasing cyberrisk. However, most traditional or “legacy” insurance products fail to provide sufficient coverage for these risk exposures vis-à-vis the 3D printing industry, just as they fail to adequately protect businesses in other emerging industries that, along with their concomitant risks, simply did not exist when the legacy insurance products covering them were formulated.
Another example subject to similar coverage challenges involves the “sharing economy,” such as ridesharing or home-sharing services. Here, too, policyholders and additional insureds face significant coverage issues and gaps in coverage as their risk profiles grow and evolve.
This article addresses three key coverage concerns related to these and other emerging and evolving industries. Policyholders should consider these issues now, when procuring or renewing their insurance policies, to ensure that these potential gaps are adequately filled prior to a claim.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Tech Company Found a BIPA Defense in an Unexpected Place: Its Cyber Insurance Policy
As War Rages on, Cyber Insurers' 'War Exclusion Clauses' Face Reckoning
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250