Publication is not Publishing: Ninth Circuit Says Insurer Must Defend Privacy Suit
Insights for Insurers Alert | 1 min read
Mar 18, 2020
Reversing a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the insurer, the Ninth Circuit recently held that an insurer was required to defend a putative class action alleging that the insured retailer collected and sold customers' personal information in violation of California's Song-Beverly Credit Card Act. Brighton Collectibles, LLC v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, No. 18-56403, 2:18-cv-01107-JFW-GJS (9th Cir. March 16, 2020).
The insured argued that the claim triggered its personal injury coverage, which applies to personal injury caused by an offense arising out of the insured's business, which includes "oral or written publication of material that violates a person's right of privacy." Based on California Supreme Court precedent holding that the overriding purpose of the Credit Card Act is to protect the personal privacy of consumers, the Ninth Circuit found that the class action alleged an invasion of privacy sufficient to trigger the insurer's duty to defend. In so ruling, the court rejected the insurer's assertion that coverage was barred by the policies' exclusions for "advertising, publishing, broadcasting or telecasting done by or for" the insured. The court stated: "The word 'publishing' in this coverage exclusion cannot be read to have the same meaning as the word 'publication' in the personal injury provision. Such a reading would exclude coverage for virtually any publication over which [the insured] might realistically be sued, rendering the policies' express coverage for publications that violate privacy rights practically meaningless."
The court also noted that the "grouping of 'publishing' with 'advertising…, broadcasting or telecasting' in the coverage exclusion suggests that the exclusion applies only to broad, public-facing marketing activities." Consequently, the plaintiff's allegation that the insured sold customer information to select third-party marketers constituted "publication" of the information within the meaning of the personal injury coverage grant, but not widespread public-facing "publishing" within the meaning of the exclusion.
Related People
Related Capabilities
Featured Insights

In The News
Aug 24, 2026
David Schultz Reviews a Humorous—But Important—FDCPA Procedural Ruling

Press Release
Aug 20, 2026
115 Hinshaw Lawyers Recognized in 2027 Editions of The Best Lawyers in America® and Ones to Watch®

Press Release
Aug 20, 2026
Hinshaw’s Landmark Tower Client Project Receives 2026 Top Projects Award

Press Release
Aug 19, 2026
Fernando Rivera-Maissonet Elected as HNBA Region II Governor and Board of Governors Member

Employment Law Observer
Aug 17, 2026
Massachusetts’ First Paid Family Medical Leave Act Verdict Yields $4.75 Million Award

Press Release
Aug 13, 2026
Lauren Campisi Recognized as a 2026 BTI Client Service All-Star by BTI Consulting Group

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Aug 13, 2026
How Will Banks Be Impacted by the Proposed Regulation O Amendments?

Press Release
Aug 12, 2026
William Cook Honored With the Distinguished Service Award by the Chicago Bar Association

Webinar
Aug 12, 2026
John Ryan Presents on "Understanding what is Covered Under the TCPA Today"

In The News
Aug 12, 2026
Scott Seaman Analyzes California’s New Pleading Standards for Excess Insurance Policy Claims



