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

Press Release
Oct 9, 2026
Adam Topel Appointed Chair-Elect of the ABA’s TIPS Appellate Advocacy Committee

Press Release
Oct 8, 2026
Technology Service Corporation Closes on Acquisition by Blackstone-Backed Purchaser

Employment Law Observer
Oct 8, 2026
“We Didn’t Know” is No Longer an Employer Defense for Religious Accommodation Claims Under Title VII

In The News
Oct 8, 2026
Lucy Wang Analyzes What Insurers Need to Know About Two New California Laws

Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter
Oct 8, 2026
The Rise of Management Service Organizations: How Lawyers and Lawmakers are Responding

In The News
Oct 7, 2026
Scott Seaman Discusses Google’s Coverage Battle Over Social Media Addiction Claims

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Oct 6, 2026
Mixed Messages Ongoing as Courts Disagree Whether Texts Constitute “Calls” Under the TCPA






