Insurer Wants to Cut Hulu Loose

     LOS ANGELES (CN) – Hartford Insurance asked the Superior Court to declare that it need not cover Hulu for a class action that claims the streaming website tracks user activity.



     Two class actions were filed against Hulu and consolidated, alleging that it “engaged in various ‘tracking exploits,’ which allowed it to track users’ online activity through the use of cookies and other identifiers placed on users’ computers, and that it obtained and misused users’ personal information,” Hartford says in its complaint.
     It seeks a declaration that its “policies do not provide coverage for the claims against Hulu,” that it has no duty to defend Hulu, and that it “owes no indemnity and no duty to settle.”
     Hartford claims it is not liable for defending the class action because the lawsuit does not allege “personal and advertising injury” or “property damage” within the meaning of any of the insurance policies.
     Hartford also claims that no coverage is available “under the 2009-2010 policies because the period covered by the complaint does not begin until March 2011.”
     “Because none of the allegations in the Garvey [class action] suit fall within the coverage provided by any of the policies, Hartford is not obligated to defend or indemnify Hulu with respect to the Garvey suit and Hartford has no obligation to satisfy any judgment that may be entered or to pay any settlement that may be reached in the Garvey suit,” the insurer says.
     Hartford Casualty is represented by David Simantob with Tressler LP.

%d bloggers like this: