Thursday, May 4, 2006
Lawyers are used to treating boilerplate as a kind of public good, swiping good language from agreements whenever they can. But they may not want to be quite so free. That’s the lesson of a recent decision discussed in Insurer’s Use of Narrative Policy Language From Another Insurer’s Policies Held to be Copyright Infringement, by Martin J. Bishop of Foley Lardner LLP in Chicago. The title is self-explanatory.