The build was fine. Their business still stopped.Founded by a software developer who owns a software company.

Technology E&O

Claims that the software failed to perform, was late, or was wrongly implemented.

Without it — The defining claim in this trade and outside general liability entirely.

Cyber liability

A breach of your systems or of client data you hold.

Without it — Holding a client’s data makes their breach your incident.

Intellectual property

Infringement claims over code, libraries, licenses or a product name.

Without it — One incompatible open-source license can force a rewrite.

Contractual liability

The indemnities and liability caps in client master service agreements.

Without it — Enterprise contracts routinely require limits nobody checked before signing.

General liability and property

The ordinary business exposures, plus equipment.

Without it — Frequently the only policy a young software company holds.

Group health and benefits

Medical, dental and vision for a small team, marketed rather than rolled over.

Without it — Developers are recruited constantly and the benefits page is part of the offer they compare.

Our contracts cap our liability. Why buy coverage?

Because a cap limits what you might ultimately pay and does nothing about getting there. Defense costs on a disputed project are frequently the entire loss, and they start immediately. Caps are also challenged, are unenforceable in some circumstances, and bind only the party who signed, not a third party harmed downstream. A cap and a policy do different jobs and enterprise clients increasingly require both.

What tech E&O actually answers

Do we need cyber as well as E&O?

Usually yes, and most technology programs put them on one combined form so the two cannot argue. The split is simple: cyber answers a breach of data, E&O answers a failure of the service. A deployment that takes a client offline is E&O. Ransomware in your environment that exposes their records is cyber. An incident that does both, which is common, is much easier to claim when one insurer holds both.

We use AI models in the product. Does that change anything?

It is the live question in this class and worth raising rather than hoping. Underwriters are asking whether model output reaches an end user unreviewed, whether it informs decisions with legal or financial consequence, what training data was used, and what the terms say about accuracy. Some forms now carry AI-specific wording and a few carry exclusions. Describe how it is actually used: a drafting aid and an automated decision engine are not the same risk, and being vague reads as the worse one.

I use AI coding tools. Does that create a claim my E&O would not cover?

Two claims. Code an assistant produced that reproduces licensed or copyrighted source is an infringement claim, and code that fails is a failure-to-perform claim; both sit inside a technology E&O policy unless it carries a 2026 AI exclusion. The practical cover is the same as for any code. Review what ships, keep the repository history, and use a tool whose enterprise terms include an IP indemnity. Then ask the carrier for affirmative AI wording so the policy says what the tool’s terms say.

IP infringement coverage for code and content

A client’s MSA lists insurance we do not have. What do we need?

Usually technology E&O and cyber at the limits in the insurance exhibit, which for enterprise clients typically run $1M to $5M each, plus general liability and workers comp. Send us the exhibit itself rather than a summary, because the sentences around the limits decide whether the certificate is accepted. Additional insured status, primary and non-contributory wording, the notice of cancellation and how long coverage must last after the contract ends all sit there.

Tech contract insurance requirements, clause by clause