Afis Computer Programs' title='Afis Computer Programs' />Is Computer Data Tangible Property or Subject to Physical Loss or DamagePart 2. In our last article, we pointed out that in the. Nor has. there been any definitive answer from the courts as to whether computer data. We found the lack of definitive case. Without definitive guidance from the courts, many companies are asking what. This article will. Afis Computer Programs' title='Afis Computer Programs' />What Can the Policyholder Do at Renewal Time As we showed in Part 1 of this article, the case. Still, without more definitive guidance. As a result, some buyers of business. Express Language to Address Computer Data Losses. Some companies have found that the simplest way to address the question of. This strategy is the mirror image of some technology errors and omissions. Fingerprinting Merit Badge Workbook This workbook can help you but you still need to read the merit badge pamphlet. This Workbook can help you organize your thoughts. Nonprofit site dedicated to fingerprints, fingerprinting, Latent Print Examination, AFIS automated fingerprint identification systems, latent print examination. CHAPTER 6 SCIENCE NO. THE USE OF ELECTRONICS ELECTRICITY. Developments in fiber optics, computers, electronic communications, nanotechnology, biochips neuro. E O policies, which expressly state that data, programs, and software are not tangible property and therefore. E O policies. The Automated Fingerprint Identification System AFIS is a biometric identification ID methodology that uses digital imaging technology to obtain, store, and. What is OPUS This Online Positioning User Service OPUS provides simplified access to highaccuracy National Spatial Reference System NSRS coordinates. As technology advances so does the modern methods of evidence extraction. Heres the top 10 modern forensic science technologies used in the field today. Mike Coburn Soldier Five Pdf Reader. Alameda County Sheriffs Office Historical Facts. In 1853, Andrew Broder was elected the first Sheriff of Alameda County. The first known original records of. QZvAdLGI/UGTMUx3VDWI/AAAAAAAABQI/QpFVqE7fIug/s1600/iStock_000004087682XSmall.jpg' alt='Afis Computer Programs' title='Afis Computer Programs' />First party property claims often involve some tangible medium that can be. Thus, the threshold. To address this concern, some companies are. This simple modification, however, may not be enough to ensure adequate coverage. In the context of a first party property loss, the. Nearly as important is the question of how much coverage the policy affords. NTY2WDg0OA==/z/iq0AAOSwYHxWF7lM/$_32.JPG?set_id=880000500F' alt='Afis Computer Programs' title='Afis Computer Programs' />Valuation provisions can be critical when it comes to computer data losses. Some policies contain language that limits coverage for loss of information. When both the insurer and the. Another wrinkle in the valuation of computer data losses is the cost of establishing. Some commercial property insurance. But what ifafter. Policyholders. may want to negotiate a provision granting coverage for the sometimes substantial. And the desire to address these issues should not be limited to commercial. Policyholders should consider addressing the same issue in. Some crime policies limit coverage to loss of money. Some crime policies also have very narrow. And all crime policies we have reviewed to date lack specific, and favorable. The foregoing paragraphs discuss only a sampling of the issues that are likely. Space does not permit a full. As always, an insurance buyer. Some Insurers Respond Negatively. It is true that some companies have been successful in negotiating express. But there is no guarantee that all insurers will agree to include. In fact, a few insurersspurred by new computer virus andor computer. Thus, at least some insurers are taking the bull by the horns and are themselves. When an insurer proposes to add a new computer virus andor computer data. Some of the new exclusions only apply to losses caused by a computer. The fact that such an exclusion is contained in the policy may imply. But some insurers are going beyond simply excluding losses caused. Contoh Soal Ujian Sertifikasi Microsoft'>Contoh Soal Ujian Sertifikasi Microsoft. Some of the new exclusions expressly disclaim coverage for. Each policyholders situation is different, and each will be faced with a. In the meantime, some policyholders will be faced with claims triggering. What might those. What Can the Policyholder Do at Claim Time Companies that have been proactive in addressing coverage for computer data. But there remain many companies that have not yet even thought to bring e commerce. And even those. companies that are negotiating favorable provisions covering computer data losses. Without any clear answer from the courts, coverage for any individual claim. Still. a policyholder faced with the insurers denial of coverage will have ammunition. Arguments in Favor of Coverage for Computer Data Losses. In the case of a third party liability claim submitted under a commercial. CGL insurance policy, the case law discussed in our last. Many computer. data claims can be characterized as claims involving damage to the medium in. Thus, a policyholder may argue that when data is. This same strategy could be successful in first party claims. Altering the arrangement of electrons on a disk or hard drive is a. One fact that weighs in favor of policyholders is that most insurers have. Although some insurers introduction of computer data exclusions. At the very least. The Tax Cases. Faced with a scarcity of decisions interpreting insurance policy language. A court that is called on to decide whether computer data is subject to taxes. Still, although courts in tax cases have reached answers to. Thus, even. if the tax cases can be considered predictive of whether the loss of computer. For example, in South Central Bell Telephone Co. Barthelemy, 6. 43 S2d 1. La 1. 99. 4, one of the leading cases in this. Louisiana Supreme Court held that certain software programs were taxable. Central to the courts reasoning was the fact. As. the court explained,When stored on magnetic tape, disc, or computer chip, this software. The software at issue is not merely. The purchaser. of computer software desires nor receives mere knowledge, but rather receives. One cannot escape the fact that software, recorded. Id. After Barthelemy, the Utah Supreme Court suggested. South Central. Utah Tel. Assn. v Auditing Div. Utah State Tax Commn., 9. P2d 2. 18. 2. 23 2. Utah 1. 99. 7. Courts elsewhere, however, have held otherwise. For example, in Northeast Datacom, Inc. City of Wallingford. A2d 6. 88, 6. 91 9. Conn 1. 98. 9, the Connecticut Supreme Court determined that. The court drew a sharp distinction between tangible and intangible. An Arizona court likewise held that its state property tax scheme, long construed. See Honeywell Information Sys., Inc. Maricopa County. 5. P2d 8. 01, 8. 03 Ariz App 1. The view that computer data is not tangible property is not confined to. Just last year, a Florida appellate court, though conceding. See Gilreath v General Electric Co., 7. S2d 7. 05. 7. 08 0. Fla App 2. 00. 0. Thus, even if the tax cases can be considered as precedent for the questions. Also, other factors make it difficult to gauge whether courts attempting to. The outcome of a tax case may rest on the attitude of a states courts. A presumption against taxation may be the deciding factor if the court determines. But the precedents exist. Summary and Upcoming Articles. We hope that this article proves useful for policyholders, brokers and others. We will continue to monitor these issues, both from a claims. In the meantime, we feel compelled to turn our attention to two different. In our next article we will address the question. Business to Business and Business to Consumer. Do professional liability policies cover claims arising. B2. B and B2. C e commerce activities covered professional. Our upcoming article represents an evolution of our thinking as expressed. The article after that will provide a report on what we are seeing in the. As reported earlier, and as alluded. We believe that any policyholder who is not absolutely certain that. Otherwise the policyholder might get blindsided at the renewal of. This article was written by Catherine. Rivard and edited by Michael Rossi. Senior Risk Management Counsel at Insurance Law Group. Inc., a law firm providing legal services to middle market and multinational. She advises on initial placements and renewals including. She previously was a partner of Troop Steuber Pasich. Reddick Tobey, LLP. Ms. Rivard has represented policyholders in insurance. She developed the first arguments for personal. More recently. she wrote briefs in Alpha Therapeutic Corp. Home Insurance. Co., 9. Cal App 4th 1. 33. Ms. Rivard is a member of the State Bar of California and. American and International Bar Associations. She earned her JD degree in. Northwestern University and her AB degree in political science, cum. Occidental College. Ms. Rivard can be reached by e mail.