AI Vendor Agreements: Liability-Shifting Clauses and the Insurance Exclusions That Compound Them

Anthony B. Crawford
Anthony B. Crawford
Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP

Anthony B. Crawford chairs the Insurance Coverage Law Practice at Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP in New York, where he advocates for policyholders in complex insurance recovery disputes. Across more than 13 years of practice, he has helped clients in industries ranging from banking and financial institutions to religious organizations secure over $100 million in judgments and settlements in state and federal courts, mediations, and domestic and international arbitrations.

Jason M. Loring
Jason M. Loring
Jones Walker LLP

Jason M. Loring is a partner in the Corporate Practice Group at Jones Walker LLP in Atlanta and a member of the firm's commercial transactions team. He co-leads the firm's privacy, data strategy, and artificial intelligence team, counseling clients on data privacy and protection, cybersecurity, data governance, breach response, artificial intelligence adoption and risk mitigation, and strategic technology and vendor transactions.

Live Video-Broadcast: August 12, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

The policy you assumed covered AI just excluded it — and the vendor contract capped what's left

This is not last year's AI procurement environment. Verisk ISO has introduced generative AI exclusion endorsements, and carriers are adding their own AI exclusions. The era of “silent AI” coverage is ending. At the same time, AI vendors press liability caps and narrow indemnities into their agreements.

The result is a no-man's land where the two compound. Accept a vendor's liability cap, and the vendor's exposure ends where your client's loss begins. Assume the insurance tower responds, and a generative AI exclusion may bar the claim. When an AI system fails, infringes intellectual property, exposes confidential information, or produces inaccurate results, the customer holds the consequences.

Attendees leave with practitioner work product. You will audit the full insurance tower and indemnity agreements for AI-related gaps. You will evaluate the emerging standalone AI liability market and the coverage arguments that remain viable. You will recognize the governance controls underwriters now require. And you will negotiate liability caps, indemnities, data rights, and ownership of prompts and outputs before disputes arise.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • Silent AI Coverage Ends
    How the new generative AI exclusions introduced by Verisk ISO and other carriers end “silent AI” coverage and reshape the insurance market.
  • Auditing for AI Gaps
    Why policyholders must audit their full insurance tower and indemnity agreements for AI-related gaps, including where the emerging standalone AI liability market fits.
  • Governance Controls
    How adopting the established governance controls underwriters now require benefits policyholders and aligns risk-transfer strategy with actual insurance availability.
  • Caps and Indemnities
    How to negotiate liability caps that reflect AI-specific risk and draft effective AI indemnification provisions before AI-related disputes arise.
  • Data and IP Rights
    How to protect data, prompts, outputs, intellectual property rights, and confidentiality when negotiating AI vendor agreements and renewals.
  • Vendor Risk Management
    How to manage AI vendor performance, compliance, and operational risk through subcontractor provisions, audit rights, and evolving regulatory compliance obligations.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: August 12, 2026 

  • 1:00 pm – 3:10 pm Eastern
  • 12:00 pm – 2:10 pm Central
  • 11:00 am – 1:10 pm Mountain
  • 10:00 am – 12:10 pm Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Anthony B. Crawford, Chair | Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP

Anthony B. Crawford chairs the Insurance Coverage Law Practice at Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP in New York, where he advocates for policyholders in complex insurance recovery disputes. Across more than 13 years of practice, he has helped clients in industries ranging from banking and financial institutions to religious organizations secure over $100 million in judgments and settlements in state and federal courts, mediations, and domestic and international arbitrations.

  • Education & Credentials

Anthony earned his J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania Law School in 2012, where he served as a Senior Editor of the University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, and completed a Certificate in Business and Public Policy at the Wharton School the same year. He received his B.A.S. from the University of Pennsylvania in 1998. He is admitted to practice in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, as well as before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and federal district courts in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Anthony was selected as a Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) Fellow in 2024 and was named a “Rising Star” by New York Metro Super Lawyers from 2020 to 2022. Earlier in his career, he was recognized as Pro Bono Volunteer of the Year by the Penn Housing Rights Project (2011) and the Penn Employment Advocacy Project (2012). He also serves as a guest lecturer at Columbia Business School, where he speaks on the legal implications of artificial intelligence.

  • Professional Involvement

Anthony writes and speaks frequently on insurance coverage issues affecting commercial policyholders. His recent work includes a May 2026 article in The Legal Intelligencer on the continued rise of generative AI exclusions in commercial insurance policies, a February 2026 piece in the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance on the Delaware Supreme Court’s affirmation of D&O coverage, and articles in the New York Law Journal, the Daily Business Review, Attorney at Law Magazine, and 7X24 Exchange Magazine. He has also presented CLE programming on navigating insurance coverage for property risks.

  • Experience

Anthony advises clients on virtually every major line of coverage, including commercial general liability, directors and officers, errors and omissions, cyber, products recall, property, and builders’ risk policies. His representative matters include a multimillion-dollar Superstorm Sandy recovery for a national rail carrier, professional liability recoveries for large financial institutions, COVID-19 business interruption and civil authority claims, portfolio-company recoveries for private equity clients, a favorable recovery for a global agribusiness and food company for plant damage in China, and an international arbitration award arising from a yacht fire. Before joining Olshan, he was a partner in the Insurance Recovery Practice at Reed Smith LLP. Prior to his legal career, Anthony served for nearly 12 years as a United States Marine Corps officer and helicopter pilot, holding positions specializing in project management and operations training.

 

Jason M. Loring, Partner | Jones Walker LLP

Jason M. Loring is a partner in the Corporate Practice Group at Jones Walker LLP in Atlanta and a member of the firm’s commercial transactions team. He co-leads the firm’s privacy, data strategy, and artificial intelligence team, counseling clients on data privacy and protection, cybersecurity, data governance, breach response, artificial intelligence adoption and risk mitigation, and strategic technology and vendor transactions.

  • Education & Credentials

Jason earned his J.D. from Wake Forest University School of Law in 2006, where he served on the editorial staff of the Wake Forest Law Review, and his B.A. in history from the College of Charleston in 2003. He is admitted to practice in Georgia. He holds the Certified Information Privacy Manager (CIPM) and Certified Information Privacy Professional, United States (CIPP/US) credentials from the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP).

  • Recognition & Leadership

The IAPP has named Jason a Fellow of Information Privacy (FIP). Before returning to private practice, he held senior legal leadership roles at global organizations, serving as senior vice president, deputy chief legal officer, and global head of privacy and data protection at Vialto Partners; as chief privacy and security counsel, Americas, at EY; as assistant general counsel, corporate services, at E*TRADE Financial Corporation; and as counsel, global enterprise solutions, at ADP.

  • Professional Involvement

Jason serves on the board of directors of the Atlanta Bar Association’s Privacy and Cybersecurity Section, on the executive committee of the State Bar of Georgia’s Privacy & Technology Law Section, and on the State Bar of Georgia’s Special Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Technology. His publications include pieces in Bloomberg Law on generative AI vendor risk in banking, Law360, and the Chambers Global Practice Guide chapters on healthcare AI, and he presents regularly on AI governance, privacy, and third-party AI risk.

  • Experience

Jason advises publicly traded corporations, privately held companies, government entities, and not-for-profits on the global data privacy, data protection, and artificial intelligence laws that shape their operations, including the EU and UK GDPR, HIPAA, the GLBA, the EU AI Act, the NIST Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework, and US state statutes such as the CCPA, the CPRA, and the BIPA. He helps clients build global privacy and AI governance and compliance programs, negotiate vendor and outsourcing agreements and contracts, and respond to data breaches, ransomware attacks, and other cybersecurity incidents. He began his legal career in private practice in Atlanta.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Insuring AI Risk After the 2026 Generative AI Exclusion Endorsements | 1:00pm – 2:00pm

This session will discuss the generative AI exclusions introduced by Verisk ISO and other carrier specific exclusions and their impact on the insurance market. The discussions will touch on will auditing a client’s full insurance tower for AI-related gaps, evaluating the emerging standalone AI liability market, and offering insights on the no-man’s land created when vendor liability caps and insurance exclusions compound each other. Attendees will leave able to identify coverage arguments that remain viable, recognize governance controls that underwriters now require, and align contractual risk-transfer strategy with actual insurance availability. It will cover the end of “Silent AI” coverage and introduction of new AI exclusions, why policyholders must audit their insurance programs and indemnity agreements for AI-related gaps, and how policyholders benefit from adopting established governance controls.

BREAK | 2:00pm – 2:10pm 

SESSION 2 – Negotiating AI Vendor Agreements: Liability Caps, Indemnities, and Data Rights | 2:10pm – 3:10pm 

As organizations rapidly adopt generative AI platforms and AI-enabled software, the vendor agreement often determines who ultimately bears the legal and financial consequences when an AI system fails, infringes intellectual property, exposes confidential information, or produces inaccurate results. This session examines the contractual provisions that deserve the greatest scrutiny during AI procurement and renewal negotiations. Attendees will learn practical strategies for negotiating liability limitations, indemnification obligations, ownership of prompts and outputs, confidentiality protections, subcontractor provisions, audit rights, and evolving regulatory compliance obligations before AI-related disputes arise. It will cover negotiating liability caps that reflect AI-specific risk, drafting effective AI indemnification provisions, protecting data, prompts, outputs, and intellectual property rights, and managing AI vendor performance, compliance, and operational risk.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 General Hours

Receive CLE credit in Florida via attorney submission.
Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Indiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
Using AI in Your Law Practice: A Step-by-Step Guide
Using AI in Your Law Practice: A Step-by-Step Guide Wed, July 22, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay
State National Security Law and Role Conflicts
State National Security Law and Role Conflicts Thu, July 23, 2026
Live Webcast
iPad for Lawyers: The Complete Mobile Practice Toolkit
iPad for Lawyers: The Complete Mobile Practice Toolkit Thu, July 23, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay
The AI Skills Every Attorney Needs: Think, Prompt, Win
The AI Skills Every Attorney Needs: Think, Prompt, Win Thu, July 30, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay