Instead, it granted the purchaser a license to use the software. After Cochlea defaulted on some of its financial obligations, plaintiffs were laid off, and the rights to the software were assigned to the underlying plaintiffs, CogniSense Inc. After being laid off, plaintiffs formed GAF Sales and Service and began buying and reselling used Cochlea inspection equipment. CogniSense alleged this activity violated the software copyrights, and sued plaintiffs in federal court. When defendant refused, plaintiffs filed the instant action.
Plaintiffs now appeal from the trial court's grant of summary disposition in favor of defendants.
It is well settled in Michigan that an insurer's duty to defend is broader than its duty to indemnify. To determine whether an insurer has a duty to defend its insured this court looks to the language of the insurance policy and construes its terms to find the scope of the coverage of the policy. An insurer has a duty to defend if the allegations of the underlying suit arguably fall within the coverage of the policy. In construing the language of the policy this court must give the policy language its plain meaning and resolve any ambiguities against the insurer and in favor of coverage. Defendant does not dispute the underlying suit contained allegations of copyright infringement and that copyright infringement is one of the listed offenses under the advertising injury definition.