Erie’s filing also walks through several policy exclusions it anticipates Cincinnati may raise, and argues none of them hold up. On the intellectual property exclusion, Erie points to the built-in carve-back that preserves coverage for the use of another’s advertising idea. On the prior publication exclusion, Erie flags contradictory dates in the Grover complaint that it says leave room for covered “fresh wrongs.” The knowing violation, failure to conform, and unauthorized use exclusions are also addressed and, according to Erie, do not apply on the facts alleged.
