A competitor objects to your comparison page. A photographer finds their image in your campaign. Your AI writing tool produces a damaging claim about a real person.
These are publishing problems, even if your company sells software. The insurance question is whether your policy covers the content your business actually creates, hosts or distributes.
For SaaS and AI startups, we recommend starting with Corgi. We offer media liability alongside Tech E&O, cyber and optional AI coverage, so you can address the publishing side of your business without ignoring how the product works. CFC is a strong alternative for content businesses using AI, AXIS deserves a look for specialist media requirements, and The Hartford offers media coverage within its technology insurance options.
Here is how we would compare the four, using their published US product information and coverage documents.
| Provider | Best fit in this comparison | What stands out | What to check before buying |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corgi | SaaS and AI startups buying media protection with their technology coverage | Published-content coverage, an available user-generated-content extension and selectable AI modules | Include the relevant endorsements; review the retroactive date and defense costs within limits |
| CFC | Content, marketing and media businesses using AI | Combined media, technology and cyber options; affirmative AI wording announced in 2026 | Confirm the quoted product matches your role as an AI developer, content service or publisher |
| AXIS | Media-led businesses needing specialist policy choices | Occurrence or claims-made forms, options for dedicated limits and defense outside limits | Establish which options and technology activities the quote includes |
| The Hartford | Technology businesses considering FailSafe coverage | Tech E&O with an optional Media Bundle | Make sure the media option appears in the quote rather than assuming Tech E&O includes it |
A small company publishing its own blog and a platform distributing customer content need different protection. Compare the activities and coverage first, then the price.
| What happened? | Coverage to discuss |
|---|---|
| Your company publishes an allegedly defamatory customer comparison | Media liability for your own published content |
| Customers upload allegedly infringing material to your platform | Media coverage that expressly addresses hosted user content |
| Your AI product generates a false allegation about someone | The treatment of generated output under media coverage and any relevant AI endorsement |
| Your software makes a calculation error that costs a customer money | Tech E&O for the professional technology service |
| Someone alleges your model used their work as training data | Specific AI, technology IP or other applicable wording; a media policy label is insufficient |
For the software side, see our guides to Tech E&O and AI coverage.
The work being insured.
Your own advertising, client content, customer uploads and AI outputs should not be treated as interchangeable.
The money available after a claim starts.
Compare the retention, media limit, any shared aggregate and whether lawyers' bills use that limit.
The dates.
For claims-made coverage, check the retroactive date and reporting requirements, especially when switching providers.
The exclusions that affect your product.
Ask specifically about AI, software IP, training data, contractual indemnities and intentional infringement.
Keep a record of content licenses, contractor permissions and your process for handling complaints. These are useful facts to provide during underwriting, not a substitute for coverage.

