Okay, I see what you’re saying. I had assumed that the policy holder assumed their data was covered by their property policy, but I guess that isn’t necessarily true.

To the point you clarified, it would seem irrational to prioritize insuring hardware over data.

Thanks for the clarification.

It’s so simple.

Unless they’re using dedicated storage arrays.

No, they said the policy defined the coverage as applying to physical loss only.

There was no assertion of value or importance.