[shuttertalk]

Ever wondered what would happen if you were commissioned to photograph a fragile art piece / priceless statue / historical object and it were to smash to pieces under your care? Apart from the bad karma, would your liability insurance cover any damages sought by the other party?

http://www.pdnonline.com/news/What-If-Yo...5562.shtml

PDN wrote about this exact scenario, where a statue worth 300,000 smashed to pieces on an assignment and the owners came after the photographer with a lawsuit.

And as it turns out, standard liability insurance typically carried by photographers would NOT cover the accidental dropping of, say, a $300,000 Nok figurine on the set. That's because liability insurance policies typically exclude damage claims "for property of others in the care, custody or control of the insured," says Scott Taylor of Taylor & Taylor Associates, a New York brokerage that provides insurance packages for photographers. Liability insurance also usually excludes claims for damage to property "deemed to be props, sets, wardrobe and/or camera and lighting equipment," Taylor says.

Looks like you need to check your exclusions carefully, and/or get third party property insurance as well otherwise you might be out of luck...

But photographers can insure themselves against damage to props and other third-party property under their "care, custody or control" by purchasing third-party property insurance, in addition to their liability insurance, Taylor explains. In addition, they can purchase insurance coverage for props, sets, and wardrobes, which covers them against loss or damage to objects such as art, antiques, jewelry, silverware, furs, and other valuables they work with on the set.

Or best of all:

"The safest thing," Taylor says, "is to have [the owners or their agents] move valuable objects. That way, if it breaks, it's not your problem."