Search for: "Voltage Pictures LLCĀ " Results 21 - 40 of 62
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Sep 2018, 4:51 pm by Howard Knopf
The recent refusal by the Supreme Court of Canada to hear on appeal of the order that Voltage Pictures post $75,000 for security of costs in a “reverse class action” underlines the importance of this rule. [read post]
13 Jun 2018, 11:30 pm by Barry Sookman
 Dose Pro Inc., 2017 QCCS 3383 Fox News Network, LLC v TVEyes, Inc. 883 F.3d 169 (2nd.Cir.2018) Voltage Pictures, LLC v. [read post]
26 Nov 2017, 4:00 am by Administrator
Voltage Pictures, LLC, 2017 FCA 97 (37679) What are the procedures, and how is cost dealt with, for third party discovery orders. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 8:40 am by JAntonelli
POW Nevada is an affiliate of Voltage Pictures which […] The post POW Nevada LLC Sues Hawaiian Users for “Revolt” Movie Downloads – ISP Defense appeared first on Torrent Defenders. [read post]
16 Jul 2017, 3:15 am by Barry Sookman
Check the glossary. https://t.co/D8A8CDw0wj -> Order permitting CIPPIC to intervene in the Voltage disclosure motion Voltage Pictures, Llc v. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 3:15 am by Barry Sookman
Check the glossary. https://t.co/D8A8CDw0wj -> Order permitting CIPPIC to intervene in the Voltage disclosure motion Voltage Pictures, Llc v. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 10:53 am by Barry Sookman
Tkach, 122 F.Supp.3d 32 (SDNY) 2015) CG v Facebook Ireland Ltd & Anor [2016] NICA 54 (21 December 2016) AY, Facebook (Ireland) Ltd & Ors [2016] NIQB 76 (9 September 2016) Muwema v Facebook Ireland Ltd [2016] IEHC 519 Voltage Pictures, LLC v Joe Doe #1 2017 FCA 97 Copyright Nintendo of America Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2017, 12:38 pm by Howard Knopf
" She cited a letter sent to defendants that asks $7,500, saying that amount would increase up to $150,000 without prompt payment.The case is Voltage Pictures LLC v. [read post]
6 Jun 2017, 12:38 pm by Howard Knopf
" She cited a letter sent to defendants that asks $7,500, saying that amount would increase up to $150,000 without prompt payment.The case is Voltage Pictures LLC v. [read post]
10 May 2017, 3:30 am by Barry Sookman
In an important ruling yesterday in Voltage Pictures, LLC v Joe Doe #1 2017 FCA 97, the Federal Court of Appeal ruled that the notice and notice regime established under the CMA changed the law. [read post]
12 Jan 2016, 8:00 am by Guest Blogger
In the Federal Court’s decision of Voltage Pictures LLC v. [read post]
12 Oct 2015, 10:54 am
For example, users can set up tracking for entities like Voltage Pictures, LLC, and can have alerts continuously delivered to their inbox. [read post]
22 Sep 2015, 11:37 am by Joe Mullin
 Voltage Pictures, the studio that produced the Oscar-winning film, followed up awards season with lawsuit season, filing hundreds of cases since early 2014 against pirates alleged to have downloaded its film illegally via BitTorrent. [read post]
21 Aug 2015, 6:00 am
Arguably the quantification if this would probably be incredibly hard, and Justice Perram dismissed the claim due to its inconsistency with the law.Ultimately, the Court allowed the claims under sub-headings a and d, but refused to lift the stay pending more detailed undertakings from Dallas Buyers Club.The case mirrors thoughts presented both in the UK and Canada in Golden Eye [Katposts here and here] and in Voltage Pictures LLC v John Doe [2014 FC 161], which aimed to… [read post]
17 Aug 2015, 1:06 pm by Daniel Nazer
DBC, owned by Voltage Pictures, has been among the most aggressive practitioners of mass copyright litigation. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 1:30 am by Jani
In Canada, under the Federal Court Rules, the disclosure of such information is very similar to the Australian provision; and Voltage LLC, the parent company of Dallas Buyers Club, has successfully used the provision to gain such information in Canada in the case of Voltage Pictures LLC v John Doe. [read post]
25 Jan 2015, 2:50 pm by Barry Sookman
Internet Archive Canada, 2014 FC 944 Media Monitoring 2011-2016  (Copyright Board) August 8, 2014 Voltage Pictures LLC v. [read post]