Search for: "People v. Potter" Results 181 - 200 of 271
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Feb 2009, 7:00 am
- Amsterdam Court of Appeal rules in favour of Hachette Filipacchi Press, publisher of Elle magazine, in trade name/trade mark infringement litigation brought by clothing company WE Netherlands (Class 46)   Poland District Administrative Court in Warsaw: ALDO S and ALDI not similar (Class 46)   South Africa More on the Springbok emblem (Afro-IP)   Sweden Appeal Court rules on reproduction of album cover artwork in case against Åhléns (International… [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 7:48 pm by Gritsforbreakfast
I think another piece of this that might be important to think about too, though, is that we don't want people entering pleas without the necessary lab testing.Scott Henson: That's right. [read post]
2 May 2016, 2:50 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
That’s where the imbalance comes: relatively manageable cost of doing business v. creation side is being killed by piracy and dealing w/great burdens from §512 to little effect. [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 4:38 pm
In Visa International Service Association v. [read post]
2 Jan 2023, 1:00 am by David Pocklington
Which light links Latin scholars with Harry Potter? [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 4:31 am by SHG
For example, in her forceful dissent in West Virginia v. [read post]
19 Mar 2022, 4:50 am by SHG
The Times conceded that it, by policy, refuses to publish “hate speech,” a phrase that remains undefined and smacks of Justice Potter Stewart’s definition of pornography from his concurring opinion in Jacobellis v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 10:55 am by Elim
LAW LIBRARY level 3: KD810 .M63 v. 7Elizabeth Cooke, ed., Modern Studies in Property Law (Oxford: Hart Pub., 2013). [read post]
19 Jul 2015, 5:00 am by SHG
It’s mostly Potter Stewart’s definition of obscenity from his concurrence in Jacobellis v. [read post]
18 Apr 2008, 8:46 am
Concluding the court wasn't ready to overturn Gregg v. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 8:05 am by JB
As the Court explained in Bartnicki v. [read post]