Search for: "United States v. Lang"
Results 181 - 200
of 336
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jun 2012, 10:21 pm
It seems that he was wrong on that account too, at least according to the majority of the United State Supreme Court. [read post]
14 Oct 2020, 2:32 pm
New Relists Lange v. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 3:15 am
United States and Department of Commerce 393 F.3d 1277 (Fed. [read post]
16 Feb 2012, 1:10 am
The advantages of this practice were demonstrated last week in General Electric v. [read post]
8 Nov 2022, 1:15 am
A new crop of copyrighted works (including rights in a certain famous British detective) will enter the public domain in the United States on January 1, 2023. [read post]
12 Jan 2015, 5:03 am
Supreme Court will decide Young v. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 6:16 am
State v. [read post]
30 May 2014, 12:40 pm
United States v. [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 4:49 pm
This law provides an exception to the general rule that the person who creates a work is the legal author of that work; according to copyright law in the United States, a work “made for hire” is legally owned by the employer, and not the employee. [read post]
9 Jul 2023, 10:59 am
In United States v. [read post]
19 Oct 2016, 8:44 am
However, in the United States, that wasn’t always true. [read post]
8 Apr 2021, 4:59 am
In both Canada and the United States, financial authorities require the disclosure of licensing transactions of significant size. [read post]
14 May 2023, 6:56 pm
Pix Credit Audience Chamber Piazza della Signoria Apartments of the Priors c. 1543 In the United States at least, there has been an increasing worry about the state of U.S. relations (economic and political) with Latin American states. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 3:10 am
Lang, 2012 210 p. ; 21cm. [read post]
14 Dec 2015, 4:09 pm
First, Dr Rolph identifies problems in the Lange (Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520) defence, noting it was not followed in Reynolds v Times Newspapers Pty Ltd [2001] 2 AC 227, a decision which the Australian courts have in turn refused to recognise, and which the High Court of Australia has declined opportunities to consider ever since, despite hinting at it in 2002: Skalkos v Assaf [2002] HCA Trans 649 (13 December 2002). [read post]
1 May 2009, 8:06 am
See United States v. [read post]
21 Mar 2024, 5:52 am
" State ex rel. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 4:47 am
As regards discretion, Sandoz pointed to alleged financial troubles facing Purdue Pharma arising from the litigation regarding Oxycontin in the United States. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 6:15 pm
., v. [read post]
8 Jun 2017, 4:04 pm
The reasons are thorough and detailed, serving as a valuable application of the ‘political discussion’ brand of qualified privilege recognised in Lange v Atkinson (No 2). [read post]
