Search for: "MUSIC v. STATE"
Results 2281 - 2300
of 4,606
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Nov 2019, 6:43 am
Permakat Eleonora Rosati wrote about Warner Music and Another v TuneIn Inc, an important High Court of England and Wales "test case" about infringement of copyright in sound recordings under section 20 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. [read post]
7 Jan 2017, 9:27 am
") BUT note Life Music, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 3:40 pm
Lopez (1995) and U.S. v. [read post]
16 Jan 2012, 5:43 am
Scorpio Music Distrib., 569 F. [read post]
4 Jun 2024, 9:30 am
(Young v. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 8:51 am
Recommendation The economic state of America, including radio seems to play the biggest role on both sides of the argument. [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 5:12 am
We harmonized with David’s beautiful music here, and put the decision in perspective here. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 4:35 am
Morse v. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 6:45 am
Tournier, Lucazeau & Others v Sacem and CISAC), from the MTL perspective, its scope is narrowed to the collective management of author’s rights in musical works, as this was understood to be the only area giving rise to difficulties requiring legislative intervention. [read post]
13 May 2016, 5:05 am
” The biggest problem for the Oracle v. [read post]
7 Nov 2019, 10:36 am
Justice Birss states:32. [read post]
7 Feb 2020, 1:41 pm
| The IPKat congratulates two new IP silks | A Creative Commons-Licensed Work Walks into a Copy Shop - Great Minds v. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 6:04 am
(SGI) v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 1:11 am
(ArsTechnica) Ask Ars: will iTunes Match be used to chase down music pirates? [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 5:32 am
MDY Industries, LLC v. [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 2:09 am
This was because the result of the hearing would not have a substantial influence on the secretary of state’s decision whether to place the man on the list of people barred from working with children. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 5:32 am
MDY Industries, LLC v. [read post]
28 Nov 2021, 4:34 pm
Last Week in the Courts The judgement in Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin v Secretary of State for the Home Department QB-2020-002120 was published this week. [read post]
20 Jan 2016, 8:52 am
Resources Code, § 21050 et seq.) to a state agency’s proprietary acts with respect to a state-owned and funded rail line or is CEQA not preempted in such circumstances under the market participant doctrine (see Town of Atherton v. [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 1:00 pm
How about "every good boy does fine" (remember music class anybody?). [read post]
