Search for: "In Re Value-Added Communications, Inc."
Results 221 - 240
of 558
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jan 2017, 11:37 pm
., Inc. [read post]
26 Dec 2016, 4:30 am
Well Marie-Andree cited that 1879 case Feist Publications, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Sep 2016, 8:30 am
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit had held (In re Tam), by a 9-to-3 vote, that the exclusion of “disparaging” marks violated the First Amendment. [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 4:49 pm
That’s just our assumption and we’re going with it. [read post]
11 Aug 2016, 12:00 am
An Article of Food, Coco Rico, Inc., 752 F.2d 11 (1985). [read post]
4 Aug 2016, 3:27 am
Copyright Office has criticized the Federal Communications Commission's plans to open up the market for pay-TV set-top boxes, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has been pushing for new FCC rules to open up the market for the costly set-top boxes, currently dominated by cable and satellite pay-TV providers, to let in new entrants such as Alphabet Inc. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 8:08 am
In Citizen VC and the Companion C&DIs the staff provided helpful guidance in several important areas: First, the staff confirmed the continuing vitality of certain key positions previously announced in the Legacy Interpretative Advice; Second, the staff collected and re-introduced the most important of the principles from the Legacy Interpretative Advice in a single letter (along with the Companion C&DIs); Third, the staff updated its views in the Legacy Interpretative Advice… [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 9:23 am
But then the SCt said unconditionally that pharma ads were commercial speech subject to different levels of scrutiny depending on what opinion you’re looking at. [read post]
3 May 2016, 2:11 pm
David Kaplan, Warner Brothers Entertainment Inc.: Use tech fingerprinting and scanning in enforcement. [read post]
2 May 2016, 9:20 pm
So they can earn money through ads or subscriptions. [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 11:29 am
[emphasis added] While Torstar was a defamation case, it is instructive of how traditional categories of “journalism” are being expanded in the modern age, particularly by our courts. [read post]
23 Apr 2016, 7:50 am
April 8, 2016): “the Communication Decency Act is inapplicable to copyright infringement actions” * New Republic: The Mass-Market Edition of To Kill a Mockingbird Is Dead * Phantomalert, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 4:55 pm
These include digital forensic preservation and investigation, notification of a broad range of third parties and other constituencies, fulfillment of a confusing constellation of state and federal compliance obligations, potential litigation, engagement with law enforcement, the provision of credit monitoring, crisis management, a communications plan – and the list goes on. [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 2:56 am
In Hantz Financial Services, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 4:26 pm
The FBI claims that there may be “relevant, critical communications and data” on the iPhone from around the time of the shooting (the FBI has already sought and received from Apple all data from any cloud storage connected to the device). [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 4:36 pm
Damages are limited to the difference between the purchase price and the value of the securities at the time of the suit. ■ Section 12(a)(2) creates liability for any person who offers or sells a security through a prospectus or an oral communication containing a material misstatement or omission. [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 7:34 am
Ass'n, Inc. [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 7:15 am
The TRIPs Agreement protects trade secrets so long as such information (a) is secret in the sense that it is not, as a body or in the precise configuration and assembly of its components, generally known among or readily accessible to persons within the circles that normally deal with the kind of information in question; (b) has commercial value because it is secret; and (c) has been subject to reasonable steps under the circumstances, by the person lawfully in control of the information,… [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am
The document added to the previous WikiLeaks publications of the chapters for Intellectual Property Rights (November 2013) and the Environment (January 2014). [read post]
22 Dec 2015, 2:50 pm
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held (In re Tam), by a 9-to-3 vote, that this exclusion of “disparaging” marks violated the First Amendment. [read post]
