Search for: "Ip v. C. I. R"
Results 221 - 240
of 495
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jan 2015, 10:17 am
Its reliance on Vaudable [v. [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 2:25 am
Timothy R. [read post]
9 Jan 2015, 4:31 am
No IP is the same. [read post]
27 Dec 2014, 2:19 am
More from Europe: In Case C-355/12 Nintendo v PC Box the CJEU said that circumventing a protection system may not be unlawful. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 6:30 am
”c. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 8:09 am
The circuits have split on this “hypothetical vs. actual test” reading of Section 365(c)(1) and the Commission sided squarely with the actual test when a debtor in possession, as licensee, proposes to assume but not assign an IP license. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 8:09 am
The circuits have split on this “hypothetical vs. actual test” reading of Section 365(c)(1) and the Commission sided squarely with the actual test when a debtor in possession, as licensee, proposes to assume but not assign an IP license. [read post]
9 Dec 2014, 10:38 am
Resiliency is all about accepting that I will sustain a certain amount of damage. [read post]
3 Dec 2014, 9:54 am
I know even less now than I thought I did this morning. [read post]
20 Nov 2014, 7:08 am
Late last year, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in R. v. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 7:38 pm
I have recently discussed whether objections against stylised device marks containing descriptive words should be raised under Articles 7(1)(b) and/or (c) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 9:46 am
See United States v. [read post]
28 Oct 2014, 6:22 am
In its controversial ruling in Case C-530/12, OHIM v National Lottery Commission [extensively reported by the IPKat here],the focus was on the probative value of national law: does it need to be considered by OHIM and by the General Court as a matter of fact or as a matter of law? [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 1:11 pm
L.J. 1033 (2009); Thomas R. [read post]
21 Oct 2014, 5:01 am
I think further clarification ca [read post]
19 Oct 2014, 10:20 am
So let's take a look at Case T-450/11 Galileo International Technology LLC v OHIM, the European Commission and the European Space Agency (ESA). [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 9:48 am
See, for example, R v. [read post]
12 Oct 2014, 5:30 am
Jane C. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 12:49 pm
The report makes some recommendations and I will cite only a few of them. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 7:03 am
Snowden, furor over Bill C-13 and the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. [read post]
