Search for: "People v. Profit"
Results 2501 - 2520
of 4,430
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Apr 2014, 4:00 am
It also pointed out the non-profit nature and altruistic motives of a library, which differ from how the defendants “manifestly utilize the Make-A-Tape as a further source of income. [read post]
6 Apr 2014, 8:48 am
The Court found that Salton was operating a business based on the following: he lives on the same property that contains the cat cages; despite the fact that he has no employees, does not file business taxes, has no business insurance and makes no profit as he claims to not charge people to view the animals, he did list a business name on one of his licenses, and he has a business card listing him as the owner and he lists prices for adults and children to see the animals. [read post]
5 Apr 2014, 12:21 pm
1) Give district courts discretion to punish frivolous suit 2) Forcing patent holders to be more clear in their claims in Biosig v. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 10:43 pm
I told people at the time that I thought Apple had peaked. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 3:04 pm
Up to $8000 per work—the statute says up to $150,000, but a jury has awarded that in Capitol Records v. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 11:38 am
The McCutcheon v. [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 12:38 am
But it would no longer be very profitable, in the short term. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 9:01 pm
” Third, the drug itself has harmed people. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 11:40 am
While the typical plaintiff complains that a defendant has profited by appropriating the value of her brand, Taha complains that CIA has profited by threatening the value of his brand -- that it has ransomed his good name. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 9:01 pm
Thompson v. [read post]
30 Mar 2014, 11:25 pm
” See FTC v. [read post]
30 Mar 2014, 5:04 am
In Estate of Thornton v. [read post]
29 Mar 2014, 6:14 pm
Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. [read post]
28 Mar 2014, 9:30 pm
Bennett Capers's "The Crime of Loving: Loving, Lawrence, and Beyond," which appears in Loving v. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 12:46 pm
He obviously has a perspective of his own on the underlying issues — he was, for instance, a forceful critic of the Court’s Employment Division v. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 6:17 am
” Sotomayor pointed to the language of U.S. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2014, 8:46 am
Verrilli begins ponderously and the Chief Justice scampers right in to trip him up:GENERAL VERRILLI: The touchstone for resolving this case is the principle Justice Jackson articulated in Prince v. [read post]
25 Mar 2014, 12:34 pm
Similarly, a few years earlier in Northwest Austin v. [read post]
21 Mar 2014, 9:57 am
In District of Columbia v. [read post]
21 Mar 2014, 3:17 am
One such case is Nigel Woolley and Timesource Ltd v UP Global Sourcing UK Ltd (formerly Ultimate Products Ltd) and Lacmanda Group Ltd (formerly Henleys Clothing Ltd) [2014] EWHC 493 (Ch), a Chancery Division, England and Wales, ruling of Judge Pelling QC sitting as a judge of the High Court. [read post]
