Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 2521 - 2540
of 4,765
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Feb 2015, 4:17 am
They are (or should be) part of a Board’s enterprise risk management duties, and they are particularly vital for certain federally-regulated entities with an obligation to protect consumer and client information and to keep it private. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 1:44 am
Another week, another Monday morning -- and another chance to catch up on whatever you missed on the IPKat's weblog last week. [read post]
13 Feb 2015, 4:36 am
Listen to the tracks yourself: a handy YouTube clip where you can compare Blurred Lines against Got to Give it Up [subject to the caveat that this isn’t what the jury will be hearing next week for the reasons explained above] [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 4:00 am
Part 1 of PIPEDA (privacy-“Protection of Personal Information”), s. 5, does the same thing—it basis a whole body of laws upon compliance with a National Standard of Canada, the, Model Code for the Protection of Personal Information, CAN/CSA-Q830-96 (in Schedule 1 of PIPEDA). [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 1:26 am
The case in question was Fenty & Ors v Arcadia Group Brands Ltd, decided in the Court of Appeal in the early days of 2015, which dealt with the sale of a simple article of clothing; a t-shirt. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 1:32 pm
LBF (& Vice-Versa) * Trademark Owners Just Can’t Win Keyword Advertising Cases–EarthCam v. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 2:26 pm
Oz producers of how consumers could get the product. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 9:58 am
Direct competitors who’s doing what Campbell was worried about; unjustifiable general concerns over free riding; messing up what confusion is about; just blowing it: NAACP v. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 9:11 am
The Court didn’t see it that way: “Here, however, the advertisements go beyond merely describing specific research in sufficient detail to allow a consumer to judge its validity. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 8:49 am
Case by case v. systematic: the cost of false positives and false negatives; court doesn’t consider the long-run consequences, like Boston Hockey or post-sale confusion. [read post]
8 Feb 2015, 4:30 am
http://t.co/8hBVhe6v5Q -> Technological Protection Measures promote access http://t.co/bcChNYgHuK -> blogged: Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2015-02-02 http://t.co/kRtYZWDGRW -> Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2015-02-02: Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2015-02-01: Zebra Stri… http://t.co/AonBJQ4xuf -> Spanish Court Criminalizes Linking to Copyright Infringing Materials and Reverses Consolidated Case Law http://t.co/7SDYde57uA -> Google blocked 524M… [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 2:14 pm
In TM: Reynolds Wrap v. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 8:11 am
Coca-Cola’s treatment in Canada v. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 4:30 am
blogged: Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2015-02-02 http://t.co/kRtYZWDGRW -> Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2015-02-02: Computer and Internet Law Updates for 2015-02-01: Zebra Stri… http://t.co/AonBJQ4xuf -> Spanish Court Criminalizes Linking to Copyright Infringing Materials and Reverses Consolidated Case Law http://t.co/7SDYde57uA -> Google blocked 524M 'bad ads' in 2014, up 50% from 2013 http://t.co/CRLOKbHIGX -> Invoke Labs stole my Pixsel app,… [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 2:56 pm
Entm’t Merchs. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 12:19 pm
Advanced Fluid Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 8:47 am
More surprising is the strong fair use rulings protecting the aggregation of copyrighted works into large-scale databases–the subject of several significant defense wins, including the Author’s Guild v. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 1:46 pm
V. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 10:52 am
Perhaps consumers deserve assurances that third party analytics companies don’t construct user profiles (Mixpanel’s marketing language was not very reassuring in this regard)? [read post]
27 Jan 2015, 10:00 am
Clean case, who told you to go Mc things up for yourself? [read post]
