Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 2561 - 2580
of 4,765
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jan 2015, 6:00 am
Why haven’t we seen similar changes in Canada? [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 10:00 pm
Now is your chance to catch up! [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 5:08 am
The decision is about likelihood of confusion, reputed trade marks' extended protection, and passing off.* The Naked Truth: use of BARELY THERE wasn't even barely thereAnother Irish Patents Office’s decision that Jeremy reports is HBI Branded Apparel Enterprises LLC v Dunnes Stores Ireland Company. [read post]
4 Jan 2015, 4:30 am
Autho… http://t.co/P7UnqsNb9N -> Coming to a theatre near you: The Interview to be screened in some Canadian cities http://t.co/aGcXhhnVq8 -> Google's Gmail blocked in China http://t.co/o92JJWelHd -> 'The Year of Shaken Trust': Looking at high-profile hacking in 2014 http://t.co/i71awBtFcW -> Director of Europol: ‘Top computer graduates are being lured into cybercrime’ http://t.co/I8xS1G6PGF -> Hacker says your fingerprint can be copied from… [read post]
30 Dec 2014, 8:34 am
The case is Brown v. [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 5:25 pm
In the case of K.U. v. [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 2:16 am
Overcoming a traditional idea peculiar to Spanish trade mark law, that court eventually puts an end to the concept of trade marks giving its owner the (positive) right to use the sign protected thereby.* First confidentiality, now costs: Vestergaard v Bestnet refuses to go awayVestergaard Fransen S/A & others v Bestnet Europe Ltd and others is a case that simply refuses to go away, writes Jeremy. [read post]
28 Dec 2014, 9:30 pm
Regulatory Science and the TTIP Reeve T. [read post]
26 Dec 2014, 12:07 pm
To us, the opinion on class certifications in Saavedra v. [read post]
23 Dec 2014, 1:28 pm
Bucci and Jews for Jesus v. [read post]
22 Dec 2014, 3:41 am
At this point, the "[t]he proprietor said that his request was to maintain in amended form. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 3:54 pm
In that case, Kaufman v. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 3:08 am
McNeely, Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 10:04 am
Jordan v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 9:17 am
Co., Inc. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2014, 11:54 am
When before in history has the consumer been flooded with such a staggering array of tempting products, wrapped in millions of dollars of “eye-catching” advertisement? [read post]
17 Dec 2014, 10:35 am
Cummings v. [read post]
17 Dec 2014, 1:25 am
If the plaintiffs just screw up at the beginning, then they will have sunk costs into a loser, and the defendant won’t want to pay. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 12:12 pm
While not completely unexpected, the Ultramercial decision is important because it continues to stir up debate as to what software and Internet related methods are still eligible for patent protection. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 12:12 pm
While not completely unexpected, the Ultramercial decision is important because it continues to stir up debate as to what software and Internet related methods are still eligible for patent protection. [read post]
