Search for: "Books v. Industrial Commission" Results 241 - 260 of 816
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jun 2010, 7:20 am by Director
Industrial Commission erred when it applied the positional risk test in determining the compensability of a claim involving an employee struck by lightning as he discussed the threatening weather situation with superiors. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 1:45 am
 The Carter Commission held hearings and conducted studies all with the view of increasing industrial activity. [read post]
28 Aug 2011, 4:33 am by Daithí
The book’s on pre-order anyway. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 4:00 am by Administrator
Periodically on Thursdays, we present a significant excerpt, usually from a recently published book or journal article. [read post]
15 Nov 2021, 8:40 am by skelly
As insurance companies, agencies, program administrators and other industry actors continue to expand their creative horizons and develop innovative insurance products, the need for reinsurance coverage has accelerated as well. [read post]
16 Feb 2014, 5:30 am by Barry Sookman
At Least In Principle http://t.co/FC7rv9BtMY -> Will the federal government reduce the price gap on books? [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 7:05 am by Lyle Denniston
”   The industry groups also contended that the existing rating system for such games, which has been praised by the Federal Trade Commission, has not been proved to be ineffective in insulating minors from games they should not play. [read post]
30 Apr 2017, 4:30 am
| New book for the preparation for the Pre-Examination of the EQE | Oldie but goldie - when is old prior art a suitable starting point for inventive step analysis? [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 2:32 am
Where a book title falls into the public domain, it must be possible for other books to use it. [read post]
6 Jul 2013, 12:39 pm by Florian Mueller
That evidence supports a conclusion that a portfolio cross-license offer is typical in the industry and reasonable.Apple has offered no evidence to suggest that such portfolio cross-licenses are atypical in the industry. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 12:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
CONCISE SUMMARIES OF THE CONTENTS OF THEThe Discipline BookA guide to disciplinary actions involving public officers and employees in New York State with end notes.For more information about this 458 page handbook, click on http://booklocker.com/books/5215.htmlA Reasonable Disciplinary Penalty Under the Circumstances A handbook focusing on appealing penalties imposed following disciplinary action, adverse performance ratings, probationary terminations and the denial of unemployment… [read post]
18 Nov 2018, 4:32 pm by INFORRM
The European Commission has urged governments not to misuse the EU data protection regulation to silence investigative journalists. [read post]
15 Sep 2021, 9:03 pm by Andrew Schaengold
Supreme Court’s decision in Matsushita v. [read post]
19 Oct 2014, 4:42 am by Ben
 In the recent copyright forum between the Philippines and Korea, IPOPHL and the Korea Copyright Commission (KCC) signed a Memorandum of Understanding to strengthen the copyright industry of both countries. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 5:42 am by INFORRM
PCC publishes guidance on online prominence, Press Complaints Commission. [read post]
16 Feb 2018, 12:45 am
A pair of LouboutinsElsewhere in the fashion industry, Kat friend Penelope Ng from Bird & Bird ATMD analyses the recent unsuccessful invalidation action brought by Polo/Lauren against Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd, in Singapore: Yet another horse – The Polo/Lauren Company L.P. v Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd. [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 11:44 am by Dennis Crouch
As we explained in our initial Comments, U.S. courts have addressed the legality of non-expressive uses of copyrighted works in the context of other copy-reliant technologies, including software reverse engineering,[2] plagiarism detection software,[3] and the digitization of millions of library books to enable meta-analysis, text data mining, and search engine indexing.[4] Authors Guild, Inc. v. [read post]