Search for: "Label v Label"
Results 2721 - 2740
of 13,302
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Aug 2019, 1:21 am
Sampling has become incredibly common in the creation and production of music, and so the potential curtailing of sampling by the CJEU could pose a big problem to artists, producers and labels. [read post]
12 Aug 2019, 11:39 am
Long Grove Investments, LLC v. [read post]
12 Aug 2019, 8:10 am
In 2017, the Indian Supreme Court, in the case State Bank of India v Santosh Gupta, observed that even though Article 370 was labeled a “[t]emporary provision[]” and the Constituent Assembly had dissolved, the article “continue[s] to be in force” (¶12)—thus indicating it had attained permanent status. [read post]
9 Aug 2019, 1:36 pm
That's because courts have shunned the only means available for obtaining relief: Bivens v. [read post]
9 Aug 2019, 11:34 am
How we deal with the free rider being the TM owner—Packman v. [read post]
8 Aug 2019, 9:43 am
Zearfoss v. [read post]
8 Aug 2019, 9:36 am
“In this case the government charged the defendants with the wrong crimes,” begins the Sixth Circuit’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
8 Aug 2019, 9:26 am
SportFuel, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 11:30 am
Balema produces and markets in Germany vinegar-based products under the names "Balsamico" and "Deutscher Balsamico"; their labels note that the products are manufactured from local (Baden) wine. [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 8:54 am
v. [read post]
6 Aug 2019, 9:29 pm
" See the 2014 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision of Hawkins v. [read post]
6 Aug 2019, 4:08 pm
In Loblaws Inc. v Columbia Insurance Company, the plaintiff’s claim was dismissed on the grounds that confusion could not be established between Pampered Chef’s short-form marks and Loblaw’s PC Marks. [read post]
6 Aug 2019, 4:08 pm
In Loblaws Inc. v Columbia Insurance Company, the plaintiff’s claim was dismissed on the grounds that confusion could not be established between Pampered Chef’s short-form marks and Loblaw’s PC Marks. [read post]
6 Aug 2019, 4:56 am
But one basic premise of free speech isn’t that we don’t treat speech as “inciting violence” (a label for constitutionally unprotected speech, see Brandenburg v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 7:41 pm
” See the 2014 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision of Hawkins v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 11:36 am
The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill was introduced by the Government on June 13, 2019, following the Owens v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 1:39 am
The Court of Appeal in Classic Maritime Inc. v Limbungan Makmur SDN BHD and Another [2019] EWCA Civ 1102 contrasted the circumstances in which an exceptions clause and a contract frustration clause would operate. [read post]
4 Aug 2019, 1:26 pm
Thanks to the New York Times and Matt Richtel for “Tainted Pork, Ill Consumers and an Investigation Thwarted. [read post]
3 Aug 2019, 6:57 am
But one basic premise of free speech isn't that we don't treat speech as "inciting violence" (a label for constitutionally unprotected speech, see Brandenburg v. [read post]
1 Aug 2019, 10:00 am
ThermoLife International LLC v. [read post]
