Search for: "Mark C. Good"
Results 3721 - 3740
of 5,981
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Jun 2013, 5:56 am
A good staple for general items and clothing, and my personal favorite is Goodwill. [read post]
3 Jun 2013, 5:45 am
Bill C-56 would not allow border officers to seize goods for copyright or trademark infringement. [read post]
2 Jun 2013, 8:52 pm
§ 2242(b)(1)(C). [read post]
2 Jun 2013, 5:30 am
http://t.co/CPO83USCCH -> Flipkart to shutdown music download service 'Flyte' | Business Line http://t.co/hjpZpmHR2G -> "Texas bans (most) private drone use, fearing spying" good read http://t.co/spCcumYnAm -> "Cisco tells EU: Microsoft-Skype merger is a monopoly" http://t.co/Ffw8eehpcn -> "The Failure of Personal Data Retention" http://t.co/LoHqtQlNmX -> "New success for crimefighters in kino.to-case: uploader of 120.000 movies caught" http://t.co/Ht74jfuQmj -> "Google… [read post]
Fresh from the Press: The Pleas in Law of the Spanish Actions against the Unitary Patent Regulations
1 Jun 2013, 8:21 am
Not all claims may be equally strong, but some of them are very likely to hit the mark. [read post]
31 May 2013, 7:24 am
The former provision prevents the registration of non-distinctive signs, which cannot fulfil the essential function of a trade mark; the latter ensures that 'descriptive signs relating to one or more characteristics of the goods or services in respect of which registration as a mark is sought may be freely used by all traders offering such goods or services' (see Case C‑173/04 P Deutsche SiSi-Werke v OHIM, and Case C‑191/01 P OHIM v… [read post]
30 May 2013, 4:00 am
“Valour Rather Than Prudence”: Hard Times And Hard Choices For Canada’s Legal Academy Harry Arthurs (2013) 76 (1) Saskatchewan Law Review Excerpt: Part C, The Return of Legal Fundamentalism [Footnotes converted to endnotes and renumbered.] [read post]
27 May 2013, 5:42 am
“[C]onsumers may unwittingly purchase the goods on the basis of the domestic markholder's reputation only to be disappointed when the product does not meet their expectations. [read post]
24 May 2013, 2:27 am
[C]onsistent with the statutory structure of the Trademark Act, each application for registration of a mark for particular goods must be separately evaluated based on its own set of facts and in view of whatever marketplace evidence is available in the record. [read post]
21 May 2013, 7:49 am
” Other reports come from Kent Scheidegger at C&C Blog and Jaclyn Belczyk at JURIST. [read post]
20 May 2013, 1:39 pm
(Image Courtesy of C-SPAN). [read post]
20 May 2013, 8:44 am
As a humble businessman, he should not publicize his virtue and goodness. [read post]
20 May 2013, 6:56 am
” The “quality of goods” exclusion also didn’t relieve Great American of its duty to defend. [read post]
18 May 2013, 2:06 pm
§ 227(c) — authorizes the FCC to set up a national Do Not Call registry, which the FCC did in coordination with the Federal Trade Commission several years ago. [read post]
13 May 2013, 6:17 am
” [Disclosure: The law firm of Thomas C. [read post]
13 May 2013, 3:01 am
Note: It is not known how many of JCP’s items have had their regular prices marked up. [read post]
9 May 2013, 11:56 am
Tough Mudder claims that its first use in commerce of both the Tough Mudder mark and the Mudder family of marks predate the Hollaways' first use and therefore Tough Mudder's use of the marks has priority. [read post]
7 May 2013, 5:01 pm
However, as they were not allocated – in extreme cases (only) 0 marks were awarded –, the candidates were unequally treated, which violated Article 16 REQE: better candidates having a positive overall number of marks lose marks if there were (further) mistakes, whereas worse candidates who already had 0 marks and who made the very same mistake would not lose any marks. [read post]
6 May 2013, 1:20 pm
Marty felt that the amount of money pumped into top level domain names would ensure that they'd remain important for a good few years to come. [read post]
5 May 2013, 11:01 am
(c) Section 33: The film producers argue that the proviso of Section 33(1) violates Article 19(1)(c) which safeguards right to join (and right not to joint) an association. [read post]
