Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 3821 - 3840
of 4,765
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Apr 2011, 3:33 pm
" A follow-up story on privacy concerns [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 11:12 am
As it turns out, the consumers' perceived source of the allegedly defamatory content didn't come up in the court's discussion. [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 6:04 am
Arevalo v. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 11:20 am
Interestingly, the Wolfe opinion doesn't even mention McDarby v. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 7:02 am
OK, convene experts to clean it up. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 5:10 am
Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare, L.P. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 9:31 am
Colonial archive v. local sites; old works v. present recordings as part of the archive; new relations of control. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 12:37 pm
" T. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 3:24 am
Sportradar denied liability since, whatever they might be doing, they weren't doing it in the UK; nor were they domiciled in the UK. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 12:12 pm
Arguing for the store chain in Wal-Mart Stores v. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 10:44 am
Though it isn’t time consuming or difficult, it is a step that many webmasters overlook, even if it is one that could help them avoid a copyright lawsuit down the road. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 7:10 am
Advertisers aren’t making this up. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 4:48 am
There's also a neat Current Intelligence note by the perceptive Enrico Bonadio (City Law School, London) on the Advocate General's Opinion on what counts as "communication to the public" in the joined cases of Football Association Premier League v QC Leisure, YouTube and Karen Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd (Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08), which the Court of Justice is going to decide this summer. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 2:50 pm
Q: how to back up promises to consumers? [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 2:47 pm
Consensus among stakeholders, if it provides appropriate protection, is preferable—but that’s the very question: will that process give consumers the protection they need and expect? [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 1:23 pm
As a general matter, "[t]he more likely a mark is to be remembered and associated in the public mind with the mark's owner, the greater protection the mark is accorded by trademark laws. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 7:43 am
Dymatize Enterprises Inc. v. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 12:18 pm
The alleged improper conduct (alleged in great detail), isn't linked up to these (or any) plaintiffs. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 4:30 am
Most consumers don't click on buttons to opt out from behavioural tracking, just like they don't go looking for privacy settings on Facebook. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 5:08 am
”The Risperdal letter in the state’s crosshairs isn’t a proper basis for the attorney general’s claims that the drugmaker violated consumer-protection laws, Pugh countered.The FDA warned J&J in 2004 to correct some things in the letter, but never formally sanctioned the drugmaker for sending it out, the lawyer added. [read post]
