Search for: "Cabell v. State of California"
Results 21 - 30
of 30
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Dec 2021, 1:31 pm
As a double-insult, 512(f) preempts related state law claims over abusive takedown notices, so it actually leaves victims worse off than if 512(f) didn’t exist by clearing out the field. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 9:16 pm
Zimmerman (Technology & Marketing Law Blog) (Copyrights & Campaigns) District Court C D California: IsoHunt told to pull .torrent files offline, likely to close: Columbia Pictures Industries Inc., et al. v. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 4:15 am
Ltd.. v. [read post]
8 Aug 2021, 8:17 am
Universal * YouTube Uploader Can’t Sue Sender of Mistaken Takedown Notice–Cabell v. [read post]
10 Nov 2020, 8:58 am
Universal * YouTube Uploader Can’t Sue Sender of Mistaken Takedown Notice–Cabell v. [read post]
26 Mar 2010, 3:39 am
Copyright (Ars Technica) US Copyright – Decisions District Court S D New York: DMCA ‘interference’ with copyright is not copyright infringement: Robert Cabell v Mark Zimmerman (The Trademark Blog) Craiglist wins $1.3m default judgment against autoposting facilitator: Craigslist v Naturemarket (Technology & Marketing Law Blog) (Copyright Litigation Blog) District Court S D Texas: Alleged Rabid Neurosis music ‘pirate’ acquitted: US… [read post]
8 Apr 2025, 8:44 am
Longarzo * DMCA’s Unhelpful 512(f) Preempts Helpful State Law Claims–Stevens v. [read post]
11 Jan 2025, 8:36 am
Longarzo * DMCA’s Unhelpful 512(f) Preempts Helpful State Law Claims–Stevens v. [read post]
12 May 2018, 9:11 am
This symposium explores these and other issues.Keynote Lecture: James V Feinerman, Associate Dean for Transnational Programs, Co-Director, Georgetown Law Asia, and James M. [read post]
3 May 2024, 8:38 am
The court doesn’t acknowledge the cases saying that 512(f) preempts state law claims. [read post]
