Search for: "Harding v. Industrial Comm." Results 21 - 40 of 55
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Apr 2017, 1:26 pm
This is particularly intriguing for the possibilities (and challenges) it may offer through regimes that are based on the privatization of law and the transfer of regulatory hard(er) authority (through contract) in lending institutions. [read post]
2 Oct 2016, 12:11 pm by Dennis Crouch
Commc’n Comm’n, 825 F.3d 674, 698 (D.C. [read post]
10 Feb 2016, 12:42 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Int’l Trade Comm’n, 180 F.3d1354, 1366 (Fed. [read post]
4 Jun 2015, 4:52 am by Terry Hart
Subcomm. on Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration of the Comm. on the Judiciary on H.R. 2372, 101st Cong. (1991). [read post]
27 Mar 2015, 10:00 am by Guest Blogger
Answering that question is hard, not just because the evidence we have about the efficacy of IP rights in encouraging innovation is mixed at best. [8] It is also hard because sometimes – often, in fact – it is competition, not regulation, that drives innovation. [9] So sometimes creating or strengthening an IP regime can be counterproductive, not only raising prices but stifling the very innovation it was supposed to encourage. [read post]
5 May 2013, 12:15 pm by Schachtman
Last week, I addressed two papers from a symposium organized by the litigation industry to applaud the First Circuit’s decision in Milward v. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 9:56 am by Max Kennerly, Esq.
” It must have been a Herculean task: from my perspective, you have to look really hard to find court decisions against the pharmaceutical and medical device industry. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 1:31 pm by SteinMcewen, LLP
McEwen* Introduction The American Invents Act is a result of pressures from diverse industries and groups. [read post]
9 May 2011, 12:35 pm
5/9/2011 Guest:  Michael Froomkin Free Expression International More Issues in Free Expression Photo by sheriffmitchell This post is part of "CDT Fellows Focus," a series that presents the views of notable experts on tech policy issues. [read post]