Search for: "MGM Studios, Inc."
Results 21 - 40
of 56
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Aug 2012, 5:23 am
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., a case in which plaintiff Paula Petrella sued MGM Studios and a variety of other major players in the film industry for “infring[ing] her purported interest in a book and two screenplays that together allegedly formed the basis for the 1980 motion picture Raging Bull. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 9:53 am
Circumventing these types of arguments would be a prosecutor's nightmare; I would love anyone's possible argument around those, or a different way to distinguish DarkComet/DarkCoderSc.As I mentioned in the previous post, an interesting argument could be made along the lines of MGM Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 3:00 am
I want to approach this question normatively, first, because I believe this to be somewhat of a novel issue, wrapped inside an already contemplated dilemma; however I am (secretly, but not so much anymore) really hoping to hear at least one person propose an outcome similar to MGM Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 9:18 am
Cal. 2002) and MGM Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 8:51 am
As a result of a recent Federal Court of Canada decision in the Metro-Goldwyn Mayer Studios Inc. case, the Canadian Trademarks Office is now required to register as a trademark in Canada the sound of a roaring lion that precedes most MGM film productions as the Court held that the sound of a roaring lion can be trademarked. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 10:33 am
This announcement apparently comes as a result of ongoing Federal Court of Canada proceedings regarding an application filed in 1992 by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 8:03 am
Cal. 2008)……………………………………………….passim MGM Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 12:31 pm
”[2] This was the first time since the Supreme Court ruled in MGM Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
12 May 2011, 8:16 am
A former Jenner & Block partner, he has argued 12 Supreme Court cases, including the 2005 file-sharing case MGM Studios Inc. v. [read post]
11 May 2011, 5:30 am
7 for EMC Documentum Webtop 6.7 - http://tinyurl.com/3wdgx3n (Press Release) Integreon Expands Operations Consulting Services for Law Firms and Corporate Legal Departments - http://tinyurl.com/3qf63t8 (Press Release) Iron Mountain Raises Possible Share Buys by $850M – http://tinyurl.com/3g5fx2h (Associated Press) Relativity 7 Pre-Release Now Available - http://tinyurl.com/3rtlsht (kCura) Lighthouse Hires Chris Dahl As Director Of eDiscovery Solutions – http://tinyurl.com/3wrb97y (Press… [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 1:23 pm
Characters are also covered by the copyright of the film (See MGM v. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 10:43 am
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 6:10 am
Verrilli, who currently serves as deputy counsel to the president, has argued a dozen cases [WSJ report] before the Supreme Court [official website], including Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Dec 2010, 9:00 pm
” MGM Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Dec 2010, 8:00 pm
” MGM Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Dec 2010, 12:11 pm
"Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc won a federal judge's approval for its bankruptcy reorganization plan, clear the way for the storied Hollywood studio to emerge from Chapter 11 under new ownership. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 8:38 pm
Eriq Gardner, THR, Esq, Studios Sue to Stop 'Family-Friendly' DVD Service - THR, Esq.: "A coalition of major studios including Paramount, Warner Bros., MGM, Disney, Universal and Fox has filed a lawsuit against a defendant who has taken movies such as Iron Man 2, The Hurt Locker, Prince of Persia and Date Night, altered them to be free of objectionable content, and is distributing them to consumers as "family-friendly. [read post]
3 Nov 2010, 2:12 pm
Earlier this morning, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. [read post]
3 Nov 2010, 1:58 pm
Image via WikipediaSpeaking of James Bond, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc., which owns the rights to the 007 film franchise, filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S. [read post]
18 Oct 2010, 8:18 am
§ 271(b) is “deliberate indifference of a known risk” that an infringement may occur, as the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held, or “purposeful, culpable expression and conduct” to encourage an infringement, as this Court taught in MGM Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
