Search for: "Thomas v. Chappell"
Results 21 - 40
of 40
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Dec 2021, 4:10 am
This was established in the case of Nichols v. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 12:23 pm
Never too late 33 [week ending Sunday 15 February] –-Evoking Audrey Hepburn’s image is not OK in Italy | Reasonable royalty and moral prejudice: new reference to the CJEU | CoA for England and Wales on parallel importations in Speciality European Pharma Ltd v Doncaster Pharmaceuticals Group Ltd & Madaus GmbH | The Logic of Innovation: Intellectual Property, and What the User Found There and Tritton on Intellectual Property in Europe reviewed | Italian baked… [read post]
2 Mar 2015, 2:43 pm
Never too late 33 [week ending Sunday 15 February] –- Evoking Audrey Hepburn’s image is not OK in Italy | Reasonable royalty and moral prejudice: new reference to the CJEU | CoA for England and Wales on parallel importations in Speciality European Pharma Ltd v Doncaster Pharmaceuticals Group Ltd & Madaus GmbH | The Logic of Innovation: Intellectual Property, and What the User Found There and Tritton on Intellectual Property in Europe reviewed | Italian baked goods’… [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 2:55 am
***** PREVIOUSLY, ON NEVER TOO LATE Never too late 33 [week ending Sunday 15 February] –- Evoking Audrey Hepburn’s image is not OK in Italy | Reasonable royalty and moral prejudice: new reference to the CJEU | CoA for England and Wales on parallel importations in Speciality European Pharma Ltd v Doncaster Pharmaceuticals Group Ltd & Madaus GmbH | The Logic of Innovation: Intellectual Property, and What the User Found There and Tritton on… [read post]
16 Mar 2015, 3:10 am
Never too late 33 [week ending Sunday 15 February] –-Evoking Audrey Hepburn’s image is not OK in Italy | Reasonable royalty and moral prejudice: new reference to the CJEU | CoA for England and Wales on parallel importations in Speciality European Pharma Ltd v Doncaster Pharmaceuticals Group Ltd & Madaus GmbH | The Logic of Innovation: Intellectual Property, and What the User Found There and Tritton on Intellectual Property in… [read post]
27 Jul 2015, 11:10 am
Ostendorf and making explicit findings on each factor -- Where counsel is involved in conduct to be sanctioned Kozel analysis is required before entering judicial default, and failure to do so is, by itself, basis for remandDOROTHY CHAPPELLE, CALVIN JOHNSON and EVELYN WILLIAMS, Appellants, v. [read post]
25 May 2017, 11:49 am
Thomas H. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 2:41 pm
People v. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 1:44 am
A tale of Dudes and Smoothies Katfriend Richard Kempner discusses Fresh Trading Limited v Deepend Fresh Recovery Limited and Andrew Thomas Robert Chappell [2015] EWHC 52 (Ch), a Chancery Division, England and Wales, decision addressing the copyright ownership in the ‘Dude’, ie the logo used on Innocent’s smoothie bottle in the past 15 years. [read post]
28 Jun 2019, 4:21 am
In Rucho v. [read post]
17 Mar 2016, 6:24 am
State v. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 2:55 pm
Solis v. [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 9:11 am
And hard as it is to believe, Chappell v. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 7:10 am
Chappell v. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 12:13 pm
(Michael Geist) Google agrees to pay $125 million to authors and publishers affected by Google Print service, settling copyright litigation (Ars Technica) Google is done paying Silicon Valley’s legal bills (EFF) Apple bends to studios, adds copyright protection to MacBooks (Wired) Website parodying Union Square Partnership shut down due to bogus cybersquatting and copyright infringement claims (EFF) Singers Daryl Hall and John Oates sue Warner/Chappell Music for failing to sue… [read post]
15 Nov 2022, 8:47 am
Engraving from painting by Chappel. [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 4:10 am
This was established in the case of Nichols v. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am
In Europe, The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the consent of a copyright holder does not cover the distribution of an object incorporating a work where that object has been altered after its initial marketing to such an extent that it constitutes a new reproduction of that work (Case C‑419/13, Art & Allposters International BV v Stichting Pictoright) with Eleonora opining that the decision means that that there is no such thing as a general principle of… [read post]
16 Jan 2012, 9:47 am
Chappell, David L. [read post]
