Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 4101 - 4120
of 4,765
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jun 2010, 4:36 am
If a competitor is complaining, it’s good for consumers. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 7:09 pm
While rates can be quite high (for example, the 21% APR in Till v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 1:46 pm
McRae, Robert T. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 6:22 pm
I would characterize this as one of the most rebloggingest blog posts I've ever written, but for those interested in who is winning the afternoon of financial reform (and I am one), here's Barney Frank's summary of the agreement so far; you'll note there isn't yet agreement on what to do with derivatives, the Volcker Rule, Frannie (which may not get addressed at all), and consumer protection. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 4:50 am
The proposed Copyright Modernization Act (and here the Kat quotes)* provides legal protection for businesses that choose to use technological protection measures (TPMs) or "digital locks", to protect their IP as part of their business models;* implements the rights and protections of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Internet Treaties, which brings Canada in line with international standards [up-to-date to the mid 1990s?] [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 1:00 am
At this stage, he requested a review by the Disability Appeals Officer, who overturned the decision of HSE Consumer Affairs. [read post]
20 Jun 2010, 9:17 pm
United States v. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 10:10 pm
If they didn’t, that would be the end of this marathon lawsuit. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 6:04 am
(SGI) v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 8:14 pm
All One God Faith, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 6:57 am
In past downturns, we haven’t seen ads like this (v. something staplegunned to a telephone pole). [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 3:09 pm
Ill June 11, 2010) e360 v. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 4:15 am
US v. [read post]
14 Jun 2010, 4:30 am
According to the court, the I Can't Believe it's Not Butter label's listing of ingredients is subject to the NLEA, but the allusion to the "nutritious blend" is advertising in the label, and is subject to state consumer protection laws, not the NLEA. [read post]
14 Jun 2010, 2:49 am
His service and all the time consuming work all attorneys do for FACDL and NACDL is donated and serves an important role in protecting the role of criminal defense attorneys in our system. [read post]
12 Jun 2010, 12:20 am
Back in 1834, the Supreme Court decided in Wheaton v. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 8:36 am
Don't have any now.SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATESNO. 08-998JAN HAMILTON, CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE, PETITIONER v. [read post]
10 Jun 2010, 8:09 pm
It’s worth pointing out that there are three possible costs to consumers here: The hassle of “forced choice”—of being hounded with pop-up reminders about installing an antivirus program, and then having to go through the initial set-up process to choose and install an antivirus program. [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 8:13 pm
In other words, given the reality of regulatory capture, especially at the FCC, the choice is not between the regulatory paradise imagined by Free Press—a land where the digital “milk and honey” runs freely and investment never dries up no matter how heavy the burdens of regulation—and a digital dystopia in which companies collude with each other to thwart consumer choice. [read post]
