Search for: "Cable One, Inc." Results 461 - 480 of 1,049
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Jun 2014, 9:55 am by Matthew Schruers
  The Second Circuit agreed, holding that a one-to-one performance of a work was not “public,” and therefore not regulated by the Copyright Act. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 8:12 am by Peter Menell and David Nimmer
Aereo, Inc., presented two fundamental showdowns:  one between the cable industry and a charismatic disruptive technology and the other between textualists and jurists seeking to vindicate legislative intent. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 5:49 am by Barry Sookman
Aereo, Inc., the SCOTUS agreed telling Aereo essentially, it looked like a cable retransmitter, it acted like a cable retransmitter, Congress had specifically amended the Copyright Act to ensure that cable retransmitters publically performed when they delivered programming to subscribers, and that Aereo’s service was indistinguishable in any meaningful way from those services. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 1:34 pm
United Artists Television, Inc., 392 U. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 7:22 am by Ben
Inc., the owner of audio of the King James Bible read by Alexander Scourby. [read post]
18 Jun 2014, 5:21 am
© 2014 Cable News Network, Inc. [read post]
9 Jun 2014, 9:28 am
It has sued Yeakle's Sports Bar and Grill, Inc., as well as Wesley Yeakle as an individual, under the Communications Act of 1934 and The Cable & Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 12:39 pm
” That’s one way to say it, but I think it would have been more revealing to have said that it actually “relate[s] to speech intended to affect elections. [read post]
1 Jun 2014, 12:18 pm by Frank Montero
The traditional “silo” mentality that addressed TV, radio, publishing, recording, cable – and now, the Internet – as separate and distinct areas cabined off from one another is eroding. [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 10:41 pm by Orly Lobel
Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. (1974) the Supreme Court ruled that cable providers were rabbit ear antennas which did not infringe on broadcasters’ copyrights. [read post]
26 Apr 2014, 6:23 pm
While she was registering it, Harpo was applying to register the mark OWN for a new cable network, the Oprah Winfrey Network. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 4:32 am by Ben
At one point she gave the example of a coaxial cable supplier and asked Clement, “How do I avoid a definition [of ‘public performance’] that might make those people liable? [read post]