Search for: "Doe v. Internet Brands, Inc." Results 501 - 520 of 617
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 May 2019, 7:53 am by Rebecca Tushnet
The endorsement guidelines thus inherently, if covertly, recognize that puffery does work. [read post]
3 May 2016, 2:41 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
   Sarah Feingold, Etsy, Inc.: Free speech—we need the internet as it is, doing pretty well. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 3:09 am by gmlevine
” Although not quite apropos, but emphasizing that benefit of the doubt favors the respondent is the Panel’s observation in Quester Group, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Dec 2016, 4:30 am by Ben
Well Marie-Andree cited that 1879 case  Feist Publications, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Oct 2013, 9:44 am by Terry Hart
• • • Incentives to share: why copyright continues to play a role online was originally posted on Copyhype • • • FootnotesABC v Aereo, No. 12-Civ-1540(AJN), order denying preliminary injunction (SDNY, July 11, 2012).Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 2:50 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Joe Touro, Annenberg School: heard rumors that Google is starting to desilo its data: Gmail v. contextual marketing etc. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 9:30 pm by Kim Kirschenbaum
Brand X Internet Services (2005) In setting the Phase II national performance standards and providing for site-specific cost-benefit variances, the EPA relied on its view that § 1326(b)’s “best technology available” standard permits consideration of the technology’s costs, and of the relationship between those costs and the environmental benefits produced. [read post]
24 Jan 2020, 12:32 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
Brand X Internet Services, 545 U.S. 967 (2005), but cannot rewrite an unambiguous one through the guise of interpretation. [read post]