Search for: "United States v. Mark"
Results 6801 - 6820
of 10,394
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Aug 2008, 1:25 pm
– Discussion of IPFrontline.com article ‘Understanding Intellectual Property Value’: (IP finance), How to make sure your IP strategy plan is not doomed to failure: (IP Asset Maximizer Blog) Improve venture capital returns with IP portfolio management: (Ezine @rticles) Global - Trade Marks / Domain Names / Brands Trade mark strategy – counterintuitive names: (IP Thinktank), ICANN Intellectual Property Constituency paper on sunrise… [read post]
16 Feb 2016, 8:30 am
Bush v. [read post]
16 Jun 2016, 2:48 am
United States, which he characterizes as having “effectively legalized racial profiling of drivers by police. [read post]
23 Aug 2008, 1:23 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: DRM for streaming music dies a quiet death: (Electronic Frontier Foundation), (Techdirt) CAFC decides Apotex and Impax infringed AstraZeneca’s Prilosec patents: (Law360), (Patent Prospector), (Patent Docs), (GenericsWeb), CAFC upholds lower court’s decision finding USPTO was within its rights to subject a Cooper patent to… [read post]
4 Apr 2019, 6:00 am
If the Supreme Court is an elite largely influenced by elites, the United States is not a democracy in the classical Aristotelean sense, but a mixed regime where aristocrats and plebes both participate in governance. [read post]
16 Dec 2021, 12:00 pm
The United States and Canada do not typically pay ransoms. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 12:57 pm
A familiar sight for lawyersinvolved in TVCatchup suitsITV Broadcasting Limited, ITV 2 Limited, ITV Digital Channels Limited, Channel Four Television Corporation, 4 Ventures Limited, Channel 5 Broadcasting Limited and ITV Studios Limited v TVCatchup Limited (in administration), TVCatchup (UK) Limited and Media Resources Limited (a Mauritian company) [2015] EWCA Civ 204 is the latest development in the long-running copyright litigation saga which is usually known by its shorter name of ITV… [read post]
4 Feb 2022, 6:10 am
By Mark S. [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 5:50 am
FMC Corp. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2016, 7:27 am
United States v. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 8:03 pm
(IP tango) Switzerland Further step to Swiss Federal Patent Court (EPLAW) United Kingdom Reminder: an appeal is not a re-hearing: Nampak Cartons Ltd v Rapid Action Packaging Ltd (PatLit) Stretching copyright with contract: Global Coal Ltd v. [read post]
20 Jun 2011, 3:41 am
This is good news and it's good to see that his nomination is moving relatively quickly.Looks like I have some light reading to do now that I'm back -- Judge Carnes issues two lengthy and significant opinions last week -- United States v. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 5:53 am
The Los Angeles Times continues the discussion over United States v. [read post]
3 Jan 2015, 3:34 pm
United States, 561 U.S. 358, 370, 383 (2010) (crediting that “the facts of the case were ‘neither heinous nor sensational’” and there was “[n]o evidence of the smoking-gun” of his guilt); United States v. [read post]
20 Jun 2008, 8:07 am
: (IP finance), Technical assistance a key point of discussion at TRIPS Council: (Intellectual Property Watch), WIPO turmoil as new DG’s future comes under threat: (IAM), WIPO to host inter-regional forum to explore strategies to enhance development and service-orientation of IP offices: (WIPO), Controversy over lack of transparency and overreaching enforcement provisions in ACTA: (Spicy IP), (Spicy IP) Global - Trade Marks / Domain Names / Brands World… [read post]
10 Dec 2009, 7:37 pm
") (quotation marks omitted). [read post]
25 Jul 2013, 4:30 am
In R. v. [read post]
8 Dec 2021, 5:21 am
Indeed, in comments proffered on the release of the State Council White Paper Tian Peiyan, the deputy director of the Communist Party's Policy Research Office took great pains to contrast the Chinese path of democratic constitutionalism with that advanced by the United States and its larger camp. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 9:18 am
” Brown v. [read post]
