Search for: "Spiegel v Spiegel"
Results 61 - 80
of 182
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jun 2022, 6:49 am
In its June 9, 2022 decision in Spiegel v. [read post]
29 Nov 2012, 2:15 am
(trade mark law: dirty tricks and acquiescence in honest use); Case C-162/10 Phonographic Performance (Ireland) Ltd v Ireland and Others (communication of a work to the public, via a hotel bedroom)Case C‑145/10 Eva-Maria Painer v Standard VerlagsGmbH, Axel Springer AG, Süddeutsche Zeitung GmbH, SPIEGEL-Verlag Rudolf AUGSTEIN GmbH & Co KG and Verlag M. [read post]
21 Nov 2017, 12:26 am
by L Donald Prutzman Tannenbaum Helpern Syracuse & Hirschtritt LLP -- Spiegel Online: Do copyright exceptions and fundamental rights make easy bedfellows? [read post]
17 May 2011, 8:00 am
See Levine v. [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 2:40 am
Spiegel v Rowland, 552 US 1257; see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442; McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301-302; Gioeli v Vlachos, 89 AD3d 984; Dempster v Liotti, 86 AD3d 169, 176). [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 5:04 am
” To state a cause of action for legal malpractice, in addition to an attorney-clientrelationship, the complaint must set forth “the negligence of the attorney; that the negligence was the proximate cause of the loss sustained; and actual damages” (Leder v Spiegel, 31 AD3d 266 [1st Dept 2006]). [read post]
22 Dec 2018, 3:25 pm
Issues under consideration include whether the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights can be relied upon to justify exceptions or limitations beyond those in the Copyright Directive (Spiegel Online GmbH v Volker Beck, C-516/17; Funke Medien (Case C-469/17) (Advocate General Opinion 25 October 2018 here) and PelhamCase 476/17); and whether a link to a PDF amounts to publication for the purposes of the quotation exception (Spiegel Online GmbH v Volker Beck,… [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 2:24 pm
Leder v Spiegel, 9 NY3d 836 [2007]; Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438 [2007]; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428 [2007]; Davis v Klein, 88 NY2d 1008 [1996]; Carmel v Lunney, 70 NY2d 169 [1987]). [read post]
19 Apr 2012, 9:15 pm
Arthur Spiegel***Ivonne Cuesta v. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 3:29 am
Co. v North Am. [read post]
22 Aug 2019, 1:30 am
Luckily the CJEU took this question on and handed down its judgment only a few weeks ago.The case of Spiegel Online GmbH v Volker Beck concerned a manuscript written by a German politician, Volker Beck. [read post]
22 Aug 2019, 1:30 am
Luckily the CJEU took this question on and handed down its judgment only a few weeks ago.The case of Spiegel Online GmbH v Volker Beck concerned a manuscript written by a German politician, Volker Beck. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 5:26 am
"Nonetheless, the complaint must be dismissed because plaintiff failed to show that any negligence on defendants' part proximately caused it to be unable to exploit the commercial permit (see Leder v Spiegel, 31 AD3d 266, 267-268 [2006], affd 9 NY3d 836 [2007], cert denied 552 US 1257 [2008]; Brooks v Lewin, 21 AD3d 731, 734 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 713 [2006]). [read post]
18 Feb 2019, 2:26 pm
Finally, there is an extended reflection on the Advocate General's conclusions on the Spiegel Online case relating to copyright exceptions and their interaction with fundamental rights. [read post]
1 Sep 2019, 3:15 am
Computer and Internet Weekly Updates for 2019-08-24 https://t.co/FfoJbnaKYc 2019-08-25 A Looming AI War: Transparency v. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 4:15 pm
In 2010 the Federal Court of Appeal upheld appeals by Der Spiegel and Mannheimer Morgen adopting the same reasoning as applied in the Deutschlandradio case. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 12:02 am
The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human rights yesterday heard the conjoined applications in Von Hannover v Germany and Springer v Germany. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 8:12 am
In its ruling in Kusnierz, the Court of Appeal stated that it preferred Spiegel’s conclusion and reasons in Desbiens to those of the trial judge in Kusnierz. [read post]
26 Feb 2007, 5:46 am
State v. [read post]
5 Sep 2019, 4:33 am
“To state a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice, a plaintiff must allege: (1) that the attorney failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession; and (2) that the attorney’s breach of the duty proximately caused the plaintiff actual and ascertainable damages” (Dempster v Liotti, 86 AD3d 169, 176 [2011] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Leder v Spiegel, 9… [read post]
