Search for: "U.S. v. Mark"
Results 8261 - 8280
of 11,362
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jul 2011, 6:59 am
An interesting aspect of the Court's recent decision in Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 5:00 am
Concepcion (2011) __ U.S. __ [131 S.Ct. 1740] (AT&T). [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 4:34 am
Woods v. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 2:00 am
In Oppenheimer v. [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 9:00 pm
U.S. v. [read post]
26 Jul 2011, 11:43 pm
That changed in 2004, when a unanimous Supreme Court strongly affirmed its support for a balanced approach to copyright law and in the process breathed new life into the Copyright Act’s fair dealing provision in a case called Law Society of Upper Canada v. [read post]
25 Jul 2011, 7:46 am
It may also flatten the distinction between references to international law, obscuring the stories of how they got into the opinion or whether they accurately reflect international law of the time at all (an issue hinted at in discussions of Hans v. [read post]
25 Jul 2011, 2:00 am
Separately, Tenaris resolved a parallel investigation by the U.S. [read post]
24 Jul 2011, 6:12 pm
The same can apply for color trade marks and trade dress in the U.S. as long as the color has acquired a "secondary meaning" and is non-functional, i.e. the color does not function except as an indication as to source (Qualitex v Jacobson) Ask any shopper on Fifth Avenue and the AmeriKat thinks one could quickly come to the conclusion that the primary function of the red-sole is that of indicating the source of the shoe as being Louboutin - that or signalling to… [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 12:31 pm
In Hollander v. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 5:59 am
U.S. v. [read post]
20 Jul 2011, 5:23 pm
The seminar marks the first appearance of Sean X. [read post]
20 Jul 2011, 8:07 am
, supra, § 1.3; Mark A. [read post]
20 Jul 2011, 1:51 am
Over the past 200+ years, however, there has been some marked divergence between the two systems. [read post]
19 Jul 2011, 6:05 pm
” Czech v. [read post]
17 Jul 2011, 11:57 am
Knights, 534 U.S. 112, 118–19 (2001) (internal quotation marks omitted).That balance clearly favors the Government here. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 9:36 pm
Purnell, 2011 U.S. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 8:39 am
Bank of China Ltd.: In Keren Elmaliach v. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 8:39 am
Bank of China Ltd.: In Keren Elmaliach v. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 7:51 am
Knights, 534 U.S. 112, 118–19 (2001) (internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
