Search for: "SERVICE REPRODUCTION COMPANY"
Results 901 - 920
of 1,097
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2011, 9:24 am
Managers need to be aware of the laws that apply to your company and the consequences for violation. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 6:47 am
Rather, I am simply advertising my trademark legal services via the distribution of flash drives to potential clients. [read post]
26 Jun 2011, 7:20 am
Opus, a Germany based company, sells via Dutch web sites blank media to Dutch customers. [read post]
18 Jun 2011, 5:23 am
In December 2009, Xbiz announced that the Complainant had been nominated for the Traffic Service Company of the Year award that year. [read post]
16 Jun 2011, 4:01 am
However, it is open to the Member States to establish a private copying levy chargeable to the persons who make reproduction equipment, devices and media available to that final user [so the Dutch can make Opus pay ...], since they are able to pass on the amount of that levy in the price paid by the final user for that service [... and Opus can then charge more]. [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 9:56 am
Wage compression at large companies has increased dramatically. [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 9:55 am
Wage compression at large companies has increased dramatically. [read post]
18 May 2011, 2:48 am
If it doesn’t, the music companies must either begin legal action against Google or Amazon, or make an unambiguous statement about what they deem is acceptable use of their content. [read post]
18 May 2011, 2:48 am
If it doesn’t, the music companies must either begin legal action against Google or Amazon, or make an unambiguous statement about what they deem is acceptable use of their content. [read post]
16 May 2011, 10:26 am
It also includes information about the individual’s or family member’s request for genetic services, genetic information of a fetus carried by the individual or family member, and genetic information of an embryo “legally held by the individual or family member using an assisted reproductive technology” (e.g., in vitro fertilization). [read post]
15 May 2011, 11:37 pm
Not every jurisdiction in the world has a provision in its trade mark law that is as curious as Article 10 of Regulation 207/2009 on the Community trade mark which reads: "Reproduction of Community trade marks in dictionaries If the reproduction of a Community trade mark in a dictionary, encyclopaedia or similar reference work gives the impression that it constitutes the generic name of the goods or services for which the trade mark is registered, the publisher… [read post]
13 May 2011, 11:15 am
An extremely interesting study of piracy, defined as large-scale unauthorized reproduction both for profit and via free downloads, around the world. [read post]
9 May 2011, 7:25 pm
[via Ars Technica] * WARNING: HTML in this post may contain chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm. [read post]
8 May 2011, 8:01 pm
But other digital music services that are subject to Sections 114 (webcasters), 115 ("DPD", or "digital phonorecord deliveries", i.e. copies or reproductions of musical compositions made digitally) and 106(1) (other digital reproductions by audio services), are all covered. [read post]
7 Apr 2011, 2:49 pm
Senate Bill 176 would have prohibited health plans offered through our exchange from covering abortion services. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 5:57 am
TrustE allowed companies like Axciom but consumers weren’t in a good position to evaluate the merits. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 1:23 pm
The Complaint alleges that prior to Apple’s APP STORE service, other companies in the industry offered a variety of downloadable mobile software such as ringtones, wallpapers, and games, but that such companies branded their services with a variety of terms that “bore no similarity to APP STORE. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 2:58 pm
If that makes little sense to you, you're in good company. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 11:30 am
We hope the court will agree and protect women's access to vital reproductive health care services. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 2:06 am
Yet their copyright was not upheld, in the name of the public interest, when they tried to enjoin the reproduction of stills from the film in a history book on the subject in Time Inc. v. [read post]
