Search for: "Figures v. Figures" Results 961 - 980 of 15,427
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Mar 2023, 1:49 am by Tessa Shepperson
  But first: The Supreme Court decision in Rakusen v. [read post]
3 Mar 2023, 12:01 am by José Guillermo
QUISPE R. a quién también he denunciado, naturalmente  mucho menos a mi, en consecuencia, SI GRITE A MIS NIETOS HA DEBIDO SER DESDE LA VÍA PÚBLICA, por tanto, extremadamente fácil comprobar dichos gritos, su residencia está rodeada de negocios y de un trajín comercial contante, es cuestión de interrogarlos.Los únicos gritos que de mi boca han salido, los he dirigido contra una mujer que intentó impedir que pasee con… [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 7:01 am by Nedim Malovic
This was because the trade mark regime is (probably) more suitable to protect a product (the BAYC NFT) which is essentially sold as an iconic luxury item as well as an investment rather than as a piece of fine art.Coming back to the Hermès v. [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 4:00 am by INFORRM
Prior to the review, we were required to provide a list of all files closed within the previous 18 months where we had acted for claimants who were public/high-net-worth figures or corporations asserting a defamation/privacy claim, or where we had acted for defendants on the end of such a threat. [read post]
1 Mar 2023, 1:15 pm
The restitution order doesn't need to be a set dollar figure. [read post]
28 Feb 2023, 12:22 pm by Jonathan Zasloff
It shows a Court trying to figure things out: while it could have been more creative, and the statute is badly flawed, the biggest problem comes from the university, which basically didn’t do its homework. [read post]
28 Feb 2023, 5:31 am by Ryan Merkley
As lawsuit-inspiring musicians go, you can’t do much better than 2 Live Crew. [read post]
27 Feb 2023, 11:30 pm by Giorgio Luceri
For some copyright aficionados, the company was also the protagonist in a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by Oracle in the US, "Rimini Street Inc. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2023, 5:58 am by Stewart Baker
[I only count two votes to ratify Big Tech's sweeping immunity claims] The Supreme Court's oral argument in Gonzalez v. [read post]
27 Feb 2023, 12:00 am by Giorgio Luceri
Therefore, the word element “Google” in the contested (figurative) mark would be negligible due to its size and position. [read post]