Search for: "Rose v. State" Results 1041 - 1060 of 2,317
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jul 2010, 10:13 am by Joe Miller
I have been General Counsel to Rose Acre Farms for the past five years. [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 7:16 am by Eric Goldman
Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 580-81 (1994) (“Parody needs to mimic an original to make its point”). [read post]
27 Sep 2011, 3:27 am
Circuit Courts of Appeal In Swartzwelder v McNeilly, 01-1085, the U.S. [read post]
30 Jun 2011, 7:24 am by jewatson
Ferguson in these library resources: Inherently unequal : the betrayal of equal rights by the Supreme Court, 1865-1903 by Lawrence Goldstone KF4757 .G655 2011 Shaping a nation : twenty-five Supreme Court cases that changed the United States by Gary Rose KF4550 .R597 2010 Color-blind justice : Albion Tourgée and the quest for racial equality from the Civil War to Plessy v. [read post]
10 Jun 2021, 12:25 pm by Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo
The actual or potential use of registered marks in another form is irrelevant when comparing the signs [para. 25] (emphasis added).This is consistent with paragraph 34 of Mitrakos v EUIPO – Belasco Baquedano (YAMAS), which refers to paragraph 38 of Pico Food v OHIM — Sobieraj (MILANÓWEK CREAM FUDGE). [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 8:09 am
 Whereas Weird Al’s Grammy-winning song fits snugly within the parody definition (and Yankovic always seeks permission, in order “to maintain relationships”), Dumb Starbucks position is questionable.ParodyIn the landmark decision addressing fair-use in Campbell v Acuff-Rose Music, Inc the US Supreme Court stated that parody "is the use of some elements of a prior author's composition to create a new one that, at least in… [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 5:11 pm
PALACIOS, ROSE MARIE; from Harris County; 14th district (14-06-00428-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 10-11-07) as redrafted08-0304ASPRI INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. v. [read post]
17 Jul 2019, 4:04 am by Edith Roberts
” In an op-ed at The Morning Call, Rose Mary Knick reflects on her victory in Knick v. [read post]
On July 25, 2017, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued an investigative report stating that US securities laws apply to sales of securities in the United States purchased with virtual currencies or distributed with blockchain technology. [read post]