Search for: "State v. Holderness" Results 1061 - 1080 of 7,269
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jul 2024, 9:48 am by centerforartlaw
The second part of the judgment then focused on whether such violation was justified by the unique qualities of the property in question, the peculiarities of its discovery, or the Italian State’s interest in preserving the integrity of its cultural patrimony. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 12:02 pm by Lyle Denniston
Holder (Attorney General), et al. (10-545). [read post]
21 Jul 2020, 1:23 am by Jani Ihalainen
It'll remain to be seen whether Member States enact any freedoms as discussed above, but it would seem highly unlikely given the current state of the World. [read post]
21 Jul 2020, 1:23 am by Jani Ihalainen
It'll remain to be seen whether Member States enact any freedoms as discussed above, but it would seem highly unlikely given the current state of the World. [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 2:45 am by Jeremy
This morning the Court of Justice of the European Union gave judgment in Case C-435/12 ACI Adam BV and Others v Stichting de Thuiskopie, Stichting Onderhandelingen Thuiskopie vergoeding. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 8:41 am by elizabethw
As holders of an Oxford SSO this means access to a variety of both primary and secondary sources from Australia, Canada, India, Hong Kong, Malaysia , New Zealand, Singapore, and the United States. [read post]
11 Jan 2021, 6:37 pm by Shannon O'Hare
Nonetheless, as Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat, stated, “the good news is, Congress is not going to be the Grinch”. [read post]
21 Aug 2009, 11:44 am
Peter Shipley is a Bay Area hacker and patent-holder who sues technology companies under the corporate name Enhanced Security Research, LLC. [read post]
14 Sep 2010, 2:00 am by gmlevine
Domain names whole or in part similar to a trademark only become confusing when they confuse the “objective bystander” as the concurring in part Panel stated in Open Society Institute v. [read post]
15 Sep 2015, 1:57 pm
  In Bateman v Mnemonics (1996), the court there stated that because fair use is a statutory doctrine, fair use is not an infringement. [read post]