Search for: "BURROWS v. STATE"
Results 101 - 120
of 203
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Aug 2023, 1:30 am
The judge determined that "[h]uman involvement in, and ultimate creative control over, the work at issue was key to the conclusion that the new type of work fell within the bounds of copyright" (referring to the decision in Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v Sarony). [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 1:30 am
The judge determined that "[h]uman involvement in, and ultimate creative control over, the work at issue was key to the conclusion that the new type of work fell within the bounds of copyright" (referring to the decision in Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v Sarony). [read post]
9 Oct 2009, 5:04 am
Burrows, 2008 U.S. [read post]
19 Jan 2024, 9:16 am
Lord Hodge who gave the only judgment (with which Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Leggatt, Lord Burrows and Lady Rose agreed) stated (at [33]): “.. the purpose of section 471(3) is to circumvent the difficult issues that can arise in the application of section 471(1). [read post]
21 May 2021, 5:14 am
The appeal was heard on 8 February 2021 before Lord Reed, Lord Briggs, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt and Lord Burrows. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 1:45 am
Lord Burrows gave the sole judgment. [read post]
28 Apr 2019, 7:45 am
In Janssen v Teva (2009) the Federal Circuit stated that mere plausibility does not suffice to meet this requirement, if it did then patents could be obtained for little more than “respectable guesses”. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 7:23 am
. * The standout emoji law opinion of 2020 is Burrows v. [read post]
13 Jul 2024, 6:30 am
Burrows, Struck by Lightning? [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 11:13 am
Burrows v. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 3:40 am
From Meshwerks, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Feb 2016, 12:00 am
State of Maryland). [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 3:33 pm
App. 1993); Burrows v. [read post]
2 Nov 2020, 1:00 am
The first is Secretary of State for Health and Ors v Servier Laboratories and Ors. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 1:00 am
The proposed panel for hand down is Lord Reed, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Kitchin, Lord Hamblen, and Lord Burrows. [read post]
16 Nov 2020, 5:42 am
As will be seen, the minority (Lords Burrows and Sales) regarded there to have been a choice of applicable law for the contract to be arbitrated and proceeded from this to determine the applicable law of the arbitration agreement. [read post]
2 Feb 2021, 9:30 am
However, in AARP v. [read post]
29 Oct 2021, 1:56 pm
The question whether mere consequential loss satisfies the tort gateway had been considered before by the Supreme Court in the very same case: Brownlie v Four Seasons [2017] UKSC 80; [2018] 2 All ER 91 (“Brownlie I”). [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 4:34 pm
District Court in National Women’s Law Center v. [read post]
15 May 2015, 9:10 am
Appeals Court Environmental Decisions <> Resource Investments v. [read post]
