Search for: "SONG V. HOLDER"
Results 101 - 120
of 433
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Nov 2009, 8:51 am
At this point, it is hard to discern which side of the argument is 100% accurate; however, legislature can take a first step in at least acknowledging the rights of performers as it does other holders of copyrights of the same song. [read post]
25 Jul 2022, 8:50 am
In Sohm v. [read post]
24 Aug 2020, 7:34 am
Regarding the right of publicity, claims that interfere with a copyright holder's exercise of the rights afforded under the Copyright Act are preempted unless the claim serves a serves a distinct state interest. [read post]
3 Oct 2007, 7:08 pm
[Sony BMG ’s attorney] replied, “When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song. [read post]
16 Jun 2016, 12:47 pm
Related Cases: Capitol v. [read post]
3 Jul 2014, 10:37 am
Zalewski v. [read post]
27 Sep 2007, 11:49 pm
[1] Bridgeport v Dimension Films, 410 F.3d 792 (6th Cir. 2005) [2] Id. at 801 [read post]
24 Apr 2007, 3:22 am
In Capitol v. [read post]
10 Dec 2020, 7:48 am
The data identify the songs and the composers. [read post]
22 Nov 2016, 12:12 pm
Today (Nov 22, 2016), the Supreme Court is considering whether to grant certiorari in Lexmark v. [read post]
15 Jul 2014, 9:54 am
Rudnicki v. [read post]
29 Aug 2019, 2:02 am
Further Spotify has also been alleged to have mischievously concealed the accreditation of certain well-known songs like “Lose Yourself” claiming inability to trace Copyright holder. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 8:50 am
One judge characterized the conflicting interests of the parties "Speech-zilla v. [read post]
14 Apr 2017, 2:26 am
USA: Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. [read post]
15 May 2024, 7:41 am
” Other Music Specialist songs found their way into recordings by the Black Eyed Peas and Kid Sister. [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 11:46 am
Koch v. [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 11:46 am
Koch v. [read post]
5 Jul 2015, 8:09 am
Subsequently the rights to the tape were transferred to the first defendant (WPMC).Between late 2009 and October 2010 Iambic negotiated with the claimants (collectively SATV, holders of the rights to the relevant Beatles songs) for a licence to reproduce and otherwise exploit the works as part of the soundtrack to the documentary. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 1:00 pm
Call us with your feedback: (310) 243-6231 In this Episode: Political campaigns raise the ire of copyright holders and newscasters A Canadian Lawyer’s perspectives MegaUpload Golan v. [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 5:40 pm
Catalina v. [read post]
