Search for: "Arnold v. Arnold"
Results 1481 - 1500
of 2,126
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
[Guest post] How much is that SEP in the window? 5 Themes from the IPKat/LSE Nokia v Daimler seminar
5 Jul 2021, 7:40 am
We also still had a referral pending at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Nokia v Daimler. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 4:32 am
In addition, defendants note that prior to serving the Bill of Particulars, Longhi retained Arnold E. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 1:02 pm
In today’s case (Schray v. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 8:17 am
The removal of the own name defence and fundamental rights – Sky v SkyKickSky v SkyKick [2017] EWHC 1769 (Ch) (July 2017)Most trade mark lawyers know Sky’s reputation for pursuing action against anyone using the word SKY in their name, even SKYPE. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 6:00 am
In 1972, the per se flood crested in U.S. v. [read post]
12 Mar 2014, 8:15 am
The case is (1) Brian Wade (2) Geraldine Perry V British Sky Broadcasting Limited [2014] EWHC 634 and although Simon Cowell has nothing to do with it he still gets a mention in the judgment.It’s time! [read post]
17 Apr 2018, 10:55 am
Nothing was more juicy than last month's decision from Mr Justice Carr in Illumnia v Premaitha [2018] EWHC 615 (Pat) in which he dealt with two applications brought by the defendants for (i) strike out of Illumina’s claim on the basis of abuse of process, and (ii) summary judgment against Illumina on the basis of issue estoppel. [read post]
12 Oct 2019, 7:09 am
Continental v. [read post]
1 Aug 2023, 2:13 am
The IPKat is pleased to host the following guest post by Katfriend Alessandro Cerri regarding the recent judgment of the High Court of England and Wales in the Lifestyle Equities v Berkshire Polo trade mark dispute. [read post]
21 Oct 2017, 4:27 am
Michael Bahar, David Cook, Varun Shingari and Curtis Arnold outlined how the Supreme Court’s ruling in Carpenter v. [read post]
30 Nov 2020, 1:34 am
The applicant had previously, on September 20, 2018, been granted such an injunction by Justice Richard Arnold (as he was at the time) , but that order had expired on the 1st of October 2020, by virtue of a “sunset clause” contained in the order. [read post]
15 Aug 2020, 4:05 am
The survey showed some degree of recognition of the shape and a level of association with JLR, but not recognition of the shapes as trade marks, i.e. as designating the goods of JLR and no other's.For those reasons, the Court was satisfied that the Hearing Officer had carefully and fairly assessed the survey evidence in a way which disclosed no error of principle.CommentWhat this case essentially confirms is the approach previously adopted by Arnold J (as he then was) in… [read post]
30 May 2016, 10:00 am
| Anne Frank's diary & geoblocking | Magic Leap lampoons Google Glass | Arnold's decision in Richter Gedeon Vegyeszeti Gyar RT v Generics| US Trade Secrets Act passes House | Publishing and the Machine| DSM Communication on Platforms leaked! [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 6:45 am
Pluripotent v totipotent So what does this distinction amount to? [read post]
27 May 2013, 12:48 am
In Vestergaard Frandsen A/S v Bestnet Europe Ltd [2009] EWHC 657 (Ch), before the Chancery Division of the High Court, England and Wales, Mr Justice Arnold found that Skovmund had breached his duty not to use any confidential information acquired during his work for Vestergaard and that Sig was liable. too. [read post]
21 May 2017, 2:34 pm
The effect of Article 15 can be seen in the ECJ decisions of SABAM v Scarlet and SABAM v Netlog prohibiting content filtering injunctions, and in Arnold J’s Cartier judgment itself:“If ISPs could be required to block websites without having actual knowledge of infringing activity, that would be tantamount to a general obligation to monitor. [read post]
9 Jan 2017, 4:19 pm
Schweitzer v. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 5:13 am
But the recent Second Appellate District reversal of Judge's Lewis' ruling in Lappe v. [read post]
21 May 2017, 2:34 pm
The effect of Article 15 can be seen in the ECJ decisions of SABAM v Scarlet and SABAM v Netlog prohibiting content filtering injunctions, and in Arnold J’s Cartier judgment itself:“If ISPs could be required to block websites without having actual knowledge of infringing activity, that would be tantamount to a general obligation to monitor. [read post]
7 Aug 2015, 6:10 am
Watkins v. [read post]
