Search for: "Ray v. Law"
Results 1621 - 1640
of 2,034
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2007, 4:04 am
See Elektra v. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 12:13 pm
(Michael Geist) Google agrees to pay $125 million to authors and publishers affected by Google Print service, settling copyright litigation (Ars Technica) Google is done paying Silicon Valley’s legal bills (EFF) Apple bends to studios, adds copyright protection to MacBooks (Wired) Website parodying Union Square Partnership shut down due to bogus cybersquatting and copyright infringement claims (EFF) Singers Daryl Hall and John Oates sue Warner/Chappell Music for failing to sue others for… [read post]
23 Oct 2015, 10:05 am
Lester Nichols and Ray Lunsford were registered sex offenders from the Kansas City area. [read post]
20 Dec 2008, 3:00 am
gain upper hand in Blu-ray DRM battle (Ars Technica) Africa South African Times report on state of African music, lack of support and protection (Afro-IP) Australia Australian Copyright Tribunal: consumer valuation of copyright: Audio-Visual Copyright Society (t/a Screenrights) v Foxtel and Re PPCA (IPKat) (IP finance) Innovation patents in Australia. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 12:19 pm
Amendments are only permitted if they comply with the law. [read post]
19 Jul 2016, 6:07 pm
Diaz v. [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 8:22 am
” Back when the law was created, an x-ray was state of the art imaging. [read post]
26 Sep 2008, 11:45 pm
(Techdirt) India Warner loses Hari Puttar case before Delhi High Court for delay in taking action and suppression of material facts (SPICY IP) (IPKat) (Techdirt) (SPICY IP) (Innovationpartners) Delay in evidence suffocates trade mark opposition: Pidilite Industries Limited v Registrar of Trademarks (International Law Office) Delhi High Court rules in Wipro's favour in its trade mark infringement action against local Delhi company (RelatIP) Delhi High Court:… [read post]
24 Nov 2015, 8:18 am
Nintendo commenced proceedings under Article 102c of Law No 633 as amended by Legislative Decree No 68 which transposes the InfoSoc Directive into Italian law and gives rights holders the ability to take action against any person manufacturing and/or distributing equipment which circumvents TPMs. [read post]
23 May 2018, 8:00 am
In Gill v. [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 9:30 am
Flanagan v. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 4:36 pm
In today’s case (Hill v. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 9:01 pm
As the Supreme Court said in Riley v. [read post]
8 Jun 2020, 10:13 am
Furthermore, there is the matter of physicians reading the same X-ray in two, inconsistent ways. [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 9:15 am
The case of State v. [read post]
8 Oct 2012, 12:21 pm
In Wisner v. [read post]
29 May 2018, 1:50 pm
Border Searches of Electronic Devices The law is clear: the Supreme Court in 1977 in United States v. [read post]
4 Apr 2025, 6:30 am
Cheffins (University of Cambridge) and Bobby V. [read post]
24 May 2010, 10:00 pm
” Louisiana Associated General Contractors v. [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 11:37 am
”Parrish, a partner at the Washington, D.C. office of international law firm King & Spalding and a member of its national appellate and strategic counseling practice group, was involved with the landmark Coleman v. [read post]
