Search for: "State v. Song" Results 1761 - 1780 of 2,074
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Sep 2008, 6:00 pm
: (Danny Weitzner - Open Internet Policy), United States: How many lines is de minimis? [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 3:33 pm by Daphne Keller
In principle, filters are supposed to detect when one piece of content – an image or a song, for example – is a duplicate of another. [read post]
23 Sep 2015, 7:43 am by Kevin Smith, J.D.
The connection with Georgia State is mostly found in the fact that the opinion in Katz v. [read post]
4 Oct 2024, 1:09 pm by Kevin
So this joins my previous contributions to Wikipedia correcting articles such as those on the Idaho official state song, United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2017, 4:13 am by Steve Lubet
Before the end of the year, Ruffin would author the opinion inState v. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
30 Sep 2022, 5:28 pm by Eugene Volokh
Wills (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 1400, 1410-1413 [Holding that song lyrics, if used to harass and ridicule, are not protected speech; affirming injunction where the defendant wrote three vitriolic letters to a third party with the intention that they would be discovered and read by plaintiff.] [read post]
15 Sep 2020, 3:26 pm by Andrew Koppelman
  It is not clear to me how one could teach certain major free speech cases, such as Brandenburg v. [read post]
26 Mar 2017, 11:55 am by Ben
The survey is available until 3rd April.The UK Copyright Literacy page states that the research is regarding “copyright officers or similar specialists in UK libraries and educational / cultural institutions. [read post]
18 Jul 2020, 4:57 pm
As a result, on May 27, 2020, the Secretary of State announced that the PRC had fundamentally undermined Hong Kong’s autonomy and certified and reported to the Congress, pursuant to sections 205 and 301 of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992, as amended, respectively, that Hong Kong no longer warrants treatment under United States law in the same manner as United States laws were applied to Hong Kong before July 1, 1997. [read post]