Search for: "DOLL V. STATE"
Results 161 - 180
of 391
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
, says: In the same way that Congress did not intend to cabin section 602’s application to copies from countries with a shorter term or compulsory licenses, the legislative record provides no evidence that it intended its application to situations where a trademark owner adds a copyrightable insignia or label on goods to protect against their parallel importation into the United States. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
The Software and Information Industry Association, arguing that “the Copyright Act contains the flexibility to deal with unforeseen applications of section 602″, says: In the same way that Congress did not intend to cabin section 602’s application to copies from countries with a shorter term or compulsory licenses, the legislative record provides no evidence that it intended its application to situations where a trademark owner adds a copyrightable insignia or label on goods… [read post]
18 Oct 2012, 7:49 pm
Co. v. [read post]
5 Oct 2012, 6:10 pm
Here are the basic facts of CNH Capital America LLC v. [read post]
30 Sep 2012, 8:51 pm
Ringgold v. [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 8:45 am
For a short history of the the Mattel/MGA trade secret feud over the Bratz dolls, see here. [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 4:20 am
Although such Final Rules were widely criticized by most companies in the United States, a sole individual, Dr. [read post]
24 Jul 2012, 6:47 am
Heller and McDonald v. [read post]
15 Jul 2012, 4:23 am
Traditional items that are frequently copied by non-Indians include Indian-style jewellery, pottery, baskets, cared stone fetishes, woven rugs, kachina dolls and clothing. [read post]
11 Jul 2012, 6:51 am
United States, 458 F.3d 1345, 1351 (Fed. [read post]
21 May 2012, 11:30 pm
This case would represent a chance for the Irish judiciary to look at again at the Crotty v An Taoiseach, a case recalled with admiration by the barrister Vincent Martin in today’s Irish Times. [read post]
14 May 2012, 4:45 am
Forget Mapp v. [read post]
2 May 2012, 12:19 pm
United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 6:22 am
Doll. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 7:42 am
Pallin v. [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 5:58 am
Kansas v. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 6:21 am
The court found a substantial state interest in curbing youth smoking that would be directly advanced by limiting marketing of tobacco products. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 9:25 am
Corp. v. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 5:34 pm
(sometimes called the “Bratz case” because the dispute concerns the Bratz dolls). [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 1:09 pm
In the 2010 New Mexico Supreme Court case of State v. [read post]
