Search for: "Feist v. Feist"
Results 161 - 180
of 217
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Apr 2011, 1:57 am
The Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal features these articles (in Volume IX Book 3): Moral Rights and Supernatural Fiction: Authorial Dignity and the New Moral Rights Agendas Not that There’s Anything Wrong with That: Imputations of Homosexuality and the Normative Structure of Defamation Law Protection for Informational Works After Feist Publications Inc. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 2:15 am
The US Supreme Court required originality and rejected the "sweat of the brow" doctrine in Feist v. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 2:15 am
In Harris v. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 2:04 am
Compare Chamberlain Group, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 9:02 am
I always make this point when I teach the Feist case—I ask the students if Feist might license Rural’s data even though the court said the data was completely unprotected by copyright law (the answer is yes, of course). [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 4:20 am
Also in that initial posting, I noted that the district court had followed the First Circuit in Phillips v. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 7:06 am
To paraphrase only slightly Feist Publications, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2011, 12:49 pm
Nielsen Company (US), LLC v. [read post]
22 Jan 2011, 8:34 pm
More particularly, Darden argues that the Register's refusal to find sufficient originality in his submitted works despite the “extremely low” amount of creativity required for a work to be copyrightable, Feist Publications, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 5:41 pm
Borland, Int’l, Inc., 49 F.3d 807, 813 (1st Cir. 1995), citing Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Oct 2010, 12:27 pm
" Feist Publ'ns, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Oct 2010, 1:57 am
(picture, left - the AmeriKat sporting her latest plaid fashion)To prove copyright infringement, the claimant has the burden of establishing that they own a valid copyright and the copying was of the elements in the claimant's work that were original (Feist Pubs v Rural Tel. [read post]
29 Sep 2010, 2:04 pm
Feist Publications, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 10:33 am
Consider how arguments like those in Hangarter and in Ritchie v. [read post]
6 Sep 2010, 8:15 am
Supreme Court's Feist opinion, which rejected the "sweat of the brow" doctrine and required a modicum of originality to qualify for copyright, found the analyst's opinions to satisfiy the originality test and thus be covered by copyright. [read post]
14 Aug 2010, 5:02 am
Sprigman: this is a specific v. general placebo issue. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 8:56 am
Third, further erosion of those foundations came from the Supreme Court in 1991, when the ruled, in Feist Publications v. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 5:00 am
’ Feist Publ'ns, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jul 2010, 5:00 am
’ Feist Publ'ns, Inc. v. [read post]
23 May 2010, 11:36 pm
Byce (Copyright Litigation Blog) CAD computer software: No artistic sizzle, but after filtration – still copyrightable under Feist: Real View LLC v. 20-20 Technologies, Inc. [read post]
