Search for: "Little v. Ives"
Results 161 - 180
of 1,632
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jan 2022, 2:37 pm
" Smith v. [read post]
21 Aug 2022, 5:06 am
In National Assn of Broadcasters v. [read post]
9 Jul 2020, 6:25 pm
A little more than one year ago, we reported on a settlement (Cassell et al. v. [read post]
24 Jul 2014, 3:00 am
This decision is still not available on BAILII, but that's no excuse for leaving it to the tender mercies of DOBBIN. so it's being written up with a little help from a LexisNexis case note. [read post]
23 Nov 2010, 10:04 am
By Eric Goldman Goforit Entertainment LLC v. [read post]
29 May 2008, 6:55 am
IV. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 8:36 am
When you read the complete text of Hamilton v. [read post]
5 Nov 2021, 8:29 am
Co. v. [read post]
14 Jun 2018, 7:12 am
In Ziglar v. [read post]
22 Dec 2014, 11:16 am
–Ellis v. [read post]
24 Dec 2013, 5:45 am
However, the Act does not protect every “particle” of an original work, “any little piece the taking of which cannot affect the value of [the] work as a whole”: Vaver, at p. 182. [read post]
27 Jul 2015, 6:24 pm
In today’s WSJ, Ashby Jones discusses Kamakahi v. [read post]
4 Aug 2013, 8:32 pm
[T]he sentence on Count IV must be vacated. [read post]
24 Jul 2014, 8:30 am
IV. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 8:40 am
(iv) In making his decisions the trial judge will have regard to the whole of the sea of evidence presented to him, whereas an appellate court will only be island hopping [a cute metaphor, says Merpel, but is it a meaningful one?]. [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 8:57 am
See our earlier client advisory for an overview of the Final Standards which are divided into five general categories: (i) organizational commitment to diversity and inclusion, (ii) workforce profile and employment practices, (iii) procurement and business practices (or supplier diversity), (iv) practices to promote transparency of organizational diversity and inclusion, and (v) entities’ self-assessment. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 3:58 pm
The Court ruled in Pliva v. [read post]
6 May 2014, 8:23 am
According to the well-known antebellum case, Corfield v. [read post]
8 Nov 2015, 1:49 pm
As I mentioned on Friday, it’s likely that the consolidated follow-up cases to Hobby Lobby, involving nonprofit organizations’ RFRA challenges to the government’s religious accommodation, will henceforth collectively be known as Zubik v. [read post]
12 Nov 2021, 2:01 am
In particular, the following is noted: (i) Support claims with evidence; (ii) evidence of other registered trade marks is not likely to be overly useful unless it is accompanied by evidence of use in the marketplace; (iii) keep evidence of use within the relevant dates; (iv) ensure that evidence shows use of the mark and not a similar mark/no mark at all; (v) do not include irrelevant evidence (e.g. use on a different product); (vi) keep submissions and evidence of fact… [read post]
