Search for: "Baker v. Selden" Results 1 - 20 of 64
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Jan 2009, 11:52 pm
Shubha Ghosh (University of Wisconsin Law School) has posted Patenting Games: Or, Baker v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 7:30 am
The Google brief addresses the issue of whether Apache Harmony, and its incorporated APIs, are subject to a field-of-use restriction imposed by Sun. (831 [PDF; Text]) Oracle's brief addresses the applicability of Baker v. [read post]
31 May 2013, 12:44 pm
Because it would represent a change in the way copyright has worked since at least 1879, when Baker v. [read post]
9 May 2014, 9:28 am by Michael Risch
But Sega is crystal clear that we do allow interoperability reuse: “To the extent that a work is functional or factual, it may be copied,Baker v. [read post]
16 Jul 2007, 1:26 am
This doctrine extends back at least to the iconic Supreme Court decision in Baker v. [read post]
20 Sep 2007, 2:29 pm
I trace the doctrinal forebears of Southco to the seminal case of Baker v. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 12:15 pm by Elim
LAW LIBRARY level 3: KD530 .P83 v. 132John Baker, ed., Selected Readings and Commentaries on Magna Carta 1400-1604 (London: Seldon Society, 2015). [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 5:55 am by Eleonora Rosati
 Merger doctrine (Baker v Selden): where there is one way, or a limited number of ways for an author to convey an idea, the author’s expression cannot be protected under copyright as it would prevent others from using that idea in other works. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 1:16 pm by Michael Risch
In my 2014 post, I noted how Sega put it: “To the extent that a work is functional or factual, it may be copied,Baker v. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 1:16 pm by Michael Risch
In my 2014 post, I noted how Sega put it: “To the extent that a work is functional or factual, it may be copied,Baker v. [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 3:36 pm by christopher
Stein, 347 U.S. 201, 217-18 (1954) (citing Baker v. [read post]
27 May 2016, 5:00 am by Michael Risch
But Sega is crystal clear that we do allow interoperability reuse: “To the extent that a work is functional or factual, it may be copied,Baker v. [read post]
5 Aug 2008, 9:55 pm
The § 102(b) exclusions, as Samuelson makes clear, have their origins in Baker v. [read post]