Search for: "Baker v. Selden"
Results 1 - 20
of 74
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Sep 2023, 12:39 am
Such an exercise makes absolutely no sense and completely ignores the principle that copyright does not exist to protect against the use by others of the content embodied in the work (Baker v. [read post]
3 Oct 2022, 9:56 am
LAW LIBRARY level 3: KD530 .P83 v.136 & 137Selden Society by Sir John Baker, ed., Reports from the Notebooks of Edward Coke (London: Selden Society, 2022) Online access: https://go.openathens.net/redirector/ubc.ca? [read post]
12 Aug 2022, 12:57 pm
Experiment asked about fairness between songwriters with prior relationship v. met through an ad. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 7:24 pm
Copyright has clear limits when it comes to protecting ideas as opposed to expression (Baker v. [read post]
19 Feb 2022, 3:07 pm
” (1) Baker v. [read post]
11 Jan 2022, 12:03 pm
[v].) [read post]
27 Sep 2021, 9:03 am
I & II (London: Selden Society, 2019). [read post]
17 Mar 2021, 8:39 am
Baker v. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 5:00 am
In Baker v. [read post]
8 Oct 2020, 7:48 am
Selden, a case I discussed in 2013. [read post]
6 Oct 2020, 11:11 am
Baker v. [read post]
2 Oct 2020, 12:17 pm
Baker v. [read post]
20 Jan 2020, 8:01 am
Oklahoma, Michigan v. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 3:14 pm
Hexamer and Baker v. [read post]
16 Nov 2019, 6:40 pm
What is perhaps the key case on-point well known but quite old: Baker v. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 11:01 am
Gordon drew on Baker v. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 7:07 am
Menell and David Nimmer in a separate submission also highlight inconsistency with SCOTUS’s seminal decision in Baker v. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 7:07 am
Drawing from past authority including Baker v. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 5:55 am
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]
25 Feb 2019, 2:13 pm
First, the Federal Circuit’s merger analysis is in conflict with this Court’s ruling in Baker v. [read post]
