Search for: "Chappell v. State" Results 161 - 180 of 191
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Nov 2019, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
EU member states have rejected a draft of the ePrivacy Regulation. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 8:46 am by John Elwood
We end the Ninth Circuit hit parade with Chappell v. [read post]
10 Jul 2022, 12:47 am by Frank Cranmer
: on the recent decisions in Onuoha v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust and Kovalkovs v 2 Sisters Food Group Limited. [read post]
5 Jun 2023, 5:16 am by Ashley Deeks, Matthew Waxman
The Supreme Court has offered snippets of its view on this in some cases, stating in Fleming v. [read post]
31 Mar 2012, 7:55 am by Brett Trout
As Lord Somervell noted in Chappell v Nestlé, half a century ago “A peppercorn does not cease to be good consideration if it is established that the promisee does not like pepper and will throw away the corn. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 12:13 pm
(Michael Geist) Google agrees to pay $125 million to authors and publishers affected by Google Print service, settling copyright litigation (Ars Technica) Google is done paying Silicon Valley’s legal bills (EFF) Apple bends to studios, adds copyright protection to MacBooks (Wired) Website parodying Union Square Partnership shut down due to bogus cybersquatting and copyright infringement claims (EFF) Singers Daryl Hall and John Oates sue Warner/Chappell Music for failing to sue… [read post]
16 Dec 2007, 3:14 pm
Box 16520 Salt Lake City, UT 84116 Phone: (877) 543-7669 (Toll Free) Web: http://www.utahchip.org Hearing Impairments Programs for Individuals who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing Utah Community Center of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Utah State Office of Rehabilitation 5709 South 1500 West Salt Lake City, UT 84123 Phone: (801) 263-4860 (V/TTY); (800) 860-4860 (V/TTY/Toll Free in UT only) Web: http://www.usor.state.ut.us/dsdhh/dsdhh.html State Agency for Individuals… [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am by Ben
  A New York federal judge agreed to certify an interlocutory appeal by SiriusXM against the ruling that gave state copyright law protection to pre-1972 sound recordings. [read post]