Search for: "Davis v. Electronic Arts" Results 1 - 20 of 83
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Feb 2023, 1:07 pm by Dennis Crouch
And it may help judges prevent (or call into question) misrepresentations about David v. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 1:09 pm by Dennis Crouch
An approach adopted by the Third and Ninth Circuits inquiring into whether the use of the plaintiff’s identity was not merely imitative, but rather for purposes of lampoon, parody, caricature, or fanciful and creative, and therefore entitled to First Amendment protection.[19] Under this test, Electronic Arts’ use of images of athletes in video games was too imitative to qualify for First Amendment protection against right of publicity claims.[20] TRUMP TOO SMALL passes… [read post]
Implements a number of provisions to improve the integrity of the program by improving use of the electronic systems states use to detect and prevent fraud and those employers use to communicate with the state unemployment agency, and provides the Department of Labor with additional authority to hold states accountable for their performance. [read post]
30 Apr 2020, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
David Hudson (Belmont University College of Law) filed an amicus brief written on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation by UCLA Amicus Brief Clinic students Megan McDowell, Emily Rehm, and Brenna Scully and me. [read post]
3 Sep 2019, 4:29 pm by INFORRM
Data Privacy and Data Protection DLA Piper has covered the changes imposed by the e-Privacy Regulation, primarily to electronic communications and digital marketing, in a recent post. [read post]
29 Dec 2017, 7:34 am by Ben
 (Photo by Ben Challis)On March 8th, a French art history student was escorted out of the Louvre Museum in Paris. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 12:01 pm by ligitsec
Christopher Tayback, Quinn, Emanuel, Urquhart, Oliver & Hedges, Los Angeles, California, for amicus National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences. [read post]
18 May 2017, 8:23 pm by Aurora Barnes
The petition of the day is: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd v. [read post]