Search for: "Denmark v State" Results 181 - 200 of 523
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Oct 2017, 4:22 pm by INFORRM
A person signing a DMCA notice must state a good faith belief that the use is not authorized, declare her authority to act under penalty of perjury, and risk damages for misrepresentation under section 512(f).[3] That source of protection has not technically disappeared, but its value is largely lost when notices are generated not by a person, but by a machine. [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 3:33 pm by Daphne Keller
A person signing a DMCA notice must state a good faith belief that the use is not authorized, declare her authority to act under penalty of perjury, and risk damages for misrepresentation under section 512(f).[3] That source of protection has not technically disappeared, but its value is largely lost when notices are generated not by a person, but by a machine. [read post]
24 Sep 2017, 9:44 am by Mukarrum Ahmed
(See pages 409-410 of the article) The UK is a party to the Hague Choice of Court Agreements Convention as a Member State of the EU, the latter having approved the Convention for all its Member States apart from Denmark. [read post]
26 Aug 2017, 2:13 pm by Mukarrum Ahmed
In Verein für Konsumenteninformation v Amazon the Court of Justice of the European Union has imposed duties on businesses and professionals to inform their consumer customers about at least the existence and the basic structure of the more favourable law principle. [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 3:41 pm
| "Big Box" not found generic or lacking distinctive character, but still .... | Changes to the Singapore copyright system: an update on the recent public consultations | he diplomatic crisis of Qatar and Gulf Cooperation Council's IP | Bundesgerichtshof's landmark ruling to hook extra-territorial patent infringement in Germany | BREAKING: Eli Lilly success as UK Supreme Court finds Actavis products directly and indirectly infringe pemetrexed patent | Monday Miscellany | Sunday… [read post]
15 Jul 2017, 5:11 am
The summary stated that the Supreme Court allows Eli Lilly's appeal and holds that Actavis' products directly infringe Eli Lilly's patent in the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Spain. [read post]
5 Jul 2017, 11:34 am
Patrick Huston, which “organizes, analyzes and synthesizes all of the 48 UTSA-adopting states’ published court opinions (state and federal). [read post]
4 May 2017, 11:12 pm by Kluwer Blogger
Top 3 Kluwer Trademark Blog posts of March/April 1) Riding on the coat-tails of Pandora – what is acceptable in Denmark? [read post]
24 Apr 2017, 8:33 am by Quinta Jurecic
Sometimes, the occasion is run-of-the-mill official business, such as a photograph of Trump’s meeting with the Prime Minister of Denmark, but things can get more complicated. [read post]
21 Apr 2017, 6:59 am by Brian Cordery
She addressed the state of implementation of the Agreement. 12 have ratified so far but not Germany and the UK. [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 4:57 am
Proof of acquired distinctiveness may be adduced for all Member States concerned, or separately for different Member States or groups of Member States. [read post]
14 Apr 2017, 2:26 am
USA: Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 1:05 am
Millions of millennia ago, in our own Milky Way galaxy, but far upstream of where we are today, two neutron stars spiraled around each other, each embodying the mass of a sun but smaller and faster than a speeding planet. [read post]
6 Mar 2017, 6:49 am
The Court then continued to assess the evidence, and concluded that the shape of the KitKat chocolate bar had acquired distinctive character through use in Denmark, Germany, Spain, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom, but that the Board of Appeal could not validly conclude its examination of the distinctive character acquired by the contested trade mark throughout the European Union on the basis of the percentage of the public recognising that… [read post]
26 Feb 2017, 4:09 pm by INFORRM
An Oklahoma jury has ordered a former state legislator to pay $4.3 million to an insurance company in a defamation case. [read post]