Search for: "Figures v. Figures" Results 41 - 60 of 12,353
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Sep 2015, 4:01 am by Lee E. Berlik
Co. v Butts to apply to public figures who were not public officials. [read post]
29 Jul 2016, 3:07 pm by Eugene Volokh
(Jeff Mitchell/Files/REUTERS) Tammy Wynette’s widower’s widow is a limited purpose public figure when it comes to discussions of what used to be Wynette’s property, a split Texas appellate panel held Wednesday (McManus v. [read post]
5 Mar 2020, 11:02 am by Peter Groves
But whatever the law means, we can probably assume that the trade mark RED BULL, and the same trade mark owner's figurative trade marks (what normal people would call logos) or at least some of them, have reputations. [read post]
20 Jan 2010, 11:58 am by lpbncontracts
National Football Post is not the place one looks in the hopes of finding a reference to Hadley v. [read post]
19 Oct 2020, 6:53 am by Nonprofit Blogger
Figured readers would be interested in this look by Brian Mittendorf at the implications for Donor Advised Funds of Fairbairn v. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 10:42 am by Gerard N. Magliocca
Let's look ahead to the argument in Trump v. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 5:43 am by Carolyn Elefant
Related posts: Three Lessons for Small Firms from Small Farms Resources for Solos and Small Firms Practicing Criminal Law Walmart v. [read post]
16 May 2017, 12:39 pm by Anthony B. Cavender
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a significant ruling in Kahl v. [read post]
10 Nov 2020, 8:58 am by Eric Goldman
MGA Entertainment The post Copyright Plaintiffs Can’t Figure Out What Copyrights They Own, Court Says ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 6:00 am by The Dear Rich Staff
Even a public domain movie such Night of the Living Dead spawned a copyrightable slogan, "When there is no room in hell … the dead will walk the earth” (Dawn Associates v. [read post]
24 Nov 2019, 6:52 am
Whether a mark is registered in colour or in black is not regarded as a wholly negligible element in the eyes of consumers (Pico Food v OHIM, T‑623/11).There are also differences between the dominant elements of the marks at issue: the human figure in the earlier mark represents a man standing on one foot, whereas the lower limbs of the human figure in the mark applied for are not depicted. [read post]
3 Jan 2009, 10:46 am
So now I am trying to figure out which one to go with. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 2:03 am
There has been some comment on this judgment (for example this post by suesspiciousminds), but clearly child care is not as 'sexy' as multi-million pound divorce cases...Hot on the heels of B (A Child) we had Prest v Petrodel, in which, to the surprise of some, Mrs Prest's appeal was unanimously allowed. [read post]