Search for: "Free Range Content, Inc. v. Google Inc" Results 1 - 20 of 61
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Nov 2015, 1:11 am by INFORRM
On 27 October 2015 Mr Justice Blue, sitting at first instance in the Supreme Court of South Australia, handed down judgment on liability in the defamation case of Duffy v Google Inc ([2015] SASC 170). [read post]
12 May 2018, 3:03 am by INFORRM
  The decision does not sit comfortably with subsequent findings by the Court of Appeal in Tamiz v Google Inc [2013] EWCA Civ 68 (where this firm acted for the claimant) that an intermediary/platform can be deemed a publisher after notice or the CJEU’s in Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Espanola de Proteccion de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja Gonzalez (Case C-131/12) that Google is… [read post]
5 Jan 2014, 3:30 pm by Barry Sookman
One of the most important, if not the most important, United States copyright cases decided in 2013 is The Authors Guild, Inc. v Google Inc. 2013 WL 6017130 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
26 Jul 2017, 2:59 am by INFORRM
The Supreme Court of Canada has issued its decision in Google Inc v Equustek (2017 SCC 34). [read post]
9 Jun 2015, 5:30 am by Terry Hart
Google Inc., 653 F. 3d 976, 980 (9th Cir. 2011). the Court said that “a copyright holder possesses ‘the right to exclude others from using his property. [read post]
8 Oct 2012, 1:43 pm by Glenn
Google, Inc. is that the firms pushing for a prosecution can only contend that Google’s search algorithms unfairly demote result rankings for so-called “vertical” competitors. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 6:46 am by Graham Smith
The Supreme Court of Canada has issued its decision in Google Inc v Equustek (28 June 2017). [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 6:46 am by Graham Smith
The Supreme Court of Canada has issued its decision in Google Inc v Equustek (28 June 2017). [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 11:26 am by Venkat Balasubramani
Online services are automatically scanning incoming content all of the time for a wide range of reasons; but the law attempts to distinguish “private” content like email as a special class of content that should be automatically processed differently. [read post]