Search for: "Paramount Communications, Inc. v. Time Inc."
Results 61 - 80
of 121
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Nov 2009, 6:21 am
Soon after Wachtell Lipton publicly advised clients to reincorporate outside of Delaware if Interco remained good law, the Delaware Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Paramount Communications, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2013, 5:39 am
The Second Circuit’s 2008 decision in Cartoon Network v. [read post]
28 Nov 2008, 12:14 pm
(Green Patent Blog) Global - Copyright Conference calls on WIPO to boost support for collective management of copyright and related rights (WIPO) Librarians take the copyright battleground in developing countries (Intellectual Property Watch) Creative Commons study on how people understand the term ‘noncommercial use’ (Creative Commons) Africa Time to follow the example of Nashville? [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 3:16 am
Loving Care Agency, Inc., et al., decided by the Supreme Court of New Jersey on March 30, 2010. [read post]
26 Dec 2016, 4:30 am
Well Marie-Andree cited that 1879 case Feist Publications, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 7:00 am
(Spicy IP) Sindh High Court to hear Basmati trade mark issue (The Trademark Blog) Indian patent examiners inching at par with global counterparts (Patent Circle) Perspectives on the promotion of innovation (Spicy IP) Spicy IP questionnaire on interim injunctions: is it time for change? [read post]
24 Nov 2014, 4:35 am
Since judgment was imposed, [he] completed payment on the Court-imposed fines, his supervised release was terminated, and he completed his community service. [read post]
19 May 2019, 4:15 pm
Canada In the case of Paramount v. [read post]
2 Aug 2022, 4:17 pm
As of the time I’m writing this, tickets are still up for sale. [read post]
23 Jan 2009, 1:00 am
(Managing Intellectual Property) (Law360) (Out-Law) ECJ rules German music distributor cannot sell two Bob Dylan compilation albums because Sony owns rights to songs in question: Sony Music Entertainment (Germany) GmbH v Falcon Neue Medien Vertrieb GmbH (IPKat) (Law360) ECJ: Date set for Advocate General’s opinion in L'Oréal SA, Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie SNC, Laboratoire Garnier & Cie v Bellure NV, Malaika… [read post]
24 Oct 2016, 11:58 am
Court of Federal Claims in Dorado Services, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Dec 2020, 8:34 am
And in the process the Court endorsed the view of five concurring and dissenting Justices in Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Feb 2021, 11:04 am
And in the process the Court endorsed the view of five concurring and dissenting Justices in Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 4:00 am
The features of musical culture and the ubiquity of musical borrowing reveal a dramatic divergence between the shared norms and practices of music culture and a doctrinal copyright approach.[16] Hence, there is something to be said about music as a unique category within copyright, both deserving and in need of special consideration. _____________________________________ 2 Théberge v Galerie d’Art du Petit Champlain Inc, 2002 SCC 34 at para 30. 3 CCH Canadian… [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 3:54 pm
Inc.) [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 2:56 pm
Plus, of course, there's the not unimportant fact that Interco was decisively rejected by the Delaware Supreme Court in Paramount Communications, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 7:50 am
Targeting a selected buyer may accelerate the time for completion but a delay or failure in identifying and/or completing a transaction with such a buyer will usually result in a longer sale process, with the seller running the risk of missing the "market window" (which happened to many sellers in Canada in 2008). [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 9:01 pm
While many states look to Delaware as an authority on issues of corporate law, companies that are incorporated in other states should consult with local counsel to ensure that any relevant differences are taken into consideration. [2] See, e.g., Revlon, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Sep 2007, 2:52 pm
The first, Riegel v. [read post]
19 Nov 2013, 5:39 am
Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) (federal)--Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. [read post]
