Search for: "People v. Flowers" Results 41 - 60 of 332
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Mar 2022, 12:34 pm by ACLU
Black people are resilient — we’ve created so much already. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 3:25 am
Robert then tackled Case C-323/09 Interflora Inc and Interflora British Unit v Marks & Spencer plc and Flowers Direct Online Limited, in which the CJEU viewed the impression of the average internet user as being an essential element of the test of whether the use of another's brand as a keyword conveys an impression that the use of that brand suggests that the user's business is connected with that of the brand owner. [read post]
15 Mar 2019, 3:46 am by Edith Roberts
” At, David Ogden weighs in on Flowers v. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 9:03 am
It's dark and not many people are out and about yet. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 5:50 pm
,infamous whites or younger people). [read post]
14 Jan 2022, 7:43 am by Tian Lu
The obvious difference lies in the text: whilst Chanel has ‘N°5, CHANEL’, the alleged infringing product uses ‘N°9, FLOWER OF STORY’ (hereinafter ‘the N°9 perfume’). [read post]
16 Aug 2007, 9:09 am
Flowers, 909 F.2d 145, 146 (6th Cir.1990). [read post]
7 Jan 2010, 1:53 pm by Michael Thomas
The court found that most people reading those words would conclude that they had replacement value insurance, It held, citing the Supreme Court of Canada's decisions in Fine's Flowers Ltd. v. [read post]