Search for: "S & F Media LLC." Results 21 - 40 of 379
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Feb 2018, 4:49 pm by INFORRM
On Inforrm we had an article from Stefan Theil on Germany’s regulation of social media. [read post]
4 Aug 2017, 10:46 am by Mark Theodore
IM (sic) F*&KIN BROKE DOWN IN THE SAME SHIT I WAS BROKE IN LAST WEEK BECAUSE THEY DON’T WANTA BUY NEW SH#T!!!! [read post]
4 Aug 2017, 10:46 am by Mark Theodore
IM (sic) F*&KIN BROKE DOWN IN THE SAME SHIT I WAS BROKE IN LAST WEEK BECAUSE THEY DON’T WANTA BUY NEW SH#T!!!! [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 10:00 am by Eric Goldman
Vodka & Milk, LLC, 1:17-cv-08603-JSR (SDNY March 15, 2018) Prior Posts on Section 512(f) * Section 512(f) Complaint Survives Motion to Dismiss–Johnson v. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 4:24 am
The beer, vanilla & coffee tumble together, enhancing the smooth nature of each.Although under Section 2(f) the USPTO may accept five years of “substantially exclusive and continuous use” as prima facie evidence of acquired distinctiveness, it not required to do so. [read post]
15 Mar 2020, 5:36 pm by INFORRM
The Guardian’s media commentator Roy Greenslade has a piece entitled “It’s time to break the silence about Mirror phone hacking”. [read post]
13 Dec 2020, 4:48 pm by INFORRM
The European Centre for Press & Media Freedom had a piece. [read post]
14 Dec 2013, 8:54 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Race Tires, 674 F.3d at 169-70; see also Country Vintner, 718 F.3d at 260 (adopting Fourth Circuit’s reasoning in Race Tires). [read post]
12 Feb 2014, 10:49 am by Brian A. Hall
UnIntellectual Property (UnIP): Trademark for “Web Celeb” The United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment to defendants Procter & Gamble Co., Microsoft Corp., and BermanBraun, LLC, on plaintiff Webceleb, Inc. [read post]
1 Dec 2015, 5:51 pm by Ed. Microjuris.com Puerto Rico
Sagardía, et al., reported at 634 F.3d 3 (1st Cir. 2011) (Defended the constitutionality of Puerto Rico’s Controlled Access Laws, affirming District Court’s decision on the facial constitutional challenge.) [read post]