Search for: "SEE, Inc. v. See Concept SAS"
Results 1 - 20
of 47
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Oct 2017, 6:33 am
In an important judgment handed down on 4 October 2017 in the case of Google Inc v Duffy ([2017] SASFC 130 [pdf]) the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Australia upheld the decision of Blue J ([2015] SASC 170) that Google Inc was liable for the defamatory content of the hyperlinks and paragraphs in search results on the claimant’s name (see our comment on the first instance decision). [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 8:15 am
But a plurality rejected the "stream of commerce" concept in Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2014, 5:21 am
Id. at 71; see also Maltby v. [read post]
1 Sep 2020, 9:33 am
Concepts, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Jan 2019, 1:16 am
Given the amount of wisdom it imparts, it is exceptionally good value.David's particular bugbears are evident including the fact that designs only protect visual features (not those experienced by other senses) and the identity of the informed user (for the few unfamiliar, he's not a fan of the approach taken in the infamous pogs case PepsiCo, Inc. v Grupo Promer Mon Graphic SA. [read post]
22 Dec 2021, 4:00 am
See: C.L.B. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2014, 5:21 am
Id. at 71; see also Maltby v. [read post]
4 Jan 2018, 9:58 am
Related Cases: Oracle v. [read post]
12 Apr 2015, 7:33 am
See, CollegeSource, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Aug 2013, 4:00 am
Inc.,[8] which had different facts to the case in point, and also emphasized the decision in Evans v. [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 6:06 am
Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit 2010); see also U.S. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2014, 2:27 pm
In L'Oréal SA v Bellure NV [2010] EWCA Civ 535 (on which see IPKat overview here) Bellure's business model was to sell cheap 'knock off' perfumes whose smell alluded to the smell of L'Oréal 's own perfumes. [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 3:21 pm
(See Fredrics v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 7:19 am
The other is the recently-filed appeal of Dealer Computer Svcs., Inc. v. [read post]
24 Mar 2016, 5:32 am
See also Johnson v. [read post]
26 Feb 2017, 4:00 am
The trend internationally is that bidding on a keyword “would not in and of itself be sufficient to establish infringement because … it must also be shown that the advertisements did not enable the average consumer to ascertain whether the goods or services referred to originated from … [the trademark owner] or from [the advertiser]”: see lnterflora v Marks and Spencer plc, [2014] EWCA Civ. 1403 at paras. 69-70 and 192; Google France SARL v Louis… [read post]
1 May 2018, 1:09 pm
" The examiner found that such a concept was similar to the decision SmartGene, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jun 2022, 4:00 am
The framers of the Charter were aware of the concept of submission as being an alternative to physical control in arrest or detention when referring, in ss 9 and 10 of the Charter, to “arrest or detention” or “imprisoned”: see the statutory construction principle exemplified in R v W(DL), 2016 SCC 22, at paras 13-18, [2016] 1 SCR 402. [read post]
30 Jan 2020, 6:54 am
It is worth recalling that - as early as 2010 - Arnold J (as he then was), in SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd [2010] EWHC 1829 (Ch) (23 July 2010), noted that:In the light of a number of recent judgments of the CJEU, it may be arguable that it is not a fatal objection to a claim that copyright subsists in a particular work that the work is not one of the kinds of work listed in section 1(1)(a) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents 1988 and defined elsewhere in… [read post]
16 Aug 2022, 1:30 am
Some of the main decisions here are Daimler AG v Együd Garage Gépjárműjavító és Értékesítő Kft, Coty Germany GmbH v Amazon Services Europe Sàrl, Google France SARL and Google Inc. v Louis Vuitton Malletier SA and L’Oréal SA v eBay International AG. [read post]
