Search for: "State v. Discoe"
Results 1 - 20
of 58
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Feb 2024, 4:54 pm
Mazer v. [read post]
27 Dec 2023, 9:40 am
* Serc-CA Discos, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 6:31 am
Voting is now open! [read post]
27 Dec 2022, 8:23 am
CS Disco Stock Plummets By More than 50% In One Day 13. [read post]
13 Dec 2022, 10:00 pm
Also in February, the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) facilitated the emergence of a royalty collection framework between the Musical Copyright Society of Nigeria (MCSN) and Disco Jockeys Association of Nigeria (DJAN). [read post]
29 Dec 2021, 9:22 am
Given this paucity of U.S. legal tech IPOs, it is notable that 2021 saw three U.S. legal tech companies go public: alternative legal services provider LegalZoom (Nasdaq:LZ), legal technology company Intapp (Nasdaq:INTA), and e-discovery company DISCO (NYSE:LAW). [read post]
29 Dec 2021, 9:22 am
Given this paucity of U.S. legal tech IPOs, it is notable that 2021 saw three U.S. legal tech companies go public: alternative legal services provider LegalZoom (Nasdaq:LZ), legal technology company Intapp (Nasdaq:INTA), and e-discovery company DISCO (NYSE:LAW). [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 1:31 pm
As a double-insult, 512(f) preempts related state law claims over abusive takedown notices, so it actually leaves victims worse off than if 512(f) didn’t exist by clearing out the field. [read post]
9 Dec 2020, 5:58 pm
La Boom Disco, Inc., 955 F.3d 279, 283-84 (2d Cir. 2020); Marks v. [read post]
9 Dec 2020, 5:58 pm
La Boom Disco, Inc., 955 F.3d 279, 283-84 (2d Cir. 2020); Marks v. [read post]
10 Jul 2020, 8:49 am
La Boom Disco, Inc., 955 F.3d 279, 283-84 (2d Cir. 2020); Marks v. [read post]
10 Jul 2020, 8:49 am
La Boom Disco, Inc., 955 F.3d 279, 283-84 (2d Cir. 2020); Marks v. [read post]
25 Apr 2020, 10:17 am
* Clarks v. [read post]
3 Jan 2019, 7:50 am
* Capitol Records LLC v. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 9:12 pm
USA v. [read post]
10 Nov 2018, 5:14 am
US (not yet) US. v. [read post]
12 Oct 2017, 4:22 pm
A person signing a DMCA notice must state a good faith belief that the use is not authorized, declare her authority to act under penalty of perjury, and risk damages for misrepresentation under section 512(f).[3] That source of protection has not technically disappeared, but its value is largely lost when notices are generated not by a person, but by a machine. [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 3:33 pm
A person signing a DMCA notice must state a good faith belief that the use is not authorized, declare her authority to act under penalty of perjury, and risk damages for misrepresentation under section 512(f).[3] That source of protection has not technically disappeared, but its value is largely lost when notices are generated not by a person, but by a machine. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 10:00 am
The Relationship Sadovska and Malik claimed that they met in a “disco” and entered into a durable relationship in Oct 2012. [read post]
25 Apr 2017, 1:12 pm
All of the proxies started dancing (you can find most of them on the venerable Google Shill List from the Oracle v. [read post]
