Search for: "Stone v. Advantage Sales "
Results 1 - 20
of 46
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Apr 2024, 6:37 pm
U.S. [read post]
20 Nov 2022, 9:55 am
Cockrum v. [read post]
6 Jan 2022, 12:21 am
Litecoin Foundation Limited v (1) Inshallah Limited (2) Nasjet Limited (3) John Pepin [2021] EWHC 1998 (Ch) (July 2021) Litecoin is a cryptocurrency, promoted and developed by the claimant. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 1:09 pm
Co. v. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 2:18 pm
”[v] This means compliance must be shown not only for plaintiff Jones but also for every offer and every sale in the “offering. [read post]
11 Aug 2019, 11:46 pm
ACCC v Birubi Art Pty Ltd (in liquidation) The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) commenced action against Birubi Art Pty Ltd (in liquidation) back in 2018 for making false claims that its tourists souvenirs, including didgeridoos, boomerangs, message stones and bull-roarers, all painted in Indigenous styles, were made in Australia and hand painted by Indigenous persons, when this was not the case. [read post]
11 Aug 2019, 11:46 pm
ACCC v Birubi Art Pty Ltd (in liquidation) The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) commenced action against Birubi Art Pty Ltd (in liquidation) back in 2018 for making false claims that its tourists souvenirs, including didgeridoos, boomerangs, message stones and bull-roarers, all painted in Indigenous styles, were made in Australia and hand painted by Indigenous persons, when this was not the case. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 9:59 am
In 2017, the Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled that such a SPA in a deed is a valid transfer; see Reservation of Special Power of Appointment in Deed Is Approved by Massachusetts Appeals Court in 2017 Case of Skye v. [read post]
28 Oct 2017, 4:00 am
You focus on the humanitarian, "not stones. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 12:25 pm
In a footnote, the court explains: Trademark infringement law is primarily concerned with stopping one person or entity from gaining an unfair competitive advantage over a business rival by misusing a protected mark. [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 7:34 am
RUEDA, Appellant V. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am
Also in the US, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that watchmaker Omega's attempt to use copyright laws to block the sale of Omega watches at discounted prices by Costco will just not work - because of the 'first sale' doctrine' - and that Omega's action was also a misuse of copyright. [read post]
24 Nov 2015, 1:21 pm
Limited, because you can’t get blood from a stone. [read post]
5 Apr 2015, 8:16 pm
A magazine publishes the statement that most of the sales staff of a department store are homosexuals. [read post]
23 Jan 2015, 8:37 pm
The latter point has attracted a great deal of commentary to date, but some of that commentary has overlooked important details, so please don’t forget to read Section V at the end. [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 12:45 am
Stone Electrical Ltd v British Sky Broadcasting Group plc is a decision of the Controller of the Irish Patents Office dating back to last August, but again it's one of those somewhat overlooked rulings that is worth bringing to the attention of this weblog's trade mark-oriented readers. [read post]
25 May 2014, 8:06 am
In the first example, the fragility of the occupier’s interest is assumed to be taken advantage of by the selling landlord in default. [read post]
28 Feb 2014, 11:11 am
In Employment Division v. [read post]
10 Oct 2013, 6:04 pm
Young, 13-95, yet another state-on-top habeas case (this time from the Second Circuit), concerns a whole slew of habeas fun, but in the main asks whether the state can forfeit application of the old rule from Stone v. [read post]
7 Feb 2013, 1:29 pm
“Sticks and stones will break my bones …but words will (also) hurt me! [read post]
