Search for: "United States v. Beebe" Results 1 - 20 of 43
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Oct 2013, 11:10 am
United States (Alvarez Machain II), 266 F.3d 1045 (9th Cir. 2001). [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 3:01 am
Belmora says that one need not own a trademark in the United States to bring a Section 43(a) claim (Bayer owned the mark FLANAX in Mexico). [read post]
2 Mar 2014, 1:42 pm by Bill Stalter
   The Supreme Court has expressed concerns how the facial challenge might be used to undermine the legislative process, and accordingly, the challenging party is held to a higher standard of proof:  To succeed in a typical facial attack, [the respondent] would have to establish “that no set of circumstances exists under which [the statute] would be valid”, United States v. [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 1:21 pm
" But it was unwilling to make the leap to the "general consuming public," a group it defined as "nearly the entire population of the United States. [read post]
21 Jul 2015, 2:45 am
Moreover, many of the seminal cases in the area predate such important new contributions to Commerce Clause juris prudence as United States v. [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 7:54 pm
On Tuesday, The Arc of the United States, which provides advocacy and services for the developmentally disabled, issued a statement asking Beebe to follow the Parole Board's recommendation. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 12:25 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Individuals tend to fare worse (.65 v. .74 for use, .27 v. .37 for ITU). [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 6:29 pm by Sonia Katyal
From there, we turned to the rise of the right of publicity in the United States, A Right is Born: Celebrity, Property and Postmodern Lawmaking, by Mark Bartholomew, who explored a fascinating tension regarding the growth of the right of publicity both before and after the 1980s. [read post]
2 Feb 2020, 11:28 pm
Likewise, the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) held repeatedly that comparable strategies could constitute bad faith [e.g. here, here and here]. [read post]
7 Apr 2016, 2:27 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
This was an appeal from the United States District Court for theMiddle District of Florida in No. 3:11-cv-00819-TJC-JRK,Judge Timothy J. [read post]
23 Nov 2016, 9:16 am by Eric Goldman
Unite Here * Trademark Dilution Symposium Videos * Griper Selling Anti-Walmart Items Through CafePress Doesn’t Infringe or Dilute–Smith v. [read post]
2 Sep 2013, 11:30 pm by Theodore Ruger
Last summer, the Supreme Court put its money where its mouth was in terms of federalism doctrine in its landmark decision about the Affordable Care Act (ACA), in NFIB v. [read post]
16 Sep 2014, 4:21 am by Terry Hart
The court begins its discussion by stating that “Transformation almost always occurs when the new work ‘does something more than repackage or republish the original copyrighted work. [read post]
27 Mar 2022, 3:34 pm
Attorney’s Fees in a Copyright Action« Win One for the Gipper »  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:20-CV-1157 Just as famous as some great upsets in sports history are the motivational speeches that inspired them. [read post]