Search for: "United States v. Feiste"
Results 1 - 20
of 58
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jul 2011, 5:26 am
Atari Games Corp. v. [read post]
16 May 2016, 10:39 am
In the United States, there is, of course Feist Publication, Inc. v Rural Telephone Service Company, on telephone directories, and Victor Lalli Enterprises, Inc. v Big Red Apple, Inc. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 12:42 pm
State law Claims: The court dismisses the state law claims on preemption grounds. __ Is this Oracle v. [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 1:41 pm
Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Feist Publications v. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 8:40 am
See Feist Publ'ns, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 5:55 am
The United States Copyright Office Review Board found that the work, comprising a minimal combination of words and short phrases, lacked the ‘modicum of creativity’ requirement expounded in Feist. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 12:25 pm
Data generally cannot be copyrighted in the United States. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 12:25 pm
Data generally cannot be copyrighted in the United States. [read post]
27 Apr 2009, 9:46 am
Although the United States pretty well rejected database protection in the Supreme Court’s Feist v. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 7:07 am
Here, the standard of originality as set out in Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Mar 2017, 2:41 pm
On March 22, 2017, the United States Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas in Star Athletic, LLC v. [read post]
27 Mar 2017, 2:41 pm
On March 22, 2017, the United States Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas in Star Athletic, LLC v. [read post]
20 Dec 2023, 9:15 am
2022cv1564-24 [9] Feist Publications, Inc., v. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 5:41 pm
United States District Court, D. [read post]
28 Mar 2017, 3:45 am
So last Wednesday (March 22, 2017, if you’re joining us late) the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Star Athletica, LLC v. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 8:26 am
Original works of authorship The Review Board set out that its decision was based on the “low standard of copyrightability” set out in Feist Publications v Rural Telephone Service Co., (499 U.S. 340 (1991), requiring a “minimal creative spark”). [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 1:56 pm
United States District Court, N.D. [read post]
15 Aug 2014, 6:53 am
This has been seen different in the United States, as under the Feist Publications v Rural Telephone Service decision (more on which can be found here) effort alone won't give a work protectability under copyright. [read post]
13 Nov 2018, 12:27 pm
Plaintiff claims that Balenciaga America will be transferring the allegedly infringing merchandise out of the United States and has requested an injunction from the court. [read post]
24 Jun 2007, 10:35 pm
In Feist, the United States Supreme Court held that an alphabetical telephone directory of all people living in a particular area lacks sufficient originality and, therefore, was not copyrightable. [read post]
