I. Background Information In 2000‚ telephone giant Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. filed a lawsuit against “pldt.com”‚ a website dedicated for free speech‚ for P 1.35 M in damages for use of domain name. The telecommunication company charged Gerry Kaimo‚ webmaster and registered owner of the domain name‚ and Philippines League for Democratic Telecommunications Inc. (PLDTI) for trademark infringement and engaging in unfair competition. The telecommunication giant claimed that the said website
Premium Domain name Internet World Wide Web
After the brutal 40 minute long lethal injection execution of Clayton Lockett that took place on April 29‚ 2014 occurred‚ fellow death row inmates being held at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary sued because they felt that a particular drug that was used to perform the poorly lethal injection was in violation of the eighth amendment. The lethal injection method used on Lockett was a three drug lethal injection procedure and resulted in him waking up after the injection and suffered for more than forty
Premium Capital punishment Crime Capital punishment in the United States
bulldozers. The Governor‚ Jack Dalrymple called the North Dakota National Guard‚ to minimize the arrests and to control more people. “District Judge James Boasberg denies the Standing Rock Sioux’s injunction request‚ allowing for construction to continue”(Sammon). What was their reason for denying the injunction request to stop construction? One of their reasons was probably all the Native American tribes coming and trespassing and spray-painting all over the bulldozers. A problem with this decision is
Premium United States Army Sioux Native Americans in the United States
breached – use your imagination). Was this a material breach? What would you ask the court to do? State your claim to the court. What kind of remedy would the court likely provide - would the court order: a. Damages – for what and how much? b. An injunction – for what? c. Specific performance – for what? Let us say that the Director made the Film in time and everything went fine‚ but it did not become a commercial success and barely paid off not reaching 150% of profit. We no longer work
Premium Contract Corporation Marketing
O’Reilly and Others Appellants v. Mackman and Others Respondents [1982] 3 W.L.R. 1096 House of Lords: HL Lord Diplock‚ Lord Fraser of Tullybelton‚ Lord Keith of Kinkel‚ Lord Bridge of Harwich and Lord Brightman 1982 Oct. 11‚ 12‚ 13; Nov. 25 Lord Denning M.R.‚ Ackner and O’Connor L.JJ. 1982 April 6‚ 7‚ 20; June 30 Peter Pain J. 1982 Feb. 25; March 5 [Conjoined Appeals] High Court--Procedure--Declaratory relief--Prisoners’ claims against prison visitors--Proceedings
Premium Appeal Habeas corpus
a grant of a preliminary injunction‚ this court held that Microsoft ’s technological bundling of IE 3.0 and 4.0 with Windows 95 did not violate the relevant provision of the consent decree. • . On May 18‚ 1998‚ shortly before issuance of the Microsoft II decision‚ the United States and a group of State plaintiffs filed separate (and soon thereafter consolidated) complaints‚ asserting antitrust violations by Microsoft and seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions against the company ’s allegedly
Free United States Appeal Sherman Antitrust Act
LAW AND ECONOMICS COURSEWORK TOPIC A – 3000 WORDS Are people rational (in the economist’s sense) and reasonable (in the lawyer’s sense)? Whatever your answer to that question‚ does it matter? The idea behind the collaboration between the two drastically different fields of law and economics is to ascertain the implication of hypothetical rational person’s response to rules and legislations. The economic analysis of law is perhaps a better description between the fusion of these two fields.
Premium Law and economics Economics Transaction cost
property.”[2] The ways judges decide whether an act constitutes a nuisance are by looking at the duration‚ extent and type of disturbance‚ the type of neighbourhood‚ the motivation and offensiveness. The remedy for an action of nuisance is either an injunction or a payment of damages.[3] In this case the type and the extent of disturbance must be viewed. Flooding a neighbours land constitutes a nuisance according to Sedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan.[4] Since Jacob’s land was damaged by the rainwater runoff
Premium Law Common law Nuisance
Undergraduate Laws Case note March 2014: Important case note LA3021 Company law Prest v Petrodel Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1395 Facts The parties were married in 1993. The wife was granted a divorce in 2008. In an action for ancillary relief the husband argued that properties could not be transferred to the wife as they were legally owned by various companies. These companies were wholly owned and controlled by the husband. The question on appeal was whether the court has power to order the transfer
Premium Law Appeal Supreme court
Hollywood Studios v. IsoHunt: The Impact of Torrents on Film Studios Gaurav Masram Entertainment Business‚ M.S. Full Sail University The advent of the Internet and online distribution of entertainment properties has revolutionized various ways copyrighted material is infringed. Unlike previous technologies‚ one can easily download copyrighted material from the web. Peer-to-peer file sharing is one such technology‚ which has a tremendous impact on the revenues of the original
Premium File sharing Copyright infringement Copyright