Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Wolters Kluwer N.V. is a Dutch information services company. [3] [4] The company serves legal, business, tax, accounting, finance, audit, risk, compliance, and healthcare markets. [3] Wolters Kluwer in its current form was founded in 1987 with a merger between Kluwer Publishers and Wolters Samsom. [5] [6] It operates in over 150 countries. [3]
Topping the complaint list were cell-phone companies, with 38,420 complaints, up 41% over 2010. After that, the list includes (in order of number of gripes): new-car dealers
Multiple subsequent editions were published under the imprint Aspen Publishers. Internet and Technology Law Desk Reference was recommended by the Cyberlaw Research Resources Guide at the James E. Rogers College of Law, and has been used as a reference in law journals including University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law ...
Pirate Investor LLC, 580 F.3d 233, 255 (4th Cir. 2009) the US Court of Appeal, against the arguments from publishing industry interveners, found fraud by the Agora company, and confirmed that punishing fraud, whether common law fraud or securities fraud, does not violate the First Amendment.
The city of Minneapolis has hired an outside law firm to investigate three complaints filed against Police Chief Brian O'Hara, less than one year into his tenure. All three complaints were filed ...
Authors or publishers had options to limit how their work was used under this model as well. [12] For free user, Google was able to show up to 20% of a copyrighted book via the snippet mode. Google could show ads on these pages and split the ad revenue with authors and publishers.
Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp., 472 U.S. 585 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case that decided whether a dominant firm's unilateral refusal to deal with a competitor could establish a monopolization claim under Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
Broderbund Software Inc. v. Unison World, Inc., 648 F. Supp. 1127, 1133 (N.D. Cal. 1986), was a United States District Court for the Northern District of California software case, initially important in determining how U.S. copyright law applied to the look and feel presented by a software product. It took an expansive position which later ...