Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Apple plans to settle a lawsuit that accused tech startup Rivos of stealing its trade secrets related to computer-chip technology, according to a joint court filing on Friday in California federal ...
The trial, involving salacious allegations of corporate espionage, racketeering and a secret database of rivals' technology, promises to keep Huawei in the spotlight amid a U.S. blacklisting and ...
NEW YORK (Reuters) -Cartier sued Tiffany & Co on Monday, accusing its luxury rival of stealing trade secrets concerning its high-end jewelry from an employee it lured away in December, in a sign ...
On January 18, 2022, Microsoft announced its intention to acquire Activision Blizzard for US$68.7 billion, following the company's acquisition of ZeniMax Media for US$7.5 billion in March 2021 and amid a workplace misconduct lawsuit filed against the company by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing.
After the issuance of a class-action lawsuit in 2017 and lengthy litigation, in 2020, Apple agreed to pay the compensation of $500m (about $25 for each affected user). [78] In June 2022, a class action claim was launched with the Competition Appeal Tribunal based on the same software update. The claim states that the lack of an option to ...
Apple v. Does (O'Grady v.Superior Court) was a high-profile legal proceeding in United States of America notable for bringing into question the breadth of the shield law protecting journalists from being forced to reveal their sources, and whether that law applied to online news journalists writing about corporate trade secrets.
The 2022 law banned classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades and was championed by DeSantis, who had used Disney as a punching bag in speeches on the campaign ...
State trade secret law not preempted by patent law. Dann v. Johnston: 425 U.S. 219: 1976: Patentability of a claim for a business method patent (but the decision turns on obviousness rather than patent-eligibility). Sakraida v. Ag Pro: 425 U.S. 273: 1976