Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Holding: selling software through a company's online service is enough to establish minimum contacts in the state where that company is located. Inset Systems, Inc. v. Instruction Set, 937 F.Supp. 161 (D. Conn. 1996). [13] Here, Inset Systems claimed that Instruction Set's website made an infringing use of Inset's registered trademark.
However, as an evenly split decision, it set precedent only in the 9th Circuit, not nationwide. [18] However, in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., [19] in 2013, the United States Supreme Court held in a 6–3 decision that the first-sale doctrine applies to goods manufactured abroad with the copyright owner's permission and then imported ...
Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as an authority for courts when deciding subsequent identical or similar cases. [1] [2] [3] Fundamental to common law legal systems, precedent operates under the principle of stare decisis ("to stand by things decided"), where past judicial decisions serve as case law to guide future rulings, thus promoting consistency and predictability.
Under the UCC's statute of frauds (inherited from the common law), contracts selling goods for a price of $500 or more are generally not enforceable unless in writing. Nevertheless, because the U.S. has ratified the CISG, it has the force of federal law and supersedes UCC-based state law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.
While the USA has been a party to the Limitation Convention for more than two decades, only one recent judicial precedent deals with the Convention. [5] This is unusual given that, for instance, the Limitation Convention applies to all contracts for sale of goods concluded between parties with place of business in the USA and in Mexico , unless ...
Held that an organization may sue in its own right if it has been directly injured, for example through a "drain on the organization's resources", and that so-called "testers", individuals who sought to determine if a company was in violation of the law, may have standing in their own right. [8] 9–0 [9] City of Los Angeles v. Lyons: 1983
Karsales (Harrow) Ltd v Wallis [1956] EWCA Civ 4 is an English Court of Appeal decision which established fundamental breach as a major English contract law doctrine. Denning LJ MR gave the leading judgment replacing the Rule of Strict Construction, which require a literal approach to the construction of contract terms.
The statutory right to sell, however, did not also create a right to limit resale. The court did not hold that a contract or license imposed on the first sale could not create an obligation. In this case, there was no contract between the owner and the original purchaser, and there was not privity of contract between the owner and any third party.