Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Internet Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Computer Law

Institution
Keyword
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 1501 - 1530 of 2661

Full-Text Articles in Internet Law

Book Review - Intellectual Property Rights And The Life Science Industries: Past, Present, And Future, Chidi Oguamanam Jun 2010

Book Review - Intellectual Property Rights And The Life Science Industries: Past, Present, And Future, Chidi Oguamanam

Canadian Journal of Law and Technology

Our so-called post-industrial society is one whose axial feature is the interac- tion between computer-driven digital and life science-driven bio-technologies. The primary legal mechanism that undergirds the allocation of rights in this new infor- mation-centred epoch is intellectual property. Perhaps only a few industrial sectors have benefitted more from the dynamics of that interaction than the pharmaceutical industry. Perhaps also, only a few industrial sectors have fully appreciated and opti- mally exploited the power of intellectual property than that sector. How did that happen? How has it continued to unfold, and what does the future hold for the continued co-evolution …

Go to article

Inadequate: The Apec Privacy Framework & Article 25 Of The European Data Protection Directive, Stuart Hargreaves Jun 2010

Inadequate: The Apec Privacy Framework & Article 25 Of The European Data Protection Directive, Stuart Hargreaves

Canadian Journal of Law and Technology

The EU and APEC approaches represent two different ways of thinking about the purpose of privacy rights in personal information (a.k.a. “informational privacy” or “data privacy”). The European approach sees integrity and control over information about oneself as inherent to human dignity; informational privacy is treated as a fundamental right subject only to limited restrictions. In contrast, the approach evinced by APEC is a market-oriented cost/benefit calculus; control over personal information is seen as a beneficial policy goal when it can increase consumer confi- dence and promote economic growth — the implication being that it can also more easily give …

Go to article

Canada's Current Position With Respect To Sound Marks Registration: A Need For Change?, Marie-Jeanne Provost Jun 2010

Canada's Current Position With Respect To Sound Marks Registration: A Need For Change?, Marie-Jeanne Provost

Canadian Journal of Law and Technology

This paper analyses and criticizes Canada’s position on sound marks registration in order to recommend the ways in which Canadian policy-makers could further act in order to advance this area of law. The first part of this paper exposes the fundamental concepts of trade-marks as they are necessary to the comprehension of the problems surrounding the registration of sound marks. In the second part, legal considerations associated with the registration of sound marks are discussed. More specifically, the visual requirement, the issue of “use,” the concept of distinctiveness and the question of overlap with copyright are assessed. In the third …

Go to article

Canadian Personal Data Protection Legislation And Electronic Health Records: Transfers Of Personal Health Information In It Outsourcing Agreements, Dara Lambie Jun 2010

Canadian Personal Data Protection Legislation And Electronic Health Records: Transfers Of Personal Health Information In It Outsourcing Agreements, Dara Lambie

Canadian Journal of Law and Technology

Personal data protection and privacy of personal health information in the electronic era is a broad topic that includes consent, security measures and access considerations. The focus of this article is on one component of the larger picture: data transfers of personal health information that occur in the context of informa- tion technology (“IT”) outsourcing. If the societal good envisioned by an inter-jurisdictional EHR is to be fully realized, then the necessity of outsourcing is a reality that must be addressed.

Go to article

Phishing: Legal And Regulatory Challenges, Wan Emril Nizam Wan Embong May 2010

Phishing: Legal And Regulatory Challenges, Wan Emril Nizam Wan Embong

Student Works (2010-2019)

Phishing scheme is a new emerging security issue of computer crime or e-commerce crime in globalization. In this paper, the legal framework of Malaysia, United States of America, United Kingdom and Singapore are analyzed and followed by discussion on critical issues that rose due to phishing activities, inter alia, the threat and magnitude of problem, techniques and variants of phishing. The paper also emphasized on the factor why phishing succeed due to human factor and technical subterfuge. The result revealed that inadequacy of current legal framework is the main challenge to govern this epidemic. However, lack of awareness among consumers, …

Go to article

Elawyering And The Future Of Legal Work, Richard Granat, Blair Janis, Stephanie Kimbro, Marc Lauritsen Apr 2010

Elawyering And The Future Of Legal Work, Richard Granat, Blair Janis, Stephanie Kimbro, Marc Lauritsen

Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Lecture Series

eLawyering is doing legal work – not just marketing it – over the Web. Pioneering practitioners have found dramatic new ways to communicate and collaborate with clients and other lawyers, produce documents, settle disputes, interact with courts, and manage legal knowledge. There are exciting initiatives underway now that deserve attention by all lawyers – present and future. The legal profession is being disrupted from without and from within. To be successful in the coming era, lawyers will need to know how to practice over the Web, manage client relationships in cyberspace, and offer “unbundled” services. This program discusses the knowledge …

Go to article

Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Response To Google's Objections To Evidence And Motion To Strike, Jennifer Spaziano Apr 2010

Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Response To Google's Objections To Evidence And Motion To Strike, Jennifer Spaziano

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Motion For Sanctions, Jennifer Spaziano Apr 2010

Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Motion For Sanctions, Jennifer Spaziano

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Xvi, Tab 53 - Declaration Of Henry Lien In Support Of Google's Reply Memorandum (Counsel For Google), Henry Lien Apr 2010

Vol. Xvi, Tab 53 - Declaration Of Henry Lien In Support Of Google's Reply Memorandum (Counsel For Google), Henry Lien

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Xv, Tab 52 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone Apr 2010

Vol. Xv, Tab 52 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Xix, Tab 56 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone Apr 2010

Vol. Xix, Tab 56 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Spaziano Declaration In Opposition To Google's Motion, Jennifer Spaziano Apr 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Spaziano Declaration In Opposition To Google's Motion, Jennifer Spaziano

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Xi, Tab 48 - Declaration Of Kris Brewer (Associate Discovery Counsel For Google), Kris Brewer Apr 2010

Vol. Xi, Tab 48 - Declaration Of Kris Brewer (Associate Discovery Counsel For Google), Kris Brewer

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Declaration Of Henry Lien (Counsel For Google), Henry Lien Apr 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Declaration Of Henry Lien (Counsel For Google), Henry Lien

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 39 - Bill Lloyd Declaration (Google Ad Support Team Lead), Bill Lloyd Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 39 - Bill Lloyd Declaration (Google Ad Support Team Lead), Bill Lloyd

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 42 - Declaration Of Cheryl Galvin, Cheryl Galvin Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 42 - Declaration Of Cheryl Galvin, Cheryl Galvin

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 76 - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management), Susan Wojcicki Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 76 - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management), Susan Wojcicki

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. R - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management), Susan Wojcicki Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. R - Wojcicki Deposition (Google Vice-President Product Management), Susan Wojcicki

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 36 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Responses To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 36 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Responses To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 34 - Deposition Of Susan Wojcicki (Google Vice President - Product Management), Susan Wojcicki Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 34 - Deposition Of Susan Wojcicki (Google Vice President - Product Management), Susan Wojcicki

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 51 - Adams Deposition (Rosetta Stone Ceo), Tom Adams Mar 2010

Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 51 - Adams Deposition (Rosetta Stone Ceo), Tom Adams

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 74 - Thomas Deposition (Rosetta Counterfeit Software Customer), Diana Thomas Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 74 - Thomas Deposition (Rosetta Counterfeit Software Customer), Diana Thomas

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. A - Alferness Deposition (Google Ad Products Senior Product Manager), Jonathan Alferness Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. A - Alferness Deposition (Google Ad Products Senior Product Manager), Jonathan Alferness

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 23 - Deposition Of Jonathan Alferness (Google Adwords Product Manager), Jonathan Alferness Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 23 - Deposition Of Jonathan Alferness (Google Adwords Product Manager), Jonathan Alferness

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 73 - Tabatabai Deposition (Rosetta Online Marketing Specialist), Nicole Tabatabai Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 73 - Tabatabai Deposition (Rosetta Online Marketing Specialist), Nicole Tabatabai

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. 28 - Rosetta Stone Unjust Enrichment Calculations, Rosetta Stone Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. 28 - Rosetta Stone Unjust Enrichment Calculations, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 67 - Lloyd Deposition (Google Trademark Assistant), Bill Lloyd Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 67 - Lloyd Deposition (Google Trademark Assistant), Bill Lloyd

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 70 - Novaczyk Deposition (Rosetta Consumer Marketing Analytics), Thomas Novaczyk Mar 2010

Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 70 - Novaczyk Deposition (Rosetta Consumer Marketing Analytics), Thomas Novaczyk

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. N - Lloyd Deposition (Google Ad Support Team Lead), Bill Lloyd Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. N - Lloyd Deposition (Google Ad Support Team Lead), Bill Lloyd

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 32 - Deposition Of Bill Lloyd (Google Ad Support Team), Bill Lloyd Mar 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 32 - Deposition Of Bill Lloyd (Google Ad Support Team), Bill Lloyd

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Go to article

First Prev Next Last