Remove 2005 Remove Confidentiality Remove Litigation Remove Privacy
article thumbnail

Journey Through “Octobers” on SpicyIP (2005 – Present) 

SpicyIP

Xiaomi highlighting how the common practice of courts granting confidentiality in commercial litigation problematizes transparency, judicial accountability, and the citizens’ right to be informed of court processes and reasoning under Article 19(1)(a). Corruption in IP Offices, Anything New?

article thumbnail

Georgia jury says "no trade secrets" in Boeing wing-component dispute

The IPKat

Before she hangs up her litigation gloves, her goal is to work on a case involving airplanes. Those who needed to know then had to sign a separate confidentiality agreement. There is a 5-year statute of limitations under the Georgia Trade Secrets Act and had Alcoa been concerned about UAC they should have brought their claims in 2005.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

The Copyright Quandary regarding the Delhi High Court Rules on Live-streaming of Court Proceedings

SpicyIP

Supreme Court of India , which dealt with issues of confidentiality, privacy (prior consent) of litigants and witnesses, restrictions on access to proceedings of trials and the preservation of the larger public interest due to the sensitivity of the proceedings. These are based on the principles set forth in Swapnil Tripathi v.

Copyright 136
article thumbnail

[Guest post] China Passes Its First Comprehensive Data Protection Law

The IPKat

Upon that, The IPKat is delighted to host the following guest post co-authored by Anja Geller (PhD candidate at Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität and Junior Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition) and Zihao Li (PhD candidate at CREATe, University of Glasgow, on privacy and data protection in the Chinese Civil Code).

Law 97
article thumbnail

WIPIP 2022, Session 3 (ROP/TM, (c) fair use)

43(B)log

Results: fear of potential litigation motivates permission seeking even when free speech rules would likely allow the use, e.g. in movies. A: contracts were confidential but may be able to talk about standard terms. RT: Litigated cases about influencers might have the contracts as part of the record. Accolade, Sony v.