Remove 2005 Remove Confidentiality 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

Custodians Of Financial Data And Its Protection In Indian Framework : Banking Sector

IP and Legal Filings

Some of these provisions are: Sections 44 of the SBI Act of 1955, Section 13 of the SBI (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1980, and Section 29 of the Credit Information Companies Act of 2005 describe the public financial institutions. iv] But no clear provision on penalty has been subscribed. IMPORTANT PRECEDENTS.

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

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

The IPKat

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.

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

Preserving Trade Secrets at District Court Hearings and Trials

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

The Eastern District of Texas General Order “anticipates that HSDs may also include documents that, in the judgment of the filing party, are or contain HSI that is substantially likely to adversely affect,” inter alia , “nonpublic intellectual property, trade secrets, or highly confidential commercial information.” United Indus., 1835(a).

article thumbnail

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

43(B)log

A: contracts were confidential but may be able to talk about standard terms. Bill McGeveran: interesting b/c privacy/data protection regimes are very different in the two regimes. There weren’t followup cases from 2005-2017; only six cases cited those two cases and two of those were Oracle v. Was there no overlap at all?

article thumbnail

Modern monarchy and the media: Duchess of Sussex wins historic privacy case against the British tabloids

IP Whiteboard

The Duchess of Sussex) was recently granted summary judgment in a privacy claim against Associated Newspapers Limited, over the publication of extracts from a hand-written letter to her father (see HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2021] EWHC 273 (Ch) ). Background. The Duke of Sussex, a.k.a.

Privacy 40