Samsung’s Market-Flooding Strategy May Not Work Much Longer Trefis Team‚ Contributor + Comment now (Photo credit: Wikipedia) Barely has a week passed since the historic ruling that went againstSamsung in the Apple patent-infringement trial‚ and its business as usual for the Korean electronics giant. Continuing with its strategy of flooding the market with new gadgets‚ Samsung recently unveiled a plethora of mobile devices and PCs ranging from smartphones‚ tablets‚ & phablets to smart cameras
Premium Smartphone Windows Mobile Android
Imagine holding an AK- 47 on the front lines of war. 300‚000 children worldwide experience this daily according to human right watch. Child soldier refers to any person under the age of 18 placed in the face of war. This issue discusses the rights of children and how they shouldn’t be involved in death‚ murder or fighting‚ but instead‚ experience the innocence of being a child. Children are abducted from their homes and schools are forced to work as spies‚ cooks or guards. Girls are subjected to
Premium Slavery Human trafficking Human rights
Issue The challenge in this case is to make a decision whether the book written by David is legitimately legal does not against the copyright of earlier published articles‚ or it is classified as an infringement work that copy the existed paper. Rules This particular case concerns about intellectual property law that emphasize on copyright law protection. Copyright is the exclusive rights to protect the original work from copied by the other people. The law of copyright does protect the expression
Premium Property Copyright Intellectual property
judicial activism. The decision of McDonald v. the City of Chicago made Chicago change its law. In the City of Chicago‚ with a permit‚ the people of and around Illinois are allowed to carry handguns. Before the Heller v. City of Chicago case‚ the precedent on guns was set by United States v. Miller case of 1939. In United States v. Miller‚ Jack Miller gets in trouble for carrying a saw-off shotgun across state borders. He argues that the regulating firearms is against the second amendment. The Supreme
Premium Law Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution
Common Argument #1: Gay marriage harms the institution of traditional marriage. Your Response: Okay‚ then name one demonstrable‚ tangible effect that same-sex marriages have on the functioning of individual heterosexual marriages. The ability of same-sex couples to get married doesn’t alter a single aspect of heterosexual marriages — directly or indirectly. The legal rights and benefits of heterosexual couples are completely unaffected by the existence of gay marriage. It’s not as if straight couples
Premium Marriage Same-sex marriage Homosexuality
............................................................................................................................ 1 An int Premium5996 Words24 Pages Precedent and Stare Decisis in Hong Kong: the Case of Transgenders Precedent and Stare decisis in Hong Kong: The Case of Transgenders Introduction The doctrines of “precedent” and “stare decisis” have been pillars of Western Law that have withstood the test of time. They have been especially important in upholding the “Rule of Law” based
Premium Hong Kong Bruce Lee
a co-equal branch of government. This means that it was an equal branch to the legislative and the executive. He became a Supreme Court Justice in 1801 and was appointed by John Adams. While holding his position he set three major goals that set precedents and made him the most significant Supreme Court Justice ever. Marshall strengthened the national government‚ weakened the state government‚ and strengthened the conditions for business and stabilized the economy. Before John Marshall was the Supreme
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution
CASE NOTE MUSUMECI V WINADELL PTY LTD KYLE CROSS I BACKGROUND INFORMATION Full Citation Musumeci v Winadell Pty Ltd (1994) 34 New South Wales Law Reports 723 Parties Musumeci‚ lessee (Plaintiff) Winadell Pty Ltd‚ lessor (Defendant) Date 4 August 1994 Court Supreme Court of New South Wales (NSWSC) Coram Santow J II LITIGATION HISTORY This case is a first instance decision. The plaintiff sought claim for damages‚ and claim for relief against forfeiture. III BRIEF STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS The
Premium
Legal Model – judges make their decisions based on the case facts; laws and precedents‚ which are previous‚ court cases where judges can pull their reasoning. Strengths of this strategy would be that they use more facts instead of ideologies. Some weaknesses could be that since they interpret the constitution in the way they want‚ it may not always be the correct form of interpreting that law. Attitudinal model – Since Judges and justices serve for life and the only way they can be removed from
Premium Law United States Constitution Separation of powers
Gregory Lee Johnson and the state of Texas. This decision happened in 1989 on June‚ 21. The court ruled that flag burning is protected under the first amendment therefore it is not considered illegal. This decision is important because it sets a precedent for the future of protest and free “speech” including non-oral speech in the first amendment. I am interested in this case because I believe flag burning should be illegal and punishable by jail which is opposite of the ruling in this decision. I
Premium President of the United States Richard Nixon United States