U.S. Code » Title 7 » Chapter CHAPTER 26— AGRICULTURAL ADJUSTMENT › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— COTTON OPTION CONTRACTS

7 U.S.C. § 605

Repealed. June 30, 1947, ch. 166, title II, § 206(d), 61 Stat. 208

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 7 CasesGoogle Scholar

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1999–2015 · leading case: Nat'l Satellite Sports, Inc. v. Eliadis, Inc., D/B/A Melody Lane Lounge, Time Warner Ent. Co., L.P., D/B/A Time Warner Cable, 253 F.3d 900 (6th Cir. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nat'l Satellite Sports, Inc. v. Eliadis, Inc., D/B/A Melody Lane Lounge, Time Warner Ent. Co., L.P., D/B/A Time Warner Cable, 253 F.3d 900 (6th Cir. 2001). “Our circuit has previously recognized Congress’s intent to expand rather than contract the reach of the Communications Act when it amended § 605: In view of [promoting the growth of satellite programming and facilitating individual reception of unencrypted satellite signals],…”
DirecTV, Inc. v. Webb, 545 F.3d 837 (9th Cir. 2008). “h7 U.S.C. § 605(e)(1) Webb was charged by DTV and held liable by the district court for more than signal piracy in violation of 47 U.”
J & J Sports Prods. Inc. v. Cela, 139 F. Supp. 3d 495 (D. Mass. 2015). “)7 U.S.C § 605 (Count I) and 17 U.S.C. § 553 (Count II) Count I alleges a violation of 47 U.”
DirecTV, Inc. v. Karpinsky (In Re Karpinsky), 328 B.R. 516 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2005). “7 U.S.C. § 605 (a) 47 U.S.C. § 605 (a) prohibits the piracy of satellite transmissions.”
Tapley v. Collins, 41 F. Supp. 2d 1366 (S.D. Ga. 1999). “, What constitutes an “interception” of a telephone or similar communication forbidden by the Federal Communications Act /"§ k7 U.S.C. § 605] or similar state statutes, 9 ALR3d 423.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 605(a) — 1 case
Nat'l Satellite Sports, Inc. v. Eliadis, Inc., D/B/A Melody Lane Lounge, Time Warner Ent. Co., L.P., D/B/A Time Warner Cable, 253 F.3d 900 (6th Cir. 2001). “Our circuit has previously recognized Congress’s intent to expand rather than contract the reach of the Communications Act when it amended § 605: In view of [promoting the growth of satellite programming and facilitating individual reception of unencrypted satellite signals],…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 605(e)(1) — 1 case
DirecTV, Inc. v. Webb, 545 F.3d 837 (9th Cir. 2008). “h7 U.S.C. § 605(e)(1) Webb was charged by DTV and held liable by the district court for more than signal piracy in violation of 47 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.