Not exact matches
There is a
similarity to and a difference from Kant's doctrine of space and time
as forms of intuition; each occasion inherits this network of potential relatedness from its past, actualizes a portion of it
as its own «region,» and (if it has any
substantial experience in the mode of presentational immediacy) redefines the network and projects it upon the contemporary world.
In the end, while the authors of this chapter do not disclose the actual correlations between their two measures and value - added, specifically (although from the appendix one can infer that the correlation between value - added and Tripod output is around r = 0.45
as based on an unadjusted r - squared), and I should mention this is a HUGE shortcoming of this chapter (one that would not have passed peer review should this chapter have been submitted to a journal for publication), the authors do mention that «the conceptual overlap between the frameworks is
substantial and that empirical patterns in the data show
similarities.»
There are numerous explanations for all these
similarities, but none
as substantial as the one offered by Mike Shields of noted Subaru tuner SPD Tuning Service.
First, there must be sufficient objective
similarity between the infringing work and the copyright work or a
substantial part thereof for the former to be properly described not necessarily identical with, but
as a reproduction or adaptation of the latter.
Courts often view the «
substantial similarity» question
as so clear or one - sided that there is no need for a jury to decide the issue (for our lawyer - readers: i.e., summary judgment).
All US courts use «
substantial similarity»
as the test for this stage.