Re: Braille copyright violations

Richard A. Schafer wrote:
>
> Sigh. Naturally, I expect substantive law changes in an
> appropriations bill.

Then you won't be surprised by P.L 104-208, "A bill making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997, and for other purposes." The "other purposes" include, in section 316, an amendment adding a new section 287(c) to the patent code to eliminate remedies for infringements of medical method claims.

You can still get medical procedures patents, and it's still infringement if the claimed procedures are performed by a medical practitioner -- there's just no remedy, that's all.

One nice thing about the California constitution is a requirement that a statute can address only one subject -- I think a lot of the porkbarrel  politics could be reduced if this was the case on a federal level, too (not that California doesn't have its share).

--
Terrence J. Carroll 
Attorney at Law                                      ph: 415/843-5090
Cooley Godward LLP                                  fax: 415/857-0663
Five Palo Alto Square            email (office): carrolltj[_at_]cooley.com
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2155         email (personal):    carroll[_at_]tjc.com