On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 20:12:17 GMT, Gene Fuller
wrote:

Did you see anything in the findings which absolves anyone from
infringement (willful or otherwise) if one reproduces a patented
invention for personal use and *does* make a good-faith effort to
change it to avoid patent infringement?

Hi Gene,

"Patent law encourages competitors to design or invent around
existing patents." See, WMS Gaming, Inc., 51 U.S.P.Q2d at 1396
(Fed. Cir. 1999). Thus, a good faith attempt to design around the
patent will generally negate a charge of willful infringement,
particularly if advice of counsel is sought during the design
process. See, Braun, Inc. v. Dynamics Corp. of Am., 975 F.2d 815,
823 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Read, 970 F.2d at 828 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Indeed, even in the absence of advice of counsel, a sincere
attempt to design around the patent may negate willfulness. See,
Rolls-Royce Ltd. v. GTE Valeron Corp., 800 F.2d 1101, 1109-1110
(Fed. Cir. 1986).

I found nothing that says infringement itself is somehow canceled. Only
"willful" infringement is negated.

Common infringement cases, as they occur, are ruled upon their merits.

Otherwise virtually all patents would
be useless. One could always claim some good-faith attempt to change the
patented item.

This marks the issue of protection offered, but NOT GUARANTEED. And
again, if it goes to court, it will invariably be between
manufacturers (or the patent holder and a manufacturer). The courts
are quite competent to smoke out the rats.

There is a special case whereby a manufacturer (or anyone for that
matter) CAN build and SELL a patented item irrespective of the patent
holder's wish IFF such a product was available before the issuance of
the patent, and the manufacturer does not diverge from that prior
issue design. This, in itself, proves the poor quality of
bureaucratic interpretations of the law that tar the subject with a
large brush.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC