The “process” of patenting: Why should we care about a potential U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bilski v. Doll?

In Bilski v. Doll, the U.S. Supreme Court is called to define one of the categories of patent-eligible subject matter, “process” patents. In 2008, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the category has a narrow meaning, and that to be eligible for a process patent under 35 U.S.C. § 101, the invention must involve a machine or apparatus or involve a transformation to a different state or thing, ultimately rejecting the patent application as unpatentable subject matter. The patent applicants have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to determine two issues: first, the meaning of “process” in 35 U.S.C. § 101 and whether the lower court properly relied on a “machine-or-transformation” test, and second, the test's potential conflict with 35 U.S.C. § 273, which provides protection for “method[s] of doing or conducting business.” The Court's decision could change the way that research and business are done, and patent protection for such investments. Parts 1 and 2 of this article address Bilski directly and what is and is not in dispute. Part 3 addresses the “machine-or-transformation” test, while Parts 4 and 5 address reasons not to adopt such a test.     

CHARTING A COURSE THROUGH THE HEALTH CARE POLICY MAZE

Health Policy: Development, Implementation and Evaluation in Australia. By H eather GARDNER (ed.)
The Price of Health: Australian Governments and Medical Politics 1910–1960. By J ames A G illespie
Federalism and Health Policy: The Development of Health Systems in Canada and Australia. By G wendolyn G ray
The President's Health Security Plan. By W hite H ouse D omestic C ouncil
Hospitals in Transition: The Resource Management Experiment. By T im P ackwood , J ustin K een and M artin B uxton     

Investigation into the use of photoanthropometry in facial image comparison

Photoanthropometry is a metric based facial image comparison technique. Measurements of the face are taken from an image using predetermined facial landmarks. Measurements are then converted to proportionality indices (PIs) and compared to PIs from another facial image. Photoanthropometry has been presented as a facial image comparison technique in UK courts for over 15 years. It is generally accepted that extrinsic factors (e.g. orientation of the head, camera angle and distance from the camera) can cause discrepancies in anthropometric measurements of the face from photographs. However there has been limited empirical research into quantifying the influence of such variables. The aim of this study was to determine the reliability of photoanthropometric measurements between different images of the same individual taken with different angulations of the camera. The study examined the facial measurements of 25 individuals from high resolution photographs, taken at different horizontal and vertical camera angles in a controlled environment. Results show that the degree of variability in facial measurements of the same individual due to variations in camera angle can be as great as the variability of facial measurements between different individuals. Results suggest that photoanthropometric facial comparison, as it is currently practiced, is unsuitable for elimination purposes. Preliminary investigations into the effects of distance from camera and image resolution in poor quality images suggest that such images are not an accurate representation of an individuals face, however further work is required.     

Pain Management and Work Capacity: Evidence From Workers’ Compensation and Marijuana Legalization

We study whether the work capacity of the older working population responds to improved pain management therapy access. We use the adoption of state recreational marijuana laws (RMLs) as a large policy shock to access to a non-pharmaceutical pain management option. We focus on workers’ compensation cash benefit receipt as a measure of work capacity, finding that receipt declines in response to RML adoption. Workers’ compensation cash benefits are awarded to workers who require time away from work to recover from an injury, which arguably captures a policy-relevant aspect of work capacity. We observe similar shifts in complementary proxies for work capacity, including work-limiting disability rates. After considering a range of alternative mechanisms, the evidence suggests that the primary driver of the reductions in workers’ compensation benefits is improvements in work capacity.