On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:41:37 -0700 (PDT), Dave__67
wrote:

On Oct 18, 4:21*pm, Ned Simmons wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:54:49 -0700 (PDT), Dave__67

wrote:

Also, no law stops someone from implementing any patented item for
their own use short of a commercial use.

Not so. There's no exception for personal use, in the US anyway.

--
Ned Simmons

Doing some reading, the enforcement mechanism still won't work if
there are no damages.

Anyway, if you made a copy of a patented item they may be able to keep
you from using it, issue an injunction to keep you from making more,
but no enforcement mechanism exists to make you destroy it or not
display it.

From the page Winston pointed to:

"If a patent is infringed, the patentee may sue for relief in the
appropriate federal court. The patentee may ask the court for an
injunction to prevent the continuation of the infringement and may
also ask the court for an award of damages because of the
infringement."

Recoverable monetary damages may be nil, but a motivated patent holder
could still prevent an infringer continuing the patent violation. In
other words, force him to destroy the offending device.

In addition, it's apparently infringement to induce or enable others
to infringe a patent.

http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise59.html
"Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as
an infringer. {FN51: 35 U.S.C. §271(b)}," which may have been the
basis of the Steadi-cam incident.

--
Ned Simmons