British Army Corporal David Payne, convicted of abusing Iraqi detainees in 2003, was sent to jail for one year on Monday. Payne, who was one of seven British soldiers who faced court-martial for charges of detainee abuse, had pleaded guilty to charges of inhumane treatment in September. The court-martial of the seven was the first prosecution of British military personnel under the International Criminal Court Act 2001 (ICCA) and Payne was the first British soldier to admit to committing a war crime in Iraq.

The charges stemmed from a 2003 raid on a hotel in Basra in which British troops detained several Iraqi civilians, including hotel receptionist Baha Musa [Herald report], who died while in custody. The soldiers allegedly took the Iraqis to a detention facility where they were held for 36 hours and subjected to physical abuse, causing Musa's death, according to prosecutors. Charges against the other soldiers were eventually dropped.

The decision extends a Supreme Court trend that has put new limits on patent rights. In today's case, the justices heeded arguments from large computer companies and automakers that the lower court test, which centered on the requirement that an invention be "non-obvious,'' had given too much power to developers of trivial technological improvements.

"Granting patent protection to advances that would occur in the ordinary course without real innovation retards progress,'' Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court.

In a second ruling today, the court gave software makers new protections from patent lawsuits on exports, ruling that Microsoft Corp. doesn't owe damages to AT&T Inc. for copies of the Windows operating system installed on computers overseas.

The gas-pedal case concerned claims that a patent was invalid because it simply combined prior inventions. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit had required challengers to show a "teaching, suggestion or motivation'' -- typically in writing -- to put the earlier inventions together.

Companies that are frequent targets of patent-infringement claims urged the Supreme Court to overturn the Federal Circuit test. The group included Intel, Cisco, Microsoft, Time Warner Inc., Viacom Inc., Micron Technology Inc. and automakers General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler AG.

Other companies, more concerned about protecting their own patents, took the opposite side in the case. General Electric Co., 3M Co., Procter & Gamble Co., DuPont Co., Johnson & Johnson and trade groups for the brand-name drug and biotech industries signed briefs backing Teleflex in the case.

The disputed Teleflex patent covers an electronic sensor combined with gas, brake or clutch pedals that adjust to the height of the driver. Teleflex says its method took less space than previous combinations.

KSR, based in Ridgetown, Ontario, makes adjustable pedals for GM's Chevrolet and GMC trucks and sport-utility vehicles.

A federal judge in Detroit ruled the technology was too obvious to qualify for a patent. The Federal Circuit in Washington revived the suit, ordering the judge to reconsider whether the patent was valid.

Teleflex argued that the Federal Circuit standard avoided the problem of "perfect hindsight'' by requiring proof that an innovation was obvious at the time it was created.

Teleflex, based in Limerick, Pennsylvania, sold its auto- pedal business in August 2005 to DriveSol Worldwide, an affiliate of Sun Capital Partners Inc., a private investment firm based in Boca Raton, Florida. Sun Capital has taken over the case.

Rather, officers can take measures to stop the car without putting themselves at risk of civil rights lawsuits.

"A police officer's attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death," Scalia said.

The court sided 8-1 with former Coweta County sheriff's deputy Timothy Scott, who rammed a fleeing black Cadillac on a two-lane, rain-slicked road in March 2001.

Victor Harris (nyse: HRS - news - people ), the 19-year-old driver of the Cadillac, lost control and his car ended up at the bottom of an embankment.

Harris, paralyzed, sued Scott.

Lower federal courts ruled the lawsuit could proceed, but the Supreme Court said Monday that it could not. Justice John Paul Stevens dissented.

In an unusual move, the court posted the dramatic video on its Web site.

The case involved Jose Medellin, who was denied the right to meet with a consular officer from Mexico after his arrest for murder.

The World Court in The Hague in 2004 ordered the United States to review the cases of Medellin and 50 other Mexican death row inmates because U.S. officials failed to tell them of their right under the Vienna Convention to talk to consular officers immediately after their arrests.

Bush in 2005 decided to comply with the World Court's ruling and he directed state courts to review the 51 cases to determine whether the violation of their rights caused the defendants any harm at trial or at sentencing.

Bush's action caused the Supreme Court to dismiss an earlier appeal by Medellin without deciding the merits of the dispute and to send the case back to the Texas courts.

After losing before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Medellin's attorneys again appealed to the Supreme Court. They said the Texas court has put the United States in violation of its undisputed treaty obligations.

Bush administration attorneys supported Medellin's appeal. They said Bush acted within his authority and that the Texas court invalidated a presidential action "on a matter of international importance."

Medellin, a gang member, was sentenced to death in state court for the 1993 rape and murder of two teenage girls in Houston. The brutal killings stemmed from a gang initiation.

Lawyers for the state opposed the appeal. They said Bush exceeded his authority and that he cannot pre-empt Texas criminal law.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments and decide the case during its upcoming term that begins in October.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said Saturday that NATO will investigate allegations of human rights violations committed by Afghan prison officials. Scheffer's comments follow allegations made by Canadian human rights groups that Canada, a NATO member and prime contributor to ISAF, NATO's security assistance force in Afghanistan, is violating international human rights law and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in allowing detainees initially held in Canadian custody to be turned over to Afghan forces, where they suffer abuse. The groups have filed suit against the Canadian government alleging that the current Canada-Afghanistan Detainee Agreement does not do enough to ensure detainees will not be tortured by Afghan forces.

Scheffer said that NATO countries have the responsibility to defend international human rights, and that NATO has an obligation to prevent Afghanistan from torturing prisoners in its facilities.

The number of executions worldwide dropped in 2006 from 2,148 the year previous to 1,591, according to new statistics issued by Amnesty International. Over 90 percent of the year's executions were conducted in six countries: Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Pakistan, the USA and China. At 177, Iran's execution rate nearly doubled in 2006. Iraq and Pakistan joined the ranks of the world's deadliest regimes with 65 hangings and at least 82 executions respectively, and Amnesty reported at least 1000 executions in China, where rights activists say the true total may be closer to 8000. The United States, with 53 executions in 2006, is the only Western Hemisphere country to have carried out any executions since 2003.

Amnesty said that some 20,000 prisoners remain on death row worldwide, and repeated its call for a worldwide moratorium on executions, noting that 99 countries - most recently, the Philippines - now support a ban on capital punishment for ordinary crimes.

He insists he has been put through "mental suffering, inconvenience and discomfort". And because he does not have a car, he says he'll now have to RENT one just to get his clothes cleaned at another store.

According to court papers, Pearson dropped off his trousers on May 3, 2005. But they were not ready when he returned later.

Aweek later, the cleaners came up with grey trousers they said were Pearson's - but he insisted they were not the ones he dropped off.

This week, DC Superior Court judge Neal Kravitz said: "The court has significant concerns that the plaintiff is acting in bad faith because of the breathtaking magnitude of the expansion he seeks."

Lawyer Chris Manning, representing Custom Cleaners' owners Ki, Jin and Soo Chung, said: "They have been abused in a ghastly way. It's going to cost them tens of thousands to defend this case."

The Chung family insist his trousers are still at the store, waiting to be collected.