Patent Grant
11831955
A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material that is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent files or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever.
The present invention relates generally to the field of content and/or data delivery over one or more networks. More particularly, the present invention is related in one exemplary aspect to apparatus and methods for linking subscriber accounts across two or more networks for the delivery of content across these networks.
Recent advances in digital information processing and technology have made a whole range of services and functions available for delivery to consumers at various types devices for very reasonable prices or subscription fees. These services and functions include digital content or programming (movies, etc.), digital video-on-demand (VOD), personal video recorder (PVR) and networked PVR (nPVR), Internet Protocol television (IPTV), digital media playback and recording, as well high speed Internet access (including so-called “Internet TV”, where television programming is delivered over the Internet without QoS) and IP-based telephony (e.g., VoIP). Other services available to network users include access to, and recording of, digital music (e.g., MP3 files).
Currently, many of these services are provided to the user via a wide variety of different equipment environments and delivery paradigms including, inter alia, cable or satellite modems or QAMs, HFCu (i.e., Hybrid Fiber-copper distribution via indigenous POST/PSTN and/or coaxial wiring in a premises), optical fiber such as FTTC, FTTH, etc., Wi-Fi™ hubs, Ethernet hubs, gateways, switches, and routers, to a plurality of user equipment types. For example, content may be delivered to users at set-top boxes, personal (desktop) computers, laptop computers, other mini-computers (such as so-called “netbooks”, mini-notebook computers), and/or other devices. Recent advances in consumer electronics have also led to the widespread introduction of a variety of portable media devices (PMDs) such as, inter alia, portable digital music devices and other so-called “MP3 players”, cellular telephones/smartphones, handheld computers, and personal digital assistants (PDA), which allow users to store and playback audio and video files. Furthermore, many users today wish to view at least some content via the Internet and their mobile device.
Although a myriad of services, equipment, data formats and providers are available, current systems offer no mechanism for a managed network operator (e.g., MSO) to partner with service providers in order to allow users who are verified as subscribers of the MSO network to obtain and utilize content from the network (such as via a subscription, pay-per-view, etc.), and to be able to view this content via the Internet or another such external network or internetwork via partnered service provider websites or similar portals.
Another mechanism for providing video content to mobile devices is the Forward Link Only (FLO), such as that offered by Qualcomm Corporation as the MediaFLO® technology (also termed “FLO TV”). MediaFLO enables live, real time audio and video streams, as well as broadcast and scheduled video and audio clips and shows to be transmitted to the user's mobile device. The data transmission path in the MediaFLO system is one-way, from the tower to the device; there is no upstream communication. Hence, the MediaFLO system is not capable of providing enhanced features such as trick mode operations (fast-forward, rewind, pause, so called “start over”, etc.) and/or advanced user interaction data collection. MediaFLO is also unable to provide premium or pay content, and instead has somewhat limited content offerings. Further, the MediaFLO system does not provide on-demand capabilities, but rather only provides broadcast (or live) and scheduled video.
Hence, methods and apparatus are needed which enable a partnered service provider to, pursuant to an on-demand or other request for protected content, autonomously or non-autonomously determine if an identified prospective viewer of Internet content already subscribes or otherwise has access rights to this content through the MSO, and if so provide the content (e.g., according to one or more delivery models associated with the user's subscription or use rights). Ideally, the aforementioned methods and apparatus would enable such content delivery while affording minimal user input, such as via a single sign-on mechanism which allows the user to log in once and have his/her accounts with both the service provider and the MSO linked. Ideally, the MSO subscriber may be provided with additional types/delivery modes of content (e.g., broadcast, on-demand, pay-per-view, premium, etc.), and/or be provided with content across different delivery platforms via the Internet according to the subscriber's service plan with the MSO. Such methods and apparatus would advantageously enable a user to receive these various types of content on any device and via any delivery paradigm (and not necessarily according to a fixed schedule), thereby enhancing the user experience.
The present invention addresses the foregoing needs by disclosing apparatus and methods for content management and account linking across entities of two or more networks.
In a first aspect of the invention, a method for providing protected content via a first network to a user of a second network is disclosed. In one embodiment, the method comprises: receiving at an entity of the second network a request for the protected content, the request comprising at least information identifying a requesting user and information identifying requested content; determining, based at least in part on the information identifying the requesting user, an identity of the requesting user as an authorized user of the second network; generating a unique identifier for the authorized user; and transmitting a response to the request to an entity of the first network, the response comprising the unique identifier.
The transmission of the response may in one variant, be configured to cause the entity of the first network to deliver the protected content to the authorized user. In another variant, the unique identifier is stored at the entity of the first network and is configured to enable use in a subsequent request, the subsequent request comprising a request for second protected content different than the first content.
In a second aspect of the invention, an apparatus in a content delivery network configured to authorize access to a selected one or more services at a packet network by at least one user device is disclosed. In one embodiment, the apparatus comprises: a first interface configured to receive: information identifying the at least one user device and a request for the access to the selected one or more services; a processor comprising at least one computer program, the computer program configured to: verify the information identifying the at least one user device as being associated with at least one subscriber of the content delivery network, generate a unique identifier specific to the subscriber, and generate a response to the request for the access to the selected one or more services; and a second interface configured to transmit: the unique identifier to at least one entity of the packet network for storage thereon, and the response to the request for the access to the selected one or more services.
In a third aspect of the invention, a method for providing protected content via a first content delivery network to an authorized user of a second content delivery network is disclosed. In one embodiment, the method comprises: receiving at an entity of the first network a request for the protected content from a user device, the request comprising at least information identifying the user device and information identifying the protected content; querying a plurality of records to determine a unique identifier of the user device, the unique identifier being previously provided by the second network; transmitting the unique identifier and the information identifying the protected content to an entity of the second network; receiving in response to the transmission of the unique identifier and the information identifying the protected content, a response from the entity of the second network; and delivering the protected content to the user device based at least in part on the response.
In a fourth aspect of the invention, a method of operating a packet network is disclosed. In one embodiment, the method comprises receiving from an IP-enabled device a request for content at an entity of the packet network, the content being protected in accordance with one or more policies specified by the operator of a managed content distribution network. The request comprises information uniquely associated with a subscriber of the managed network. Information stored at the entity received from the operator is accessed, the stored information enabling the entity to determine whether the request for content should be granted. When granting the request, a communication is issued to the managed network indicating that the content is being provided, and the content is provided to the requesting IP-enabled device over the packet network, the content being at least partly encapsulated using an IP protocol.
In an fifth aspect of the invention, a business and operation “rules” engine is disclosed. In one embodiment, the engine comprises one or more computer programs adapted to control various aspects of content and message exchange between two entities so as to achieve desired business or operation goals (or obey certain rules). Business methods based on e.g., the foregoing rules and content/message exchange are also disclosed.
In a sixth aspect of the invention, a computer-readable apparatus is disclosed. In one embodiment, the apparatus comprises a storage device having at least one program stored thereon, the program, when executed, facilitates providing protected content to subscribers of a managed (e.g., MSO) network via a content source accessible to the subscriber via the Internet or another external network.
These and other aspects of the invention shall become apparent when considered in light of the disclosure provided herein.
All Figures © Copyright 2010 Time Warner Cable, Inc. All rights reserved.
Reference is now made to the drawings wherein like numerals refer to like parts throughout.
As used herein, the term “application” refers generally to a unit of executable software that implements a certain functionality or theme. The themes of applications vary broadly across any number of disciplines and functions (such as on-demand content management, e-commerce transactions, brokerage transactions, home entertainment, calculator etc.), and one application may have more than one theme. The unit of executable software generally runs in a predetermined environment; for example, the unit could comprise a downloadable Java Xlet™ that runs within the JavaTV™ environment.
As used herein, the terms “client device” and “end user device” include, but are not limited to, set-top boxes (e.g., DSTBs), personal computers (PCs), and minicomputers, whether desktop, laptop, or otherwise, and mobile devices such as handheld computers, PDAs, personal media devices (PMDs), and smartphones.
As used herein, the term “codec” refers to a video, audio, or other data coding and/or decoding algorithm, process or apparatus including, without limitation, those of the MPEG (e.g., MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4/H.264, etc.), Real (RealVideo, etc.), AC-3 (audio), DiVX, XViD/ViDX, Windows Media Video (e.g., WMV 7, 8, 9, 10, or 11), ATI Video codec, or VC-1 (SMPTE standard 421M) families.
As used herein, the term “computer program” or “software” is meant to include any sequence or human or machine cognizable steps which perform a function. Such program may be rendered in virtually any programming language or environment including, for example, C/C++, Fortran, COBOL, PASCAL, assembly language, markup languages (e.g., HTML, SGML, XML, VoXML), and the like, as well as object-oriented environments such as the Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA), Java™ (including J2ME, Java Beans, etc.) and the like.
The terms “Customer Premises Equipment (CPE)” and “host device” refer to any type of electronic equipment located within a customer's or user's premises and connected to a network. The term “host device” refers generally to a terminal device that has access to digital television content via a satellite, cable, or terrestrial network.
As used herein, the term “display” means any type of device adapted to display information, including without limitation CRTs, LCDs, TFTs, plasma displays, LEDs, incandescent and fluorescent devices, or combinations/integrations thereof. Display devices may also include less dynamic devices such as, for example, printers, e-ink devices, and the like.
As used herein, the term “DOCSIS” refers to any of the existing or planned variants of the Data Over Cable Services Interface Specification, including for example DOCSIS versions 1.0, 1.1, 2.0 and 3.0. DOCSIS (version 1.0) is a standard and protocol for internet access using a “digital” cable network.
As used herein, the term “headend” refers generally to a networked system controlled by an operator (e.g., an MSO) that distributes programming to MSO clientele using client devices. Such programming may include literally any information source/receiver including, inter alia, free-to-air TV channels, pay TV channels, interactive TV, and the Internet.
As used herein, the terms “Internet” and “internet” are used interchangeably to refer to inter-networks including, without limitation, the Internet.
As used herein, the terms “microprocessor” and “digital processor” are meant generally to include all types of digital processing devices including, without limitation, digital signal processors (DSPs), reduced instruction set computers (RISC), general-purpose (CISC) processors, microprocessors, gate arrays (e.g., FPGAs), PLDs, reconfigurable compute fabrics (RCFs), array processors, and application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs). Such digital processors may be contained on a single unitary IC die, or distributed across multiple components. As used herein, the terms “MSO” or “multiple systems operator” refer to a cable, satellite, or terrestrial network provider having infrastructure required to deliver services including programming and data over those mediums.
As used herein, the terms “network” and “bearer network” refer generally to any type of telecommunications or data network including, without limitation, hybrid fiber coax (HFC) networks, satellite networks, telco networks, and data networks (including MANs, WANs, LANs, WLANs, internets, and intranets). Such networks or portions thereof may utilize any one or more different topologies (e.g., ring, bus, star, loop, etc.), transmission media (e.g., wired/RF cable, RF wireless, millimeter wave, optical, etc.) and/or communications or networking protocols (e.g., SONET, DOCSIS, IEEE Std. 802.3, ATM, X.25, Frame Relay, 3GPP, 3GPP2, WAP, SIP, UDP, FTP, RTP/RTCP, H.323, etc.).
As used herein, the term “network interface” refers to any signal or data interface with a component or network including, without limitation, those of the FireWire (e.g., FW400, FW800, etc.), USB (e.g., USB2), Ethernet (e.g., 10/100, 10/100/1000 (Gigabit Ethernet), 10-Gig-E, etc.), MoCA, Coaxsys (e.g., TVnet™), radio frequency tuner (e.g., in-band or OOB, cable modem, etc.), Wi-Fi (802.11a,b,g,n), WiMAX (802.16), PAN (e.g., 802.15), or IrDA families.
As used herein, the term “QAM” refers to modulation schemes used for sending signals over cable networks. Such modulation scheme might use any constellation level (e.g. QPSK, 16-QAM, 64-QAM, 256-QAM, etc.) depending on details of a cable network. A QAM may also refer to a physical channel modulated according to the schemes.
As used herein, the term “server” refers to any computerized component, system or entity regardless of form which is adapted to provide data, files, applications, content, or other services to one or more other devices or entities on a computer network.
As used herein, the term “storage device” refers to without limitation computer hard drives, DVR device, memory, RAID devices or arrays, optical media (e.g., CD-ROMs, Laserdiscs, Blu-Ray, etc.), or any other devices or media capable of storing content or other information.
As used herein, the term “Wi-Fi” refers to, without limitation, any of the variants of IEEE-Std. 802.11 or related standards including 802.11 a/b/g/n/v.
As used herein, the term “wireless” means any wireless signal, data, communication, or other interface including without limitation Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, 3G, HSDPA/HSUPA, TDMA, CDMA (e.g., IS-95A, WCDMA, etc.), FHSS, DSSS, GSM, PAN/802.15, WiMAX (802.16), 802.20, narrowband/FDMA, OFDM, PCS/DCS, analog cellular, CDPD, satellite systems, millimeter wave or microwave systems, acoustic, and infrared (i.e., IrDA).
Overview
The present invention discloses, inter alia, methods and apparatus for providing protected content to subscribers of a managed (e.g., MSO) network via a content source accessible to the subscriber via the Internet or another external network. In one embodiment, a user accesses a third party service provider (content source) website, and requests delivery of content (e.g., via on-demand type streaming, broadcast, high speed file download, etc.). If the particular content requested is protected content or content which is only accessible to certain types of subscribers, the service provider and/or MSO determines whether the requesting user is permitted to access the content. The process by which it is determined whether a user may access content includes (i) authenticating the user as a subscriber to the MSO, and (ii) determining whether the subscriber's service/subscription level permits viewing of the requested content (and optionally one or more use restrictions). The process is advantageously agnostic to the underlying networks involved in both the request and content delivery processes.
In one variant, the user is authenticated by requiring him/her to establish a login identity and password, and/or assigning the user a GUID. The user's MAC address or IP address may also be used in this process. This unique information is stored at an MSO entity, and when the user requests content, the user must log into the MSO; the relevant information is retrieved and compared to information that the user has provided in their login. If valid login information is entered (i.e., the information provided matches the stored information for that user GUID), then a session is created between the MSO and user.
The aforementioned authentication at the MSO may be facilitated by various entities associated with the service provider. For instance, the user may first log in to a service provider's website, such as by establishing a login identity and password which are stored at the service provider's site. Once logged in, the service provider may forward requests to view content to an appropriate MSO and provide a platform for the user to log in to the MSO site.
In another variant, the service provider and MSO accounts for a particular user may be linked or federated. In other words, a trust relationship is established between the service provider and MSO, which is used to verify subscriber information. According to this embodiment, a given user will have MSO-specific information regarding its identity (such as login information for the MSO, GUID, etc.), and/or information regarding its subscription level and other service details stored at the service provider site. Messages received from the MSO representing permission for the user to access content may also be stored at the service provider site. The service provider may later reference this information when subsequent requests for content are made by the user for content, thereby providing faster and more efficient service.
Methods for unlinking or de-federating a user's account in the service provider and MSO sites are also disclosed.
In other variants, the MSO enables the service provider to enforce security or rights management protection (e.g., DRM, encryption keys, etc.) on content authorized for delivery, such as by pre-positioning information enabling this protection (and specific to the requesting subscriber) at the service provider.
Similarly, another variant disclosed allows the service provider to pre-configure the requested content based on one or more configuration parameters associated with the requesting device (e.g., codec support, DRM support, display capabilities, etc.).
Business rules for the implementation of the aforementioned methods and for the delivery of content are also disclosed.
Exemplary embodiments of the apparatus and methods of the present invention are now described in detail. While these exemplary embodiments are described in the context of use with the aforementioned hybrid fiber coax (HFC) cable system, or satellite network architecture having an multiple systems operator (MSO), digital networking capability, IP delivery capability, and plurality of client devices/CPE, the general principles and advantages of the invention may be extended to other types of networks and architectures, whether broadband, narrowband, wired or wireless, or otherwise, the following therefore being merely exemplary in nature. For instance, the invention may be adapted for use on so-called hybrid fiber copper (HFCu) networks, or WiMAX (IEEE Std. 802.16) wireless networks.
It will also be appreciated that while described generally in the context of a consumer (i.e., home) end user domain, the present invention may be readily adapted to other types of environments (e.g., commercial/enterprise, government/military, etc.) as well. Myriad other applications are possible.
Also, while certain aspects are described primarily in the context of the well-known Internet Protocol (described in, inter alia, RFC 791 and 2460) and Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), it will be appreciated that the present invention may utilize other types of protocols (and in fact bearer networks to include other internets and intranets) to implement the described functionality.
Other features and advantages of the present invention will immediately be recognized by persons of ordinary skill in the art with reference to the attached drawings and detailed description of exemplary embodiments as given below.
Network—
The data/application origination point 102 comprises any medium that allows data and/or applications (such as a VOD-based or “Watch TV” application) to be transferred to a distribution server 104. This can include for example a third party data source, application vendor website, CD-ROM, external network interface, mass storage device (e.g., RAID system), etc. Such transference may be automatic, initiated upon the occurrence of one or more specified events (such as the receipt of a request packet or ACK), performed manually, or accomplished in any number of other modes readily recognized by those of ordinary skill.
The application distribution server 104 comprises a computer system where such applications can enter the network system. Distribution servers are well known in the networking arts, and accordingly not described further herein.
The VOD server 105 comprises a computer system where on-demand content can be received from one or more of the aforementioned data sources 102 and enter the network system. These servers may generate the content locally, or alternatively act as a gateway or intermediary from a distant source.
The CPE 106 includes any equipment in the “customers' premises” (or other locations, whether local or remote to the distribution server 104) that can be accessed by a distribution server 104.
Referring now to
The exemplary architecture 150 of
It will also be recognized, however, that the multiplexing operation(s) need not necessarily occur at the headend 150 (e.g., in the aforementioned MEM 162). As one alternative, a multi-location or multi-stage approach can be used, such as that described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,602,820, entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR MULTI-STAGE MULTIPLEXING IN A NETWORK” incorporated herein by reference in its entirety, which discloses inter alia improved multiplexing apparatus and methods that allow such systems to dynamically compensate for content (e.g., advertisements, promotions, or other programs) that is inserted at a downstream network node such as a local hub, as well as “feed-back” and “feed forward” mechanisms for transferring information between multiplexing stages.
Content (e.g., audio, video, data, files, etc.) is provided in each downstream (in-band) channel associated with the relevant service group. To communicate with the headend or intermediary node (e.g., hub server), the CPE 106 may use the out-of-band (OOB) or DOCSIS channels and associated protocols. The OCAP 1.0 (and subsequent) specification provides for exemplary networking protocols both downstream and upstream, although the invention is in no way limited to these approaches.
It will also be recognized that the multiple servers (broadcast, VOD, or otherwise) can be used, and disposed at two or more different locations if desired, such as being part of different server “farms”. These multiple servers can be used to feed one service group, or alternatively different service groups. In a simple architecture, a single server is used to feed one or more service groups. In another variant, multiple servers located at the same location are used to feed one or more service groups. In yet another variant, multiple servers disposed at different location are used to feed one or more service groups.
An optical transport ring (not shown) is also commonly utilized to distribute the dense wave-division multiplexed (DWDM) optical signals to each hub within the network in an efficient fashion.
In addition to on-demand and broadcast content (e.g., video programming), the system of
The CPE 106 are each configured to monitor the particular assigned RF channel (such as via a port or socket ID/address, or other such mechanism) for IP packets intended for the subscriber premises/address that they serve.
While the foregoing network architectures described herein can (and in fact do) carry packetized content (e.g., IP over MPEG for high-speed data or Internet TV, MPEG2 packet content over QAM for MPTS, etc.), they are often not optimized for such delivery. Hence, in accordance with another embodiment of the present invention, a “packet optimized” delivery network is used for carriage of the packet content (e.g., IPTV content) when the request issues from an MSO network (see discussion of
Content Delivery Network Architecture—
The approach to providing access to protected content outside of an MSO network described in the present disclosure are based in the exemplary embodiment on a pre-defined set of transactions or assertions which are passed between the content provider (e.g., service provider or other third-party entity) and the managed network operator (e.g., MSO). The assertions are conducted between applications proprietary to both of the aforementioned organizations, yet externalized through a set of standards-based protocols. In one implementation of the invention, the protocols utilized include those defined by the Liberty Alliance Project, and/or by the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), although it will be recognized that other protocols may be used with equal success.
The Liberty Alliance, formed in 2001, created a set of open standards and guidelines for identity management with the fundamental concept of “identity federation” (or the linking of accounts within or across disparate organizations). The guidelines produced from the project, known as Liberty Alliance Identity Federation Framework (ID-FF) V1.2 specification, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety, define the process by which identities from trusted sources can be linked in order to reduce ongoing multiple logins, thus increasing identity assurance while reducing identity fraud. In 2003, the Liberty Alliance contributed their body of work to OASIS that was founded in 1993 under the name SGML Open. SGML Open's original charter was the creation of guidelines for interoperability among products supporting the Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML), but in 1998 SGML Open changed its name and shifted its focus from SGML to Extensible Markup Language (XML), as it became widely adopted by the technology industry.
To date, specifications from OASIS have become the de facto standard for security and identification management between consenting business partners, which is represented through the Security Assertion Markup language (SAML) Specification (Version 2.0 released in 2005), which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. Early versions of SAML and the ID-FF were compatible; however, the two standards became incompatible based on component changes within SAML for greater consistency and component symmetry. Other key differences addressed in SAML v2.0 were encryption metadata and multi-endpoint support for a single protocol. Also, SAML v2.0 generalized the Liberty functionality to account for more options or use cases for expanded definition. However, it will be appreciated that the present invention is not limited to any particular standards or languages, the foregoing SAML and ID-FF being merely exemplary of the broader principles of the invention.
Referring now to
The service providers 202 may for example include any broadcast provider (such as e.g., NBC, Turner Broadcasting, Viacom, etc.) which distributes content across one or more mediums, or through distribution agreements with the MSO 201. Subscribers include the individual consumers or users of video/audio/data services.
Subscribers request access to content via user devices such as e.g., consumer premises equipment (CPE) 106, personal media devices (PMD) 107, personal computers (PC), laptop computers, mobile devices, etc. The user devices may include any apparatus capable receiving audio/video/data services from the MSO 201 or service provider 202 via the Internet. Hence, two primary request/delivery models are envisaged (although others may be used as well, or combinations or variants of the foregoing): (i) request from an MSO-network device (e.g., CPE 106 such as an IP-enabled DSTB or premises gateway 113) to an Internet site (such as e.g., the external web application 204), for content to be returned back to the requesting MSO-network device (see
An example of the former case (i) might be an IP-enabled DSTB or PC/DOCSIS cable modem registered with the MSO 201 that utilizes MSO infrastructure to access the Internet (and the third party service provider/source site), with content being streamed back to the requesting device over a comparable pathway. Here, the MSO network acts both as a “bearer” and “authorizer” network. Note that in one embodiment, although the subscriber is using (primarily) MSO infrastructure and requesting MSO protected content, the source of the content is actually a third party (e.g., web server), and hence the content is delivered in an essentially agnostic fashion (i.e., the MSO does not know that it is carrying its own content, but rather the protected content appears to be just any other third party content (and hence advantageously does not require any special routing, management, or other considerations).
An example of the latter case (ii) might be an IP-enabled mobile device (e.g., smartphone or laptop computer) which may or may not be registered with the MSO 201, and is being operated by an authorized MSO subscriber. The device may obtain access to the Internet via e.g., a service provider WLAN, cellular 3G/4G (e.g., LTE-A), WiMAX, or other such interface 250, whereby it may connect to the third party website and request content, the latter streamed to the device over a comparable return path when delivery is authorized. In this fashion, the MSO 201 network is not a bearer, but rather merely an authorizer.
Once the subscriber (and/or device) is authenticated and authorized, the content may be provided from the service provider content server 206 to the requesting device (e.g., CPE 106, PMD 107, etc.). The service provider may also designate a proxy to deliver the content (e.g., a fourth party with which the third party service provider has an existing relationship).
As indicated, before the protected content may be provided thereto (via the content server 206), the service provider 202 must authenticate the requesting device as being an MSO 201 subscriber and ensure the requesting subscriber is authorized to view the requested content. The authentication step (determining whether the requesting user is an MSO 201 subscriber) utilizes at least an MSO-based identity provider 210. The authorization step (determining the “entitlements” of the subscriber with respect to the requested content) utilizes at least an MSO-based entitlements server 208.
Two exemplary models by which a user's status as an MSO subscriber is authenticated are discussed herein, although other paradigms will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill given the present disclosure. The first model enables “linking” of the service provider's 202 subscriber identity to the MSO's 201 subscriber identity. This link allows the service 202 to avoid having to redirect the subscriber back to the MSO 201 for authentication once the accounts have been linked. The second method (“non-linking”) is used in the event the service provider 202 does not maintain identities for its subscribers, and instead leverages only the MSO 201 identity provider 210 for authentication; i.e., if the service provider 202 does not support its own identity management system (IDMS). In one variant, the non-linked embodiment requires that the service provider 202 enforce an MSO 201 policy that authentications are session-based and cannot be persistent.
In one embodiment, the architecture 200 for providing delivery of protected content outside an MSO 201 network may include the components discussed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/834,796, entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR CONTENT DELIVERY AND MESSAGE EXCHANGE ACROSS MULTIPLE CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORKS”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,357,247 on May 31, 2016, which was previously incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
As noted above, the requested/provided content may comprise traditional broadcast content as well as on-demand content. Other types of content may also be provided. For example, so called “quick clips” content (described in co-owned U.S. Pat. No. 7,174,126 issued Feb. 6, 2007 and entitled “TECHNIQUE FOR EFFECTIVELY ACCESSING PROGRAMMING LISTING INFORMATION IN AN ENTERTAINMENT DELIVERY SYSTEM” incorporated herein by reference in its entirety), so-called “start-over” content (described in co-owned U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0034171 entitled “TECHNIQUE FOR DELIVERING PROGRAMMING CONTENT BASED ON A MODIFIED NETWORK PERSONAL VIDEO RECORDER SERVICE” incorporated herein by reference in its entirety), so-called “lookback” content (as described in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/913,064 filed Aug. 6, 2004 and entitled “TECHNIQUE FOR DELIVERING PROGRAMMING CONTENT BASED ON A MODIFIED NETWORK PERSONAL VIDEO RECORDER SERVICE” incorporated herein by reference in its entirety), and/or so-called “remote DVR” content (as discussed in co-owned U.S. Pat. No. 7,457,520 issued Nov. 25, 2008 and entitled “TECHNIQUE FOR PROVIDING A VIRTUAL DIGITAL VIDEO RECORDER SERVICE THROUGH A COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK” incorporated herein by reference in its entirety) may be delivered. Still further, enhanced access to premium based content which is not available to non-subscribers, or which cannot be delivered across traditional transport may also be provided, such as e.g., behind the scenes outtakes, alternate endings, actor interviews, etc.
As will be discussed in greater detail below, the aforementioned network architecture further enables upstream communication between the user devices (CPE 106 and/or PMD 107) and service provider 202 and MSO 201. Accordingly, entities at the service provider 202 and/or MSO 201 may collect usage data from the devices (whether actively via upstream messages or signaling, or passively based on user request/trick mode or other types of behavior), as well as provide the user with trick mode capabilities with respect to the content (e.g., fast forward, rewind, pause, etc.) where applicable.
Delivery of content to the CPE 106 and/or PMD 107 occurs within the MSO network (i.e., under the paradigm of
Moreover, the foregoing apparatus and methods provide for enhanced content access, reproduction, and distribution control (via e.g., a DRM-based approach and other security and content control measures), as well as quality-of-service (QoS) guarantees which maintain high media quality and user experience, especially when compared to prior art “Internet TV” paradigms. In one exemplary implementation, the network may be based on an IMS (IP Multimedia System, such as e.g., that defined in relevant 3GPP standards) which includes SIP session protocols, as well as a Service Delivery Platform (SDP).
In another implementation (
In one variant of this approach, network services are sent “over the top” of other provider's infrastructure, thereby making the service provider network substantially transparent (i.e., the protected content requests and other communications are passed over the service provider network and the Internet as if they are any other traffic). In another variant, a cooperative approach between providers is utilized, so that features or capabilities present in one service provider's network (e.g., authentication of mobile devices to an AP or RAN) can be leveraged by another provider operating in cooperation therewith.
In another embodiment, requested content may be authorized via the content and data distribution architecture 200, and provided to the CPE 106 and/or PMD 107 as described in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/258,229 filed on Oct. 24, 2005 and entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ON-DEMAND CONTENT TRANSMISSION AND CONTROL OVER NETWORKS”, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. As discussed therein, data may be provided according to download or “on-demand” paradigms. In one embodiment, the network comprises a cable television network connected with a CSP (cellular service provider) or wireless service provider (WSP), and on-demand content delivery is accomplished via a “point-to-point” approach wherein a session is established between a content receiving entity (such as a cellular telephone) and a distributing entity (e.g., a VOD server). Session establishment and data flow control are advantageously implemented using protocols and bandwidth that are typically used for (i) providing on-demand services to subscribers within the cable network, and (ii) delivery and control of streaming multimedia to client mobile devices.
Yet other mechanisms and architectures for providing content to PMDs 107 and/or CPE 106 located in or out of a managed network may be used consistent with the invention as well, the foregoing being merely exemplary of the broader principles.
As will be discussed in greater detail below, the architecture 200 utilizes information obtained from or stored at an MSO-maintained authorization server (not shown) to determine whether a requesting user device is authorized to receive the content. In one embodiment, the provision of content and use thereof are effectively controlled by the supplying web or service provider content server 206 (or any intermediary MSO-operated infrastructure). For example, once a user is authorized to receive content, the server 206 serves the content to the user device over the prescribed delivery path/model.
In another embodiment, various restrictions to the provision of content to a user at a display device associated with the user device are determined by the device (e.g., CPE 106, PMD 107, etc.) itself, as discussed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/716,131 filed on Mar. 2, 2010, entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR RIGHTS-MANAGED CONTENT AND DATA DELIVERY”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,342,661, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. As discussed therein, a downloadable or transferrable rights profile coupled with a “smart” media player application are given. The rights profile contains information regarding the specific rights of a device and/or a subscriber to access content. It is via the rights profile that the device (via the media player and its associated rights management application) determines whether to provide content to a subscriber.
In one implementation of the architecture of
In another exemplary embodiment, the receiving device may comprise a converged premises device (CPD) and/or a media bridge. The CPD may for example be of the type described in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/378,129 filed Mar. 16, 2006, entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CENTRALIZED CONTENT AND DATA DELIVERY”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,347,341 on Jan. 1, 2013, incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. As discussed therein, the CPD comprises a WLAN (e.g., Wi-Fi) and/or PAN (e.g., Bluetooth or 802.15) wireless interface. Packetized (e.g., IP) traffic may be exchanged between the CPD and a PMD 107 via, e.g. the WLAN/PAN interface. Hence, in one embodiment, the PMD 107 may request content from the CPD.
In yet another embodiment, the user device may comprise a media bridge, which may, for example, be of the type disclosed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/480,597 filed Jun. 8, 2009, entitled “MEDIA BRIDGE APPARATUS AND METHODS”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,602,864 on Mar. 21, 2017, incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. As discussed therein, the media bridging apparatus acts as a connection between a PMD 107 (which may include e.g., an iPod, handheld computer, smartphone, PDA, etc.) and a user's home network. This bridging apparatus may be used, for example, to convert content stored on the PMD 107 to a format capable of being presented on a user's set-top box or other client device. The bridging apparatus may also be utilized for transmitting content to the PMD 107 (such as by converting the content to a format capable of being stored/presented on the PMD 107) provided the user of the PMD 107 is authorized to receive the content.
As noted above, in one embodiment, the MSO 201 may utilize the components discussed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/834,796, entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR CONTENT DELIVERY AND MESSAGE EXCHANGE ACROSS MULTIPLE CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORKS”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,357,247 on May 31, 2016, including e.g., a technology services group (TSG) authorization infrastructure and an advance technology group (ATG) authentication infrastructure. As discussed therein, the authorization infrastructure and authentication infrastructure may comprise at least an MSO-based common login application (CLA), a service oriented architecture (SOA), an enterprise identity system (EIS) and an identity provider. The aforementioned infrastructures communicate with one or more service providers 202 prior to enabling delivery therefrom of requested content to a subscriber.
As shown in
Communication between the various entities of the network may, in one embodiment, utilize the entitlements description language set forth in the previously referenced co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/834,796, entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR CONTENT DELIVERY AND MESSAGE EXCHANGE ACROSS MULTIPLE CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORKS”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,357,247 on May 31, 2016.
Authentication without Linked Accounts—
Referring now to
Per step 302 of the method, a request for access to protected content is received from the subscriber at the external node (e.g., web application 204).
When the request is received, the service provider 202 forwards the request to the MSO-based identity provider 210. In one embodiment, the service provider 202 may format the request to comprise an Extensible Hypertext Markup Language (XHTML) form which comprises a Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) POST message that POSTs to the identity provider server 210 containing the following elements:
In one embodiment, the service provider 202 and identity provider 210 use HTTP POST binding. An exemplary identity provider 210 POST URL may be as follows:
At step 306, the identity provider 210 determines whether a login session has been created. If the session exists, the content is provided to the user. In other words, as will be discussed in greater detail below, if the subscriber has already logged onto the MSO login page (and/or the user GUID has been stored at the service provider 202), the MSO will immediately be made aware of the user's credentials, and that the user is authorized to receive the content. If no login session has been created, there is no security context for the subscriber, and the subscriber is redirected to the MSO login page (step 308). At the login page, the subscriber logs-in using for example, a user identifier and password combination or other means for validating the subscriber's digital identity. Methods and apparatus for creating a digital identity are discussed in previously incorporated co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/834,796 entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR CONTENT DELIVERY AND MESSAGE EXCHANGE ACROSS MULTIPLE CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORKS”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,357,247 on May 31, 2016.
Per step 310, the login credentials are validated. If the entered credentials are not valid (e.g., do not match stored information for the subscriber, and/or no stored information for the subscriber can be found), an error message is presented to the subscriber (step 312). If the credentials are valid, the identity provider 210 returns a response to the request at step 314.
In one embodiment, an XHTML form is returned to a browser which returns the following to the external service provider 202:
Since the service provider 202 in the embodiment of
Next, per step 316, in response to receiving the response, the service provider 202 sends an authorization request to the MSO-based entitlement server 208. In one embodiment, the entitlements server 208 may be of the type discussed in previously incorporated U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/536,724 filed on Aug. 6, 2009, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING ENTITLEMENTS TO DATA OVER A NETWORK”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,341,242 on Dec. 25, 2012. In an alternative embodiment, the entitlements server 208 may correspond in functionality to the SOA and other entities of the authorization infrastructure discussed in previously referenced U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/834,796 entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR CONTENT DELIVERY AND MESSAGE EXCHANGE ACROSS MULTIPLE CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORKS”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,357,247 on May 31, 2016.
At step 318, a response to the authorization request is received. The response reflects whether the service details for the particular subscriber permit the subscriber to access the requested content. For example, if it is determined (at the entitlements server 208) that a subscriber is a so-called “basic” subscriber, and the request is for content which is classified as “premium” content, then the service details for the subscriber do not permit the subscriber to access the content. When this occurs, the response to the authorization request will indicate a denial of service. The “deny” message indicates that the subscriber was found not to have rights to the resource (i.e., active account but not active service). Alternatively, another type of message may be generated, such as one that instructs the subscriber how to upgrade to be able to obtain the content, or provide a one-time payment to access the content, etc.
If the service details match the requirements for the requested content, a “permit” message is transmitted to the service provider 202 at step 318. For example, if the service details indicate that the subscriber is currently purchasing a premium level of service, and the requested content is within the premium package, the subscriber will be permitted access to the content. The “permit” message indicates that the subscriber was found to have rights to the resource (i.e., active account and active service).
In another variant, a rights “profile” or other data structure may be sent along with (e.g., as part of) or pursuant to the “permit” message, so as to inform the service provider of any access or use restrictions (e.g., limited number of views, allowable viewing window, restriction on trick mode or start over functions, limitations on copying/distribution, etc.). These rights/restrictions can be used by the service provider to configure the requested content for delivery, such as by embedding DRM data or watermarking in the content before delivery, encrypting it, etc.
Lastly, at step 320, the service provider 202 may proceed according to the authorization response. For example, if service is denied, the service provider 202 provides a pre-defined message to the subscriber indicating the reason and/or instructions or a link for online help to aid in resolving the denial. If service is permitted, the protected content may be delivered to the subscriber (consistent with any use restrictions or policies).
At this point, the service provider 202 performs a security check on behalf of the target resource. If a valid security context at the service provider already exists, the requested resource may be provided. However, if a valid security context is not yet established, the service provider 202 responds to the CPE 106 request (402). In one embodiment, the response comprises an XHTML form. For example, the following may be provided:
In one embodiment, the RelayState token is an opaque (e.g., obfuscated) reference to state information maintained at the service provider 202. In a further embodiment, the value of the SAMLRequest parameter is a base64 encoding of the following <sampl:AuthnRequest> element:
Before the <samlp:AuthnRequest> element is URL-encoded and inserted into the XHTML form, it may first be deflated and base64-encoded (in that order).
When the CPE 106 receives the response, it requests to sign on to the network of the identity provider 210 (i.e., the MSO network) at step 403. In one embodiment, the sign on comprises a so-called “single sign-on (SSO)” service, wherein the subscribers need only to sign or log in once in order to obtain access to protected content. The subscriber's single sign on may be restricted to a prescribed period of time (e.g., 24 hours, etc.). For example, the user may issue a POST request to the SSO service at the identity provider 210 as follows:
In one embodiment, the values of the SAMLRequest and RelayState parameters are taken from the XHTML form (discussed above). The identity provider 210 processes the <samlp:AuthnRequest> element (by URLdecoding, base64-decoding and inflating the request, in that order) and performs a security check. If the user does not have a valid security context, the identity provider identifies the user (discussed elsewhere herein).
Information is transmitted between the CPE 106 and the identity provider 210 to validly identify and authenticate the user. A separate step for authorizing the user may also be utilized. The identity provider validates the request and responds with a document containing an XHTML form which may, in one embodiment, be similar to the following:
In one embodiment, the value of the RelayState parameter is the same as noted above, and the value of the SAMLResponse parameter is the base64 encoding of the following <samlp:Response> element, and within the Response is the <saml:AttributeStatement> containing the value of the customer GUID, as follows:
Next, the identity provider 210 redirects the CPE 106 to the assertion consumer service (step 404). The assertion consumer service is in the exemplary embodiment an application process which validates SAML responses. The identity provider sends a document to the service provider that indicates whether the CPE is or is not authenticated, along with other information about the CPE. The assertion consumer service is a sub-process of the service provider which receives documents (assertions), validates the digital signatures therein, decrypting, and consuming data contained in the document. The CPE may then be passed on to the service provider application. The assertion consumer service responds to the identity service provider from the service provider. The CPE 106 may then request assertions from the service provider 202 (step 405). For example, a user agent running on the CPE 106 (or PMD 107 or client) may issue a POST request to the assertion consumer service at the service provider 202 as follows:
The values of the SAMLResponse and RelayState parameters in the above example may be taken from the XHTML form discussed above.
The assertion consumer service processes the response, creates a security context at the service provider 202, and redirects the CPE 106 to the target resource at step 406. The CPE 106 then requests the target resource at the service provider 202 (again) at step 407. In one embodiment, the request is as follows:
https://sp.example.com/myresource
Since a security context exists, the service provider 202 returns the requested resource to the CPE 106 (step 408).
Authentication with Linked Accounts—
In one embodiment, a single subscriber may be authenticated only once (e.g., the aforementioned “single sign-on SSO”), the process creating a link between the MSO 201 information for the subscriber and the service provider 202 information for the same subscriber (i.e., federating the accounts). According to this embodiment, the subscriber will not have to be authenticated each time they attempt to view content, but rather they are authenticated only once. The model may utilize, for example, SAML 2.0 for the authentication.
When a customer attempts to access secure content from the external web application 204, the service provider 202 makes a request to the identity provider 210 to determine whether the user has an authentication session. If needed the service provider 202 requires login and check for an association to an MSO 201, and may further check the entitlement levels (such as according to the methods discussed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/536,724 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING ENTITLEMENTS TO DATA OVER A NETWORK”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,341,242 on Dec. 25, 2012, previously incorporated herein. If no association is present, then the service provider 202 requests that the user “links” the user's service provider 202 identity with the user's MSO 201 identity. The response from the MSO identity provider 210 contains the customer's (subscriber's) identification (GUID) and a pseudonym for linking the identities. The service provider 202 stores the pseudonym along with the GUID for this customer in a persistent profile maintained thereon, rather than in a cookie on the subscriber's browser. The service provider 202 then makes a request to the entitlement server 208 to obtain the entitlements for the subscriber using the GUID.
To accomplish the aforementioned account federation, the service provider 202 must employ at least a basic mechanism for identity management (such as e.g., an IDMS). An exemplary method for the delivery of protected content to a user via a service provider 202 which utilizes federation is illustrated in
As shown, per step 502, the customer (via his/her CPE 106 or PMD 107) requests secure resources from the external web application 204. In one embodiment, the customer must first log into the service provider 202 in order to request access to the protected content (not shown). The type of login (e.g., password and user ID combination, challenge question, user-specific graphic or icon, etc.), the information required at login, and the creation of a login identity for the service provider 202 are each controlled by the service provider 202 itself. For example, the service provider 202 may require the subscriber to identify him/herself by e.g., providing an email address and password combination, whereas the MSO login (information) may be unique and completely unrelated.
At step 504, the service provider 202 responds with an XHTML form that POSTs to the identity provider 210. In one embodiment, the message contains the following fields:
In one embodiment the service provider 202 and identity provider 210, in the deployment of the SAML 2.0 Web Browser SSO profile both utilize the HTTP POST binding. An exemplary identity provider 210 POST URL may be as follows:
If, at step 506, the identity provider 210 determines that no security context is in scope (i.e., no session has been established), the user is routed to a login page associated with the MSO 201 (step 508). At the login page, the user enters his/her credentials and their validity is determined (step 510). If the credentials entered are not valid, an error message will be displayed to the user (step 512). Alternatively, if the user as not yet established login credentials with the MSO 201, the user may be provided with an opportunity to do so (e.g., to generate a digital signature) as discussed in previously incorporated U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/834,796 entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR CONTENT DELIVERY AND MESSAGE EXCHANGE ACROSS MULTIPLE CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORKS”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,357,247 on May 31, 2016.
Although separate logins are required under this embodiment for the service provider 202 and the MSO 201, it will be appreciated that the user may use the same or similar information to log into both sites. For example, both the service provider 202 and the MSO 201 may permit the user to use an email address as a username. Accordingly, a single subscriber may use the same username (email address) to log into both sites.
Upon verification of the credentials (step 510), the identity provider 210 returns a response. In one embodiment, the identity provider response comprises an XHTML form sent to the browser containing:
Next, the browser sends the request to an assertion consumer service at the service provider 202 (as discussed above), the service provider 202 requests user credentials (if necessary) and stores the GUID and pseudonym of the linked account (step 516). A renewed request is then sent to original target resource. An authorization (and/or entitlement) request is then made by the service provider 202 (step 518), and a response is received (step 520).
Lastly, at step 522, the resource is provided to the user.
The service provider 201 then performs a security check on behalf of the target resource. If a valid security context at the service provider already exists, the requested resource may be provided. However, if a valid security context is not yet established, the service provider 201 responds with a document containing an XHTML form (step 602):
In the above XHTML form, the RelayState token is an opaque reference to state information maintained at the service provider 202, and the value of the SAMLRequest parameter is the base64 encoding of the following <samlp:AuthnRequest> element:
In one embodiment, before the <samlp:AuthnRequest> element is URL-encoded and inserted into the XHTML form (above), it is first deflated and base64-encoded (in that order).
Next, the CPE 106 (or PMD 107) issues a POST request to the identity provider 210 (step 603). In one embodiment the POST request is as follows:
Next, the identity provider 210 validates the request and responds with a document containing an XHTML form, such as that presented below:
In the above example, the value of the RelayState parameter is the same as that previously discussed, and the value of the SAMLResponse parameter is the base64 encoding of the following <samlp:Response> element, and within the Response is the <saml:AttributeStatement> containing the value of the customer GUID:
Next, the identity provider 210 redirects the CPE 106 to the assertion consumer service (step 604). The client (e.g., CPE 106) may issue a POST request to the assertion consumer service at the service provider 202 (step 605). In one example, the request is as follows:
The assertion consumer service processes the response, creates a security context at the service provider and redirects the CPE 106 (or PMD 107) to the target resource (step 606). The CPE 106 then requests the target resource at the service provider (again) at step 607. In one embodiment, the request appears as follows:
As noted above, in one embodiment the entitlements of the requesting user may be determined, such as is described in previously referenced co-owned, co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/536,724 filed on Aug. 6, 2009 and entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING ENTITLEMENTS TO DATA OVER A NETWORK”.
Next, since a security context exists, the service provider 202 returns the resource to the CPE 106 (step 608).
Account Decoupling (De-Federation)—
As noted above, the service provider 202 may in certain embodiments utilize a separate IDMS, and may link a subscriber account contained therein to an MSO 201 subscriber account for the same subscriber or entity. Once an account has been linked, there may be conditions (whether based on policy or by the election of the user) which require that the link between the accounts be terminated. For example, if the subscriber is no longer a customer of a first MSO, and instead now is a customer of a second MSO, unlinking or de-federation will be necessary. In one embodiment, the termination is executed by the service provider 202 sending a termination request to the identity provider 210 (e.g., MSO) over a Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) back channel, or via another available communications channel.
As shown, per step 702 a request to de-federate the account is received from the subscriber (or other instigator) at the service provider 202. In response to receiving the subscriber request, the service provider 202 develops a request to be sent to the MSO 201 (step 704). In one embodiment, the service provider 202 utilizes the Name Identifier Management Protocol (as discussed in the previously referenced SAME 2.0 specification) to generate and send the request to the identity provider 210 or other designated entity, for example, an <ManageIDNameRequest> containing the subscriber's pseudonym may be sent.
The identity provider 210 (and/or other MSO 201 entities) processes the request at step 706. The identity provider 210 then returns a “success” or “failure” message comprising the <ManageIDNameResponse> with the appropriate status code therein, at step 708. For example, if the request is processed successfully, a verification code is returned to the service provider 202 comprising a <ManageIDNameResponse> with a code verifying the success of the unlinking. If the de-federation is successful, any future attempts by the subscriber to view protected content will be denied. If the request is not processed successfully, a failure message comprising a <ManageIDNameResponse> with a code indicating the failure of the unlinking is returned. The service provider 202 may initiate another request if the response provided by the MSO 201 indicates failure to unlink the accounts.
Referring now to
Next, at step 802, a response is received from the identity provider 210. In one embodiment, the response is carried within a SOAP over HTTP message and is digitally signed. An exemplary response is illustrated below:
Usage Data Collection and Billing Mechanisms—
In yet another embodiment, various data collection entities may be utilized at e.g., the MSO 201 and/or content/service provider 202 which are configured to collect data regarding content usage at the CPE, PMD or other client device. For example, the collection entities may be configured to store data records relating to the content requested by individual ones of the devices. In this manner, the collection entities may develop statistics relating to the frequency of requests from individual users, the types of content requested (such as genre, premium, pay-per-view, etc.), etc. The collection entities may also be configured to receive upstream communications from the devices regarding interactions of the user with the requested content. For example, the collection entities may create data records relating to the trick mode operations employed by the users, including the periods during which the trick modes are operated (such as e.g., during advertisements, etc.).
The usage data may, in one embodiment, be further used for billing purposes. For example, in one billing paradigm a user may be charged a premium for utilization of the herein described services based on the number of content hours watched or received, and/or the types of content being requested. In one embodiment, while certain content may be provided at no additional costs to a subscriber in conjunction with the subscriber's subscription plan with the MSO, other content (such as premium content, pay-per-view content, on-demand content, content outside of the subscriber's subscription plan, etc.) may be provided to the subscriber for additional cost. The aforementioned data collection mechanisms may then be utilized to generate billing records for the subscriber's content requests. In another embodiment, the number of requests and/or the actual time (in hours, minutes, etc.) spent accessing (or watching) the requesting content is recorded and used for generating billing records. The generated billing records are transmitted to e.g. a billing system which generates bills to the customer for accessing content outside of, or in addition to, his/her subscription plan.
It is further appreciated that the foregoing methods for providing content to a requesting subscriber (e.g., the methods of
Security and Other Content Configuration—
In yet another embodiment, digital rights management (DRM) or other forms of rights/content protection (e.g., use of encryption keys, cryptographic residue or hashing for integrity protection, etc.) may be used consistent with delivery of the content. For instance, in one implementation, the necessary cryptographic data (e.g., keys) are pre-positioned at the service provider 202 to enable the service provider 202 to enforce security rights on content authorized for delivery. In this manner, the MSO 201 can maintain control over the content although it has left the boundaries of the MSO network. The service provider 202 may apply DRM or other rights management mechanisms to the requested content prior to delivery to the subscriber according to MSO policy. The DRM or other rights management mechanism may be generic, or alternatively specific to the requesting subscriber. For instance, each subscriber is assigned an encryption key (e.g., public/private key pair, or asymmetric key) that is always applied to content provided thereto, the encryption key(s) being linked to the subscriber such as by GUID. For example, a user may be assigned a key pair for its content requests; the content source then encrypts any requested for content from that user with the user's specific key pair.
In addition, integrity protection (such as via a one-way hashing algorithm of the type well known in the art) may optionally be applied to the content during transmission so as to assure that it has not been tampered with or otherwise compromised.
In another embodiment, the service provider 202 may further pre-configure the requested content based on one or more configuration parameters associated with the requesting device. For example, the MSO 201 may provide information to the service provider 202 (or the client device may provide this information directly to the content/service provider) indicating the capabilities of each of the devices associated with a particular subscriber. The information may e.g., identify the device by MAC address or other unique identifier, and identify the user by GUID. The service provider 202 stores this information and, when a request is received from a particular device, the service provider 202 automatically pre-configures the content for delivery thereto based on what is known about the particular requesting device. For example, the service provider 202 may be informed of e.g., the available codecs, DRM, display capabilities, etc. that are available at a user device. The service provider 202 may configure the content according to these known capabilities, such as by changing the display resolution, bitrate, encoding scheme, QoS policies applied, encapsulation protocol, etc.
The delivery of capabilities information (e.g., by the MSO 201) prior to any content requests enables more efficient delivery of content without the user experiencing incompatibilities or non-optimized viewing of the requested content. Moreover, where the MSO pre-positions the configuration information, negotiation between the service provider 202 and the device(s) individually (and/or with the MSO 201 at each content request) are advantageously obviated.
Single Log Out (SLO)—
The single log out (SLO) process is utilized where a non-linked customer has established a session at the service provider 202, and the customer elects to log out of the service provider 202 site. In order to accomplish the log out, the service provider 202 sends a log out request to the identity provider 210 in order to ensure that the identity provider 210 destroys the authenticated session on its side (i.e., at the MSO 201) thereby ensuring maximum security for the customer.
In the exemplary embodiment, the service provider 202 is responsible for displaying the success of the log out request after the browser is returned to the service provider 202 following a successful SLO.
Next, at step 906, the identity provider 210 (and/or other MSO 201 entities) processes the request. A response to the request is returned at step 908. In one embodiment the response to the request comprises an XHTML form to the browser redirecting the browser to the service provider SLO return URL. The XHTML form may, for example, contain a SAMLResponse with the following field(s):
Per step 910, the service provider 202 displays a message that the session has been successfully logged out.
Referring now to
In the above embodiment, the value of the SAMLRequest parameter may be the base64 encoding of the following <samlp:LogoutRequest> element:
Before the <samlp:LogoutRequest> element is URL-encoded and inserted into the XHTML form, it is first deflated and base64-encoded (in that order).
Next, the user agent (running on the CPE 106 and/or PMD 107) issues a POST request to the identity provider 210 at step 1003. In one embodiment, the request is structured as follows:
Next, the SLO service validates the request and responds with a document containing an XHTML form (step 1004). An exemplary XHTML form is as follows:
In the above example, the value of the SAMLResponse parameter may be the base64 encoding of the following <samlp:LogoutResponse> element, and within the LogoutReponse is the <samlp:StatusCode> stating the success or failure of the request:
Next, the SLO return URL is requested at the service provider 202 (step 1005), and the service provider 202 displays the successful logout request (step 1006).
Cancel Login—
If/when a subscriber is sent to the identity provider 210 login page to authenticate (as discussed above), the subscriber can decide to cancel the authentication transaction. Canceling the transaction may be necessary for any reason, and this facility generically allows a SAML response to be sent back to the service provider 202 so the transaction can be ended. For example, the login cancel may be triggered when the customer no longer wants their identity with the MSO 201 to be linked to that of the service provider 202, or in the instance where the service provider 202 has deleted the user's identity from its system.
At step 1104, the MSO 201 processes the request, and at step 1106 returns a response. In one embodiment, the response comprises a <ManageIDNameResponse> containing a suitable status code response. The response is for example carried within a SOAP over HTTP message and is digitally signed. The response message is then displayed to the user (step 1108)
Lastly, at step 1202, a response is received from the identity provider 210. As above, the response is carried within a SOAP over HTTP message and is digitally signed in one embodiment.
Exemplary User Device—
Generally, the exemplary user devices (e.g., CPE 106 and/or PMD 107) useful with the present invention will include e.g., a network interface (including an interface for accessing the Internet via the designated bearer medium; e.g., MSO network, non-managed network, etc.), a processor and associated storage, and optionally a plurality of back end interfaces for communication with other devices. The user device can assume literally any discrete form factor, including those adapted for settop/desktop, hand-held, or wall-mounted use, or alternatively may be integrated in whole or part (e.g., on a common functional basis) with other devices if desired. Additionally, the user device may include other elements and interfaces such as for example an interface for the HomePlug A/V standard which transmits digital data over power lines, a PAN (e.g., 802.15), Bluetooth, or other short-range wireless interface for localized data communication, etc.
In one embodiment, the network interface receives content and/or data via one or more RF tuners configured to receive content from an HFC network 101. The RF tuner(s) may comprise traditional video RF tuner(s) adapted to receive video signals over, e.g., a QAM. For example, the RF tuner(s) may comprise one or more tuners, a demodulator, decryption module, and demultiplexer of the type well known in the art, although other configurations may be used. A wideband tuner arrangement such as that described in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/013,671 entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR WIDEBAND DISTRIBUTION OF CONTENT” filed Dec. 15, 2004, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,723,267 on Aug. 1, 2017, and incorporated herein by reference in its entirety, may also be utilized, such as where the content associated with one or more program streams is distributed across two or more QAMs. Additionally, the RF tuner(s) may incorporate functionality to modulate, encrypt/multiplex as required, and transmit digital information for receipt by upstream entities such as the CMTS.
Alternatively, the network interface may comprise any other means for receiving content from a network. For instance, the device may comprise a Wi-Fi or WiMAX enabled smartphone or laptop with connectivity to the relevant wireless service provider, which ultimately connects to the unmanaged network (e.g., Internet).
Digital data received via the network interface may include for example MPEG-2 or H.264 encoded programming data that is forwarded to a television or other device monitor via a video interface. Programming data may also be stored on the storage unit for later distribution by way of the video interface, or using a Wi-Fi interface, Ethernet interface, FireWire (IEEE Std 1394), USB/USB2, or any number of other such options.
Programming and other types of data including pictures, video, music or MP3 files, software applications, metadata files, etc. may also be received by way of the various digital interfaces in the user device. These data may be stored locally (e.g., in the storage unit) or even on a device or network agent in communication with the user device, for later use by a user as is discussed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/378,129 entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CENTRALIZED CONTENT AND DATA DELIVERY”, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,347,341 on Jan. 1, 2013, and previously incorporated herein.
During operation of the user device, a client application (located in the storage unit) is run on the microprocessor. The client application follows appropriate protocol for sending requests for content and receiving requested content as well as for providing additional information to the network to facilitate authentication and federation (discussed above) by providing information regarding the subscriber/user and/or device to the network entities discussed above. For example, the client application may provide subscriber account information and/or login information upstream in order for the identity provider 210, service provider 202, and other entities to identify the subscriber and provide content based on what is known (at the MSO 201 and/or service provider 202) about the subscriber.
While the foregoing embodiments of the invention have been described primarily with respect to the network-side elements (i.e., content/service provider 202, MSO 201, etc.), it will be appreciated that other implementations of the invention may utilize a specially adapted CPE 106 or client device (e.g., PMD 107) used by the subscriber in generating the request for protected content. For example, the CPE or client software application or stack component may obtain and format request messages or other messages (e.g., logins) for certain external web applications 204 according to a prescribed configuration. In one such implementation, a subscriber accesses a designated external web application 204, wherein the website 204 passes the subscriber its programmer GUID or other identifying information. The client application then uses this information to recognize the site as “MSO affiliated”, and thereby necessarily being compliant with the aforementioned protocols discussed above. The client application then formats and requests for protected content or other messages between the subscriber device and that website 204 according to the supported protocols, such as by including MAC address, subscriber GUID, etc. In this fashion, the website 204 is relieved of some of the burden of such formatting, and one or more subsequent messages between the two entities may be obviated (i.e., the website does not have to go back and ask the client device for each requisite piece of information it requires to process the subscriber's request).
In another embodiment, the various restrictions (if any) to the provision of content to a user at a display or rendering device associated with the user device are determined by the device (e.g., CPE 106, PMD 107, etc.) itself, as discussed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/716,131 filed on Mar. 2, 2010 entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR RIGHTS-MANAGED CONTENT AND DATA DELIVERY”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,342,661 on May 17, 2016, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. As discussed therein, a downloadable or transferable rights profile coupled with a “smart” media player application are given. The rights profile contains information regarding the specific rights of a device and/or a subscriber to access content. It is via the rights profile that the device (via the media player and its associated rights management application) determines whether to provide content to a subscriber, and/or what restrictions or privileges to apply. Hence, in the present context, the MSO might generate a rights profile and pass this profile (or information indicating which of a plurality of pre-positioned profiles to apply) to the service provider 202 for transmission to the smart media player on the client device.
In addition, the client application may be configured to collect information regarding the user's actions with respect to content, and pass this upstream (whether to the service provider 202 or the MSO 201). For example, the client application may record button presses, playback events, trick mode events, etc. and pass this information to MSO 201 entities which may use the information to make various business decisions including e.g., secondary content insertion decisions.
Methods and apparatus for providing such secondary content insertion may be of the type discussed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/441,476 filed on May 24, 2006, entitled “SECONDARY CONTENT INSERTION APPARATUS AND METHODS”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,386,327 on Jul. 5, 2016, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety, and may be utilized to provide dynamic secondary content insertion (e.g., replacement of dated or geographically inappropriate advertisements or promotions), and thereby allow the MSO 201 or other network operator to adjust the secondary content to make it more applicable to the remote user's context (e.g., location, hardware/software environment, date/time, etc.). Additionally, the apparatus and methods discussed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/198,620 filed on Aug. 4, 2005, entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTEXT-SPECIFIC CONTENT DELIVERY”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,286,388 on Mar. 15, 2016, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety, may be utilized consistent with the present invention. As discussed therein, contextually-related “secondary” content (e.g., advertising messages, useful informational links, etc.) may be provided in association with other primary content selected by the user.
Anonymity—
As noted above, certain data (including collected data, etc.) may be particular to or identified with a particular subscriber, user, or user device. Accordingly, such data may, in addition to being obfuscated as described above, also be anonymized by inter alia, the use of a cryptographic hash to protect the privacy of the identified subscriber, user, and/or device. In one embodiment, the techniques for providing anonymity utilizing a cryptographic hash described in co-owned, co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/186,452 filed Jul. 20, 2005 and entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR BOUNDARY-BASED NETWORK OPERATION”, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety, may be utilized in conjunction with the present invention. As disclosed therein, the identity of a subscriber device or subscriber is anonymized by using a cryptographic hash coupled with an optional “opaque” variable which carries information relating to the subscriber device of the hash with which it is associated. The hash and opaque variable frustrate de-encryption or reverse-engineering of the individual subscriber's identity or specific location. Alternative methods of providing anonymization may also be utilized consistent with the present invention.
While complete anonymization (i.e., there is no way of tracing or identifying the source) is generally not applicable to information which must be used to uniquely identify an individual and/or device, partial anonymization such as that described above is readily used with the present invention. For example, it may be desirable to perform a one-way hash of a user's IP address or MAC address so that someone surreptitiously obtaining the information cannot determine the source data (actual address), but the hash algorithm produces a known deterministic result with the same “seed”, and hence the hash output can be used to uniquely identify a given user/device, such as by matching that hashed output with known outputs from the same algorithm corresponding to existing subscribers/devices. This hashing is to be distinguished from encryption, wherein the original source data (address) can in fact be recovered and read when the encrypted data is decrypted (such as via a public/private encryption key pair).
Business/Operational Rules Engine—
In another aspect of the invention, a so-called “decision” engine may be disposed at e.g., the identity provider 210, entitlement server 208, service provider 202, content server 206, CPE 106, or other location (e.g., rendered as one or more computer programs disposed thereon). This engine comprises, in an exemplary embodiment, one or more software routines adapted to control the authentication/authorization and content delivery processes in order to achieve one or more goals relating to operations or business (e.g., profit or revenue or subscriber retention). Included within these areas are network optimization and reliability goals, increased maintenance intervals, increased subscriber or user satisfaction/longevity, increased subscription base, higher profit (e.g., from increased advertising revenues, more subscriber “views” of given content, greater flexibility in the types and locations of platforms from which the subscriber may access content, and so forth).
These decision rules may comprise a separate entity or process, and may also be fully integrated within other processing entities (such as the applications running on the aforementioned entities and/or the client application), and controlled via e.g., a GUI displayed on a device connected to the relevant server, network entity, or even CPE 106. In effect, the rules engine comprises a supervisory entity which monitors and selectively controls content access and delivery operation at a higher level, so as to implement desired operational or business rules. The decision engine can be considered an overlay of sorts to the more fundamental algorithms used to accomplish required network operation.
For example, the identity provider 210, entitlement server 208, service provider 202, content server 206, and/or CPE 106 may invoke certain operational protocols or decision processes based on information or requests received from the CPE 106 or PMD 107, conditions existing within the network, demographic data, geographic data, etc. However, these processes may not always be compatible with higher-level business or operational goals, such as maximizing profit or system reliability. Hence, when imposed, the business/operational rules can be used to dynamically (or manually) control access to and delivery of content. The decision rules may be, e.g., operational or business-oriented in nature, and may also be applied selectively in terms of time of day, duration, specific local areas, or even at the individual user level (e.g., via specific identification of the CPE or client device via TUNER ID, IP address, MAC address, or the like, or via a user-based login or “entitlements” profile of the type previously described herein).
For example, one decision rule implemented by the decision engine may comprise providing protected content from the third party (e.g., service provider 202) according to a tiered system. Content under such an approach might be selected in part on the revenue such delivery will bring to the MSO 201 based on the content source.
Various billing models for the delivery of protected content may also be incorporated into the rules engine. The rules engine may include for instance various policies which provide information that is utilized by e.g., billing entities to generate billing records. For example, the engine may include rules for applying a pricing structure to requested content. In one embodiment, the rules may indicate a pre-selected amount of content hours and/or particular content which is offered to certain subscribers without a fee. Additional fees may be charged for premium content, content which is outside a subscriber's subscription plan, pay-per-view content, and/or for content exceeding a prescribed time threshold (e.g., content hours requested above those hours which are included in the subscriber's subscription plan). Hence, when content is requested the rules engine may consult the pricing structure and generate a record of a cost to be charged to the customer. The record may be used to generate a bill as well as to inform the customer of the additional costs. The rules engine may further be constructed so that the content is delivered only after the customer has given permission for the additional charges. The ability of the MSO to make an “upsell”; i.e., offer the consumer an opportunity to purchase a higher tier subscription and/or pay-per-use subscriptions.
The various billing rules may further take into account the customer's subscription level. For example, certain customers may be afforded access to certain types of content at no additional charges, whereas other customers may be required to pay additional fees to receive the content. Suppose for example a customer has a “basic” subscription which includes content which is broadcast on Channel X, but does not include content which is broadcast on Channel E If the subscriber requests content which is broadcast on Channel X, the rules engine consults the pricing structure (and other rules), and determines that the subscriber is within his/her subscription plan in requesting the content, and does not apply a price (e.g., generate information to be used in generating a billing record). If that subscriber instead requests content which is broadcast on Channel Y, the rules engine consults the pricing structure (and other rules) and determines that the subscriber is outside of his/her subscription plan, and thus applies a price model to the content. The rules engine may further inquire for permissions given the determined price, and pass the pricing information to a billing entity.
Additionally content may be established with the rules engine as free, or have a set price. For example, free on-demand (FOD) content may be indicated at the rules engine as never having a price associated therewith, whereas VOD, movies on-demand (MOD), and pay-per-view content may be associated with a pricing structure. In another variant, a subscriber may be entitled to a certain number of requests and/or a time limit for receiving content. For example, a customer's subscription plan may be associated with a certain number or hours of content access (e.g., unlimited, 1 request per month, 10 hours of content downloads, etc.). As discussed above, the rules engine applies a pricing structure (as applicable) upon user request.
In yet another variant, the use rights or features provided with the requested (protected) content may be varied as a function of e.g., subscriber subscription level, time of day, requesting device capability, etc. For instance, a request received from a premium level, or “Gold”, subscriber might be serviced with a content stream that includes complete “trick mode” functionality (i.e., FF, REW, Pause, etc.), or for broadcasts a “start over” functionality, whereas a lower tier subscriber's request might not include one or any of these capabilities. The number of plays can be limited as well; e.g., Gold subscribers receive unlimited plays, while lower tiers receive only one or a finite number of plays of the content. As noted above, these rules or functional restrictions can be relayed from the MSO 201 to the service provider 202 via messaging conducted pursuant to a particular subscriber request, or alternatively can be pre-positioned within the service provider site as a decision rule set.
Moreover, the quality of content provided can be varied as needed or desired. For instance, use of different encodings or bitrates (e.g., HD versus SD), QoS parameters, latency, etc. can be employed depending on the subscriber (individually), the general classification of the subscriber (e.g., Gold), time of day, available resources, revenue/profit implications of each option, etc.
It will also be recognized that both the MSO 201 and the third party (e.g., service provider 202) may employ different business or operation decision rules to one another. For example, the MSO 201 might establish preferential rules or classes for the various service providers 202, such that service provided to these different providers 202 is differentiated in some fashion. In one such case, those providers 202 paying the MSO 201 a fee, or with which the MSO 201 has a pre-existing business relationship, may be given preferential service and capabilities.
The MSO 201 and/or service provider 202 may also structure a business relationship whereby one “pays” the other via some sort of consideration for servicing of requests. For example, an MSO might pay a given provider $X for each valid MSO subscriber request serviced by the provider, since the MSO is in effect leveraging the programmer's infrastructure to extend the reach of its capabilities for the MSO customers (i.e., extension of the “four any's” model described in co-owned U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/256,903 entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR PACKETIZED CONTENT DELIVERY OVER A CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORK” previously incorporated herein. Conversely, the provider might pay the MSO consideration for each MSO subscriber request serviced, or an advertisement click-through basis, etc. in that if the MSO instructs its subscribers to use the provider's site preferentially over others, this may generate additional revenue (such as via the aforementioned click-throughs) for the provider or its advertisers.
As noted above, certain information may be collected and utilized to provide targeted advertisements to the CPE. For example, the methods and apparatus of co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/441,476 filed on May 24, 2006, entitled “SECONDARY CONTENT INSERTION APPARATUS AND METHODS”, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,386,327 on Jul. 5, 2016 and/or co-owned, co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/198,620 filed on Aug. 4, 2005, entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTEXT-SPECIFIC CONTENT DELIVERY”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,286,388 on Mar. 15, 2016, each of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety, may be utilized to provide dynamic secondary content insertion (e.g., replacement of dated or geographically inappropriate advertisements or promotions) and/or contextually-related “secondary” content (e.g., advertising messages, useful informational links, etc.). Still further, collected information regarding a user's viewing habits may be utilized to provide content recommendations as discussed in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/414,576 filed Mar. 30, 2009, entitled “RECOMMENDATION ENGINE APPARATUS AND METHODS”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,215,423 on Dec. 15, 2015, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Content, user interface and/or advertisement personalization may also be provided.
Many other approaches and combinations of various operational and business paradigms are envisaged consistent with the invention, as will be recognized by those of ordinary skill when provided this disclosure.
It will be recognized that while certain aspects of the invention are described in terms of a specific sequence of steps of a method, these descriptions are only illustrative of the broader methods of the invention, and may be modified as required by the particular application. Certain steps may be rendered unnecessary or optional under certain circumstances. Additionally, certain steps or functionality may be added to the disclosed embodiments, or the order of performance of two or more steps permuted. All such variations are considered to be encompassed within the invention disclosed and claimed herein.
While the above detailed description has shown, described, and pointed out novel features of the invention as applied to various embodiments, it will be understood that various omissions, substitutions, and changes in the form and details of the device or process illustrated may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the invention. The foregoing description is of the best mode presently contemplated of carrying out the invention. This description is in no way meant to be limiting, but rather should be taken as illustrative of the general principles of the invention. The scope of the invention should be determined with reference to the claims.
This application is a continuation of and claims priority to co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/905,704 filed on Feb. 26, 2018 of the same title, issuing as U.S. Pat. No. 10,917,694 on Feb. 9, 2021, which is a continuation of and claims priority to co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/834,801 filed on Jul. 12, 2010 of the same title, which issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,906,838 on Feb. 27, 2018, each of which are incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. Additionally, this application is generally related to the subject matter of co-owned, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/536,724 filed on Aug. 6, 2009, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING ENTITLEMENTS TO DATA OVER A NETWORK”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,341,242 on Dec. 25, 2012, co-owned U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/256,903 filed on Oct. 30, 2009 and entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR PACKETIZED CONTENT DELIVERY OVER A CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORK”, which published as U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0103374 on May 5, 2011, and to co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/834,796 filed concurrently herewith, entitled “APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR CONTENT DELIVERY AND MESSAGE EXCHANGE ACROSS MULTIPLE CONTENT DELIVERY NETWORKS”, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,357,247 on May 31, 2016, each of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4484120 | Olex et al. | Nov 1984 | A |
| 4687457 | Milner | Aug 1987 | A |
| 4820233 | Weiner | Apr 1989 | A |
| 4853771 | Witriol et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4889027 | Yokoi | Dec 1989 | A |
| 5042807 | Sasakawa et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
| 5046022 | Conway et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
| 5063603 | Burt | Nov 1991 | A |
| 5079491 | Nose et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
| 5083803 | Blake et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
| 5092343 | Spitzer et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
| 5245672 | Wilson et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
| 5355435 | Deyong et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
| 5369497 | Allen et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
| 5369707 | Follendore | Nov 1994 | A |
| 5378188 | Clark | Jan 1995 | A |
| 5388186 | Bose | Feb 1995 | A |
| 5408588 | Ulug | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5410344 | Graves et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5467428 | Ulug | Nov 1995 | A |
| 5528284 | Iwami et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5534911 | Levitan | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5557319 | Gurusami et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5577209 | Boyle et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5628284 | Sheen et al. | May 1997 | A |
| 5638359 | Peltola et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5652594 | Costas | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5673367 | Buckley | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5673387 | Chen et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5708961 | Hylton et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5715403 | Stefik | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5745837 | Fuhrmann | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5758257 | Herz et al. | May 1998 | A |
| 5787172 | Arnold | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5818438 | Howe et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5822530 | Brown | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5828832 | Holden et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5838921 | Speeter | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5870474 | Wasilewski et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5875108 | Hoffberg et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5897635 | Torres et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5937143 | Watanabe et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5940738 | Rao | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5999535 | Wang et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6009103 | Woundy | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6009418 | Cooper | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6014653 | Thaler | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6061088 | Khosravi et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6125397 | Yoshimura et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6148400 | Arnold | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6154844 | Touboul et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6157719 | Wasilewski et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6167432 | Jiang | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6167521 | Smith et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6181697 | Nurenberg et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6212636 | Boyle et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6219710 | Gray et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6233341 | Riggins | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6233389 | Barton et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6233687 | White | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6253058 | Murasaki et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6256393 | Safadi et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6259701 | Shur et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6259988 | Galkowski et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6266421 | Domyo et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6286049 | Rajakarunanayake et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6317884 | Eames et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6338013 | Ruffner | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6345038 | Selinger | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6359601 | Maguire, Jr. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6363369 | Liaw et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6389538 | Gruse et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6396531 | Gerszberg et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6429291 | Turley et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6435936 | Rehkemper et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6456716 | Arnold | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6458157 | Suaning | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6473793 | Dillon et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6519062 | Yoo | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6523696 | Saito et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6545705 | Sigel et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6545708 | Tamayama et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6546016 | Gerszberg et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6546291 | Merfeld et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6547631 | Randall | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6560511 | Yokoo et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6564381 | Hodge et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6565407 | Woolington et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6570608 | Tserng | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6581046 | Ahissar | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6601171 | Carter et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6615108 | Peless et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6633232 | Trajkovic et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
| 6640145 | Hoffberg et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
| 6642938 | Gilboy | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6642939 | Vallone et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6643262 | Larsson et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6643627 | Liaw et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
| 6657991 | Akgun et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6672961 | Uzun | Jan 2004 | B1 |
| 6682392 | Chan | Jan 2004 | B2 |
| 6694145 | Riikonen et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
| 6697711 | Yokono et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
| 6711742 | Kishi et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6718552 | Goode | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6742116 | Matsui et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6748395 | Picker et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6754904 | Cooper et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6757906 | Look et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6758746 | Hunter et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6760645 | Kaplan et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6760768 | Holden et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6774908 | Bates et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
| 6774926 | Ellis et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6782475 | Sumner | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6782550 | Cao | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6785810 | Lirov et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6788676 | Partanen et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6807573 | Saito et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6813505 | Walley et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6847778 | Vallone et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
| 6859535 | Tatebayashi et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
| 6865746 | Herrington et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
| 6898708 | Hori et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6909726 | Sheeran | Jun 2005 | B1 |
| 6910064 | Astarabadi et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
| 6918131 | Rautila et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
| 6925257 | Yoo | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6931018 | Fisher | Aug 2005 | B1 |
| 6934964 | Schaffer et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
| 6944150 | McConnell et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
| 6948183 | Peterka | Sep 2005 | B1 |
| 6954632 | Kobayashi | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6957261 | Lortz | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6957328 | Goodman et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6973489 | Levy | Dec 2005 | B1 |
| 6973576 | Giobbi | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 6975730 | Kuroiwa et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
| 6978474 | Sheppard et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
| 6985355 | Allirot | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6996544 | Sellars et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7003670 | Heaven et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7006881 | Hoffberg et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
| 7007170 | Morten | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7009972 | Maher et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7013290 | Ananian | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7016963 | Judd et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
| 7017189 | Demello et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
| 7020652 | Matz et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7023833 | Aiello et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
| 7027460 | Iyer et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7039048 | Monta et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7051352 | Schaffer | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7054443 | Jakubowski et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7054850 | Matsugu | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7054902 | Toporek et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7055031 | Platt | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7055040 | Klemba et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7055165 | Connelly | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7065216 | Benaloh et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
| 7068639 | Varma et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
| 7069449 | Weaver et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7069578 | Prus et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
| 7072950 | Toft | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7073199 | Raley | Jul 2006 | B1 |
| 7092397 | Chandran et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
| 7096483 | Johnson | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7099308 | Merrill et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7100183 | Kunkel et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7103181 | Ananth | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7103905 | Novak | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7106382 | Shiotsu | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7107326 | Fijolek et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
| 7136866 | Springer et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7146627 | Ismail et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
| 7149772 | Kalavade | Dec 2006 | B1 |
| 7154901 | Chava et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7154912 | Chong et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7164971 | Ferla et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7165268 | Moore et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
| 7167895 | Connelly | Jan 2007 | B1 |
| 7171567 | Bayer | Jan 2007 | B1 |
| 7174126 | McElhatten et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7174127 | Otten et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7174371 | Elo et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7174385 | Li | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7185355 | Ellis et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
| 7194756 | Addington et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7206775 | Kaiser et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7207055 | Hendricks et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
| 7209458 | Ahvonen et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7213036 | Apparao et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7225333 | Peinado et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7228427 | Fransdonk | Jun 2007 | B2 |
| 7228556 | Beach et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
| 7235013 | Kobayashi | Jun 2007 | B2 |
| 7237112 | Ishiguro et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
| 7242960 | Van et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7242988 | Hoffberg et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
| 7248694 | Husemann et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7254608 | Yeager et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7257106 | Chen et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7257227 | Chen et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7260823 | Schlack et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7266555 | Coates | Sep 2007 | B1 |
| 7266726 | Ladd et al. | Sep 2007 | B1 |
| 7289534 | Bailey et al. | Oct 2007 | B1 |
| 7293276 | Phillips et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
| 7299502 | Schmeling et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
| 7305460 | Park | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7312391 | Kaiser et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7313611 | Jacobs et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
| 7324531 | Cho | Jan 2008 | B2 |
| 7325043 | Rosenberg et al. | Jan 2008 | B1 |
| 7325073 | Shao et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
| 7330483 | Peters, Jr. et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
| 7330510 | Castillo et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7330967 | Pujare et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
| 7333483 | Zhao et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7336787 | Unger et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7337458 | Michelitsch et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7340762 | Kim | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7343398 | Lownsbrough | Mar 2008 | B1 |
| 7353543 | Ohmori et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7359375 | Lipsanen et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7363643 | Drake et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7373506 | Asano et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7376386 | Phillips et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7376976 | Fierstein et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7382786 | Chen et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7395251 | Linsker | Jul 2008 | B2 |
| 7397825 | Woodward et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
| 7404082 | Medvinsky et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
| 7406515 | Joyce et al. | Jul 2008 | B1 |
| 7409546 | Platt | Aug 2008 | B2 |
| 7418320 | Bodin et al. | Aug 2008 | B1 |
| 7426501 | Nugent | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7426920 | Petersen | Sep 2008 | B1 |
| 7444655 | Sardera | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7457520 | Rosetti et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
| 7472280 | Giobbi | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7486869 | Alexander et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7487363 | Alve et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7487523 | Hendricks | Feb 2009 | B1 |
| 7506367 | Ishibashi | Mar 2009 | B1 |
| 7532712 | Gonder et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7548562 | Ward et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7565203 | Greenberg et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7567983 | Pickelsimer et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7571452 | Gutta | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7592912 | Hasek et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7602820 | Helms et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7603469 | Fletcher et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7609637 | Doshi et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7624337 | Sull et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7650319 | Hoffberg et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7672920 | Ito et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7673004 | Sherstinsky et al. | Mar 2010 | B1 |
| 7690020 | Lebar | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7707644 | Choi et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7721314 | Sincaglia et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7725553 | Rang et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7730321 | Gasparini et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7742074 | Minatogawa | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7742625 | Pilu | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7752617 | Blinick et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7757101 | Nonaka et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7765029 | Fleischer et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7770200 | Brooks et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7783891 | Perlin et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7805127 | Andreasen | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7809197 | Fedorovskaya et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7809942 | Baran et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7849030 | Ellingsworth | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7865440 | Jaquette | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7870245 | Butler | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7870599 | Pemmaraju | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7893171 | Le et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7895445 | Albanese | Feb 2011 | B1 |
| 7900052 | Jonas et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7908626 | Williamson et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7916755 | Hasek et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7925592 | Issa et al. | Apr 2011 | B1 |
| 7930558 | Hori | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 7936775 | Iwamura | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7937164 | Samardzija et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7945349 | Svensson et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7954131 | Cholas et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7970492 | Matsushima et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
| 7983418 | Oyama et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
| 8015130 | Matsugu et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8015785 | Walker et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8024762 | Britt | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8042054 | White et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8095610 | Gould et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8103546 | Des Jardins | Jan 2012 | B1 |
| 8145355 | Danko | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8145492 | Fujita | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8154436 | Szajnowski | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8166126 | Bristow et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8166508 | Mitsuji et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8170065 | Hasek et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8181262 | Cooper et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8219134 | Maharajh et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8234387 | Bradley et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8249497 | Ingrassia et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8280982 | La et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8281352 | Brooks et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8281997 | Moran et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8302111 | Ladd et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8315305 | Petre et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8332370 | Gattegno et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8332657 | Eskicioglu et al. | Dec 2012 | B1 |
| 8341242 | Dillon et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8346692 | Rouat et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8347341 | Markley et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8396249 | Khosla et al. | Mar 2013 | B1 |
| 8396282 | Huber et al. | Mar 2013 | B1 |
| 8429702 | Yasrebi et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
| 8467623 | Izhikevich et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8467823 | Seki et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8472627 | Denning et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8484511 | Engel et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8494677 | Mizutani | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8515160 | Khosla et al. | Aug 2013 | B1 |
| 8516529 | Lajoie et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8520850 | Helms et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8527094 | Kumar et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8538757 | Patch | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8542872 | Gornick et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8571261 | Gagvani et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8583758 | Casey et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
| 8600166 | Adhikari | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8640166 | Craner | Jan 2014 | B1 |
| 8712939 | Szatmary et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8712941 | Izhikevich et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8719199 | Izhikevich et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8725658 | Izhikevich et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8725662 | Izhikevich et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8731295 | Schepelmann et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8732854 | Cholas et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8738607 | Dettinger et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8750490 | Murtagh et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 8750909 | Fan et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 8756183 | Daily et al. | Jun 2014 | B1 |
| 8761402 | Mcavoy et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 8775341 | Commons | Jul 2014 | B1 |
| 8793205 | Fisher et al. | Jul 2014 | B1 |
| 8805270 | Maharajh et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8812419 | Teller et al. | Aug 2014 | B1 |
| 8843622 | Graham et al. | Sep 2014 | B1 |
| 8880222 | Kawamoto et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
| 8943008 | Ponulak et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
| 8949919 | Cholas et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
| 8954193 | Sandin et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
| 8972315 | Szatmary et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 8977582 | Richert | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 8983216 | Izhikevich et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 8990133 | Ponulak et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
| 8995815 | Maharajh et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 8996177 | Coenen | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 9002511 | Hickerson et al. | Apr 2015 | B1 |
| 9002828 | Fiatal | Apr 2015 | B2 |
| 9043952 | Sandin et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
| 9083513 | Helms et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
| 9111441 | Yano et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9124551 | Lu et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
| 9124608 | Jin et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
| 9124650 | Maharajh et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
| 9164596 | Lee et al. | Oct 2015 | B1 |
| 9210313 | Svendsen | Dec 2015 | B1 |
| 9215235 | Jacobsen et al. | Dec 2015 | B1 |
| 9215423 | Kimble et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
| 9258608 | Dillon et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
| 9300919 | Cholas et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9706160 | Marsh et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
| 9716530 | Imes et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
| 9733804 | Scott et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
| 9766709 | Holz et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
| 9817521 | Li et al. | Nov 2017 | B2 |
| 9906838 | Cronk et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
| 11132705 | Des Jardins | Sep 2021 | B1 |
| 20010004768 | Hodge et al. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
| 20010014946 | Ichinoi et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010019614 | Madoukh et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
| 20010029581 | Knauft | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010043613 | Wibowo et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010045809 | Mukai | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010050945 | Lindsey | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20010053223 | Ishibashi et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20010053226 | Akins et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20010056541 | Matsuzaki et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020002688 | Gregg et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020013772 | Peinado | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020024943 | Karaul et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020026575 | Wheeler et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020027883 | Belaiche | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020032754 | Logston et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020038294 | Matsugu | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020042921 | Ellis | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020048367 | Maillard | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020053076 | Landesmann | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020056125 | Hodge et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020059218 | August et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020059619 | Lebar | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020062440 | Akama | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020066033 | Dobbins et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020072293 | Beyo et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020077984 | Ireton | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020081937 | Yamada et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020083451 | Gill et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087995 | Pedlow et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020095689 | Novak | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020123931 | Splaver et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020126654 | Preston et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020129358 | Buehl et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020131511 | Zenoni | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020144067 | Jeong | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020144267 | Gutta et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020147771 | Traversat et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020152091 | Nagaoka et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020152299 | Traversat et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020152393 | Thoma et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020156556 | Ruffner | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020158599 | Fujita et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020178444 | Trajkovic et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020183895 | Kaplan et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020183985 | Hori et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184154 | Hori et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188744 | Mani | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188869 | Patrick | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020194595 | Miller et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020198854 | Berenji et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020199105 | Ishiguro et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030005453 | Rodriguez et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030009681 | Harada et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030012190 | Kaku et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030021421 | Yokota et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030028451 | Ananian | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030041336 | Del et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030046560 | Inomata et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030048380 | Tamura | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030050903 | Liaw et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030056217 | Brooks | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030065623 | Corneil et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030069965 | Ma et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030074571 | Fujiwara et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030084003 | Pinkas et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030093794 | Thomas et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030097340 | Okamoto et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030097574 | Upton | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030115267 | Hinton | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030135628 | Fletcher et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030140227 | Asano et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030163443 | Wang | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030163739 | Armington et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030165241 | Fransdonk | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030166401 | Combes et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030174838 | Bremer | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030187799 | Sellars et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030200548 | Baran et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030205763 | Park et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030208763 | McElhatten et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030208767 | Williamson et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030217137 | Roese et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030217365 | Caputo | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030220100 | McElhatten et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030222987 | Karazuba | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20030232568 | Engel et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040016638 | Laconti et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040024688 | Bi et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040034677 | Davey et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040034877 | Nogues | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040045032 | Cummings et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040045035 | Cummings et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040045037 | Cummings et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040052377 | Mattox et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040056625 | Sano et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040078602 | Rothbarth et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040088558 | Candelore | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040100563 | Sablak et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040102862 | Kato et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040109569 | Ellison et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040117254 | Nemirofsky et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040117836 | Karaoguz et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040123129 | Ginter et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040128499 | Peterka et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133923 | Watson et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040136439 | Dewberry et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040137918 | Varonen et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040153211 | Kamoto et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040158358 | Anezaki et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040162638 | Solomon | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040166832 | Portman et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040174900 | Volpi et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040177369 | Akins | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040181800 | Rakib et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040184616 | Morten | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040190721 | Barrett et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040193609 | Phan et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040193680 | Gibbs et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040204792 | Taylor et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040212148 | Losey et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040220082 | Surmeier et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040224425 | Gjerde et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225416 | Kubota et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040230994 | Urdang et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040237100 | Pinder et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040244138 | Taylor et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040250273 | Swix et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040260798 | Addington et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040261093 | Rebaud et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040268386 | Logan et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050005287 | Claussen | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050010331 | Taylor et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050012830 | Pilu | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050015351 | Nugent | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050015810 | Gould et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050021985 | Ono et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050022227 | Shen et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050022751 | Nelson | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050034171 | Benya | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050036649 | Yokono et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050039212 | Baran et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050044223 | Meyerson | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050047647 | Rutishauser et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050049749 | Watanabe et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050049886 | Grannan et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050055220 | Lee et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050055729 | Atad et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050065651 | Ayers et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050065888 | Benaloh | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050066353 | Fransdonk | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050071047 | Okabayashi et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050083921 | McDermott, III et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050086334 | Aaltonen et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050086683 | Meyerson | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050091173 | Alve | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050097006 | Nyako | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050108763 | Baran et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114686 | Ball et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114701 | Atkins et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114900 | Ladd et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050130585 | Gnuschke et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050138193 | Encarnacion et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050138357 | Swenson et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050149227 | Peters et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050157731 | Peters | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050165899 | Mazzola | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050169468 | Fahrny et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050172127 | Hartung et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050177740 | Athaide et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050177741 | Chen et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050177855 | Maynard et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050182931 | Robert et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050188210 | Perlin et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050188415 | Riley | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050190912 | Hopkins et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050195975 | Kawakita | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050198693 | Choi et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050209749 | Ito et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050210500 | Stone | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050223097 | Ramsayer et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050228725 | Rao et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050268107 | Harris et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050273629 | Abrams et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050278259 | Gunaseelan et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050283450 | Matsugu et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050289616 | Horiuchi et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050289618 | Hardin | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060002551 | Brown et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060004662 | Nadalin et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060008144 | Prasad et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060008256 | Khedouri et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060015352 | Wynn et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060020786 | Helms et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060020950 | Ladd et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060021004 | Moran | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060021019 | Hinton | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060036750 | Ladd et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060041903 | Kahn et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060041905 | Wasilewski | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060041915 | Dimitrova et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060047801 | Haag et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060048216 | Hinton | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060053463 | Choi | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060064583 | Birnbaum et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060069448 | Yasui | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060080171 | Jardins | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060088030 | Beeson et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060094001 | Torre et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060095940 | Yearwood | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060117379 | Bennett et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060130099 | Rooyen | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060130101 | Wessel | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060130107 | Gonder et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060130113 | Carlucci et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060136964 | Diez et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060136968 | Han et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060136990 | Hinton | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060137005 | Park | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060137015 | Fahrny et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060145647 | Kitatsuji et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060148362 | Bridges | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060149850 | Bowman | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060156392 | Baugher et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060160543 | Mashinsky | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060161218 | Danilov | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060161635 | Lamkin | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060168219 | Ahluwalia et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060171423 | Helms et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060179138 | Van et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060184972 | Rafey et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060187900 | Akbar | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060190990 | Gruper et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060200856 | Salowey et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060206712 | Dillaway et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060209799 | Gallagher et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060212400 | Kamperman et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060218604 | Riedl et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060218647 | Hars et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060221246 | Yoo | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060236131 | Vauclair | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060238656 | Chen et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060248553 | Mikkelson et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060259927 | Acharya et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060272031 | Ache | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060291506 | Cain | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070003130 | Goerick et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070008405 | Benosman et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070011335 | Burns et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070019645 | Menon | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070022068 | Linsker | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070022459 | Gaebel, Jr. et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070022469 | Cooper et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070025271 | Niedrich et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070025372 | Brenes et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070033531 | Marsh | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070037475 | Spear | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070046791 | Wang et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070049245 | Lipman | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070053513 | Hoffberg et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070061023 | Hoffberg et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070067851 | Fernando et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070073704 | Bowden et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070076728 | Rieger et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070079381 | Hartung et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070081537 | Wheelock | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070094691 | Gazdzinski | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070098178 | Raikar | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070104456 | Craner | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070118848 | Schwesinger et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070121578 | Annadata et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070121678 | Brooks et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070124488 | Baum et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070124602 | Wald et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070124769 | Casey et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070124781 | Casey et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070150920 | Lee et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070153820 | Gould | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070154041 | Beauchamp | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070157234 | Walker | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070157262 | Ramaswamy et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070157295 | Mangalore et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070168466 | Tooley | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070169144 | Chen | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070174888 | Rubinstein | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070176643 | Nugent | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070180230 | Cortez | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070192615 | Varghese et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070199019 | Angiolillo | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070204300 | Markley | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070204314 | Hasek et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070206799 | Wingert et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070208678 | Matsugu | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070209054 | Cassanova | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070209059 | Moore et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070217436 | Markley et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070219910 | Martinez | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070220024 | Putterman et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070220553 | Branam et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070226365 | Hildreth et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070239315 | Sato et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070244610 | Ozick et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070245376 | Svendsen | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070250872 | Dua | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070250880 | Hainline | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070250912 | Rassool et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070258329 | Winey | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070261116 | Prafullchandra et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070276690 | Ohtani et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070276925 | La et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070276926 | LaJoie | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070280298 | Hearn et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070288637 | Layton et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070288715 | Boswell et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070290885 | Tanabe et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070294178 | Pinder et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070294717 | Hill et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070294738 | Kuo et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070299728 | Nemirofsky et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080008321 | Gagnon et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080008371 | Woods et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080009345 | Bailey et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080021836 | Lao | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080022012 | Wang | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080039974 | Sandin et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080059804 | Shah et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080066112 | Bailey et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080085048 | Venetsky et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080086241 | Phillips et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080086750 | Yasrebi et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080091805 | Malaby et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080091807 | Strub et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080092163 | Song et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080092181 | Britt | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080098212 | Helms | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080098450 | Wu et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080982412 | Helms et al. | Apr 2008 | |
| 20080100482 | Lazar | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080103976 | Read et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080103977 | Khosravy et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080112405 | Cholas et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080117920 | Tucker | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080123862 | Rowley | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080133551 | Wensley et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080137541 | Agarwal et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080141353 | Brown | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080148362 | Gilder et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080154626 | Gounares et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080155059 | Hardin et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080162353 | Tom et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080165460 | Whitby-Strevens | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080170530 | Connors et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080170551 | Zaks | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080177998 | Apsangi et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080192820 | Brooks et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080201282 | Garcia et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080201386 | Maharajh et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080201748 | Hasek et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080212945 | Khedouri et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080222684 | Mukraj et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080235746 | Peters et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080243385 | Yamamoto | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080256510 | Auerbach | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080270307 | Olson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080273591 | Brooks et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080276304 | Maffione | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080279534 | Buttars | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080281971 | Leppanen et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080282299 | Koat et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080288618 | Vardi et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080294074 | Tong et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080297669 | Zalewski et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080306903 | Larson et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080320523 | Morris et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090006256 | Lazovsky | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090007234 | Birger et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090013356 | Doerr et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090014402 | Wolf et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090018696 | Goerick et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090025075 | Chow et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090030802 | Plotnick et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090031335 | Hendricks et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090031371 | Munsell et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090031384 | Brooks | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090043722 | Nugent | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090064221 | Stevens | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090066790 | Hammadou | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090083279 | Hasek | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090083811 | Dolce et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090083813 | Dolce et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090086643 | Kotrla et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090086722 | Kaji | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090089438 | Agarwal | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090098861 | Kalliola et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090100459 | Riedl et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090100493 | Jones et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090102983 | Malone et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090113472 | Sheth et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090118890 | Lin et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090133048 | Gibbs et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090133090 | Busse | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090141696 | Chou et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090141939 | Chambers et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090144362 | Richmond | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090150400 | Abu-Hakima | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090150917 | Huffman et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090151006 | Saeki et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090153499 | Kim et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090156204 | Kim | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090158311 | Hon et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090161981 | Allen | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090165105 | Chaudhry | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090168995 | Banga | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090172776 | Makagon et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090175218 | Song et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090177794 | Alexander | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090182815 | Czechowski, III et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090185576 | Kisel et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090187939 | Lajoie | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090193466 | Ehreth | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090193486 | Patel et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090201917 | Maes et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090203387 | Wold | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090210899 | Lawrence-Apfelbaum et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090210912 | Cholas et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090220216 | Marsh et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090225760 | Foti | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090235308 | Ehlers et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090282241 | Prafullchandra et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20090282449 | Lee | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20090287624 | Rouat et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20090290711 | Bloom et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20090292922 | Park | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20090293101 | Carter et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20090296621 | Park et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090310862 | Tu et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090313116 | Ashbaugh | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20100012568 | Fujisawa et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100017627 | Princen et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100027560 | Yang et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100030578 | Siddique et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100031299 | Harrang et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100031366 | Knight | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100036457 | Sarpeshkar et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100042478 | Reisman | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100043030 | White | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100081375 | Rosenblatt et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100081958 | She | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100082983 | Shah et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100083329 | Joyce et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100083362 | Francisco et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100086171 | Lapstun | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100088236 | Karabulut et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100088292 | Tirpak et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100091286 | Dahlgren | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100100240 | Wang et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100106846 | Noldus et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100115091 | Park et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100115113 | Short et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100119214 | Shimazaki et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100122274 | Gillies et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100122276 | Chen | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100125658 | Strasters | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100131973 | Dillon et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100138900 | Peterka et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100166320 | Paquier | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100169153 | Hwacinski | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100169977 | Dasher et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100182136 | Pryor | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100185855 | Margolus et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100198888 | Blomstedt et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100199299 | Chang et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100199312 | Chang et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100217613 | Kelly | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100217837 | Ansari et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100218231 | Frink et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100219613 | Zaloom et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100228418 | Whitlow et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100250022 | Hines et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100250341 | Hauser | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100251304 | Donoghue et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100251305 | Kimble et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100269144 | Forsman et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
| 20100280641 | Harkness et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100283853 | Acree | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100286824 | Solomon | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100287585 | Frondal et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100287609 | Gonzalez et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100289643 | Trundle et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100290710 | Gagvani et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100292835 | Sugiura et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100293049 | Maher | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100310076 | Barzilai et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100313225 | Cholas et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100313226 | Cholas et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100316257 | Xu et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100325547 | Keng et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20110015989 | Tidwell et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110016071 | Guillen et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110016479 | Tidwell et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110016482 | Tidwell et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110035072 | Jackson | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| 20110071841 | Fomenko et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110078717 | Drummond et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110078721 | Wang et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110090898 | Patel et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110093900 | Patel et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110099017 | Ure | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110102600 | Todd | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110103374 | Lajoie et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110107379 | Lajoie et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110107436 | Cholas et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110110515 | Tidwell et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110119214 | Breitwisch et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110119215 | Elmegreen et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110119637 | Tuli | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110119724 | Damola | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110126018 | Narsinh et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110134245 | Khizhnichenko | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110138064 | Rieger et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110145049 | Hertel et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110164753 | Dubhashi et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110166932 | Smith et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110169977 | Masuda | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110173053 | Aaltonen et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110173095 | Kassaei et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110178658 | Kotaba et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110178943 | Motahari et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110179196 | Friedman | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110184556 | Seth et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110191801 | Vytheeswaran | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110197070 | Mizrah | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110208355 | Tsusaka | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110213688 | Santos et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110219229 | Cholas et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110222832 | Aizawa | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110228742 | Honkasalo et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110235698 | Petre et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110245974 | Kawamoto et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110252236 | De et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110252243 | Brouwer et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110265116 | Stern et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110276881 | Keng et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20120005527 | Engel et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120008786 | Cronk et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120011090 | Tang et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120011567 | Cronk et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120023535 | Brooks | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120030363 | Conrad | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120030714 | Sweatt, III et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120063736 | Simmons et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120079866 | Kuwayama et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120081552 | Sablak et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120083982 | Bonefas et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120089699 | Cholas | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120093402 | Staelin et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120098933 | Robinson et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120109866 | Modha | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120109886 | Ko | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120117012 | Szatmary et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120124606 | Tidwell et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120131629 | Shrum, Jr. et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120143495 | Dantu | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120144416 | Wetzer et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120159603 | Queck | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120167173 | Nadalin et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120171927 | Yu | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120173021 | Tsusaka | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120185092 | Ku | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120185899 | Riedl et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120209428 | Mizutani | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120209432 | Fleischer et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120211923 | Garner et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120256941 | Ballestad et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120260346 | Carey et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120265370 | Kim et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120291062 | Pearson et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120295662 | Haubrich | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120303091 | Izhikevich | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120308076 | Piekniewski et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120308136 | Izhikevich | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120310386 | To et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120330872 | Esser et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20130014140 | Ye et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130014171 | Sansom et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130024888 | Sivertsen | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130046716 | Chan et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130046849 | Wolf et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130073484 | Izhikevich et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130073491 | Izhikevich et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130073492 | Izhikevich et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130073495 | Izhikevich et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130073496 | Szatmary et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130073498 | Izhikevich et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130073499 | Izhikevich et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130073500 | Szatmary et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130077597 | Nukala et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130077831 | Momozono et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130097647 | Brooks et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
| 20130103626 | Hunzinger | Apr 2013 | A1 |
| 20130116827 | Inazumi | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130117212 | Hunzinger et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130117692 | Padmanabhan et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130125223 | Sorotokin | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130151448 | Ponulak | Jun 2013 | A1 |
| 20130151449 | Ponulak | Jun 2013 | A1 |
| 20130151450 | Ponulak | Jun 2013 | A1 |
| 20130176423 | Rischmuller et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130184860 | Ota et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130191443 | Gan et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130201316 | Binder et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130204814 | Hunzinger et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130204820 | Hunzinger et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130216144 | Robinson et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130218821 | Szatmary et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130227284 | Pfeffer et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130245937 | Dibernardo et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130251278 | Izhikevich et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130272570 | Sheng et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130297542 | Piekniewski et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130300644 | Chen et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130309971 | Kiukkonen et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130310977 | Tsusaka et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130314502 | Urbach et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130318217 | Imes et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130318629 | Lajoie et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325768 | Sinyavskiy et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325773 | Sinyavskiy et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325774 | Sinyavskiy et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325775 | Sinyavskiy et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325776 | Ponulak et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325777 | Petre et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130326839 | Cho et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130347089 | Bailey et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140008496 | Ye et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140012788 | Piekniewski | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140016858 | Richert | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140032021 | Metzler et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140041042 | Wong et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140051485 | Wang et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140074855 | Zhao et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140078343 | Dai et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140079297 | Tadayon et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140081895 | Coenen et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140085507 | Pillman et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140085545 | Tu et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140086486 | Pillman et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140089232 | Buibas et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140104498 | Li et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
| 20140114477 | Sato et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
| 20140114867 | Volkmann et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
| 20140116469 | Kim et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140142729 | Lobb et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140175267 | Thiel et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
| 20140198838 | Andrysco et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140233923 | Bradley et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140240492 | Lee et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140247325 | Wu et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140276951 | Hourtash et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140277718 | Izhikevich et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140281489 | Peterka et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140281904 | Burckart et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140282750 | Civiletto | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140283137 | Rebaud et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140320668 | Kalevo et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
| 20150006744 | Chatterjee et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150012943 | Mampaey | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150015165 | Engelen et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150040176 | Hybertson et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
| 20150095932 | Ren | Apr 2015 | A1 |
| 20150143408 | Sallas | May 2015 | A1 |
| 20150157182 | Noh et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150168954 | Hickerson et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150234385 | Sandin et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150362919 | Bernstein et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20160075015 | Izhikevich et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
| 20160134912 | Dillon | May 2016 | A1 |
| 20160165650 | Kim et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160165651 | Pathuri et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160179096 | Bradlow et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160243701 | Gildert et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160301525 | Canard et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| 20160337464 | Eriksson et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
| 20170048336 | Novo et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
| 20170230702 | Sarosi et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
| 20180054774 | Cohn et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 102226740 | Oct 2011 | CN |
| 1139198 | Oct 2001 | EP |
| 1821459 | Aug 2007 | EP |
| 2081361 | Jul 2009 | EP |
| 2113860 | Nov 2009 | EP |
| 2381709 | May 2003 | GB |
| H0487423 | Mar 1992 | JP |
| H08263440 | Oct 1996 | JP |
| 2000156676 | Jun 2000 | JP |
| 2000332746 | Nov 2000 | JP |
| 2001243707 | Sep 2001 | JP |
| 2001274786 | Oct 2001 | JP |
| 2001274788 | Oct 2001 | JP |
| 2001275090 | Oct 2001 | JP |
| 2001285821 | Oct 2001 | JP |
| 2002163396 | Jun 2002 | JP |
| 2002352094 | Dec 2002 | JP |
| 2003058657 | Feb 2003 | JP |
| 2003162600 | Jun 2003 | JP |
| 2003233690 | Aug 2003 | JP |
| 2003248508 | Sep 2003 | JP |
| 2003296484 | Oct 2003 | JP |
| 2003348508 | Dec 2003 | JP |
| 2004030111 | Jan 2004 | JP |
| 2004072721 | Mar 2004 | JP |
| 2004120736 | Apr 2004 | JP |
| 2004120738 | Apr 2004 | JP |
| 2004303111 | Oct 2004 | JP |
| 2005506627 | Mar 2005 | JP |
| 2005519365 | Jun 2005 | JP |
| 2005519501 | Jun 2005 | JP |
| 2005339093 | Dec 2005 | JP |
| 2006185473 | Jul 2006 | JP |
| 2006311267 | Nov 2006 | JP |
| 2007020144 | Jan 2007 | JP |
| 2007534030 | Nov 2007 | JP |
| 2007336553 | Dec 2007 | JP |
| 2008005047 | Jan 2008 | JP |
| 2008015936 | Jan 2008 | JP |
| 2008021293 | Jan 2008 | JP |
| 2008507905 | Mar 2008 | JP |
| 2008167018 | Jul 2008 | JP |
| 2008186272 | Aug 2008 | JP |
| 2008206039 | Sep 2008 | JP |
| 2008539631 | Nov 2008 | JP |
| 2009071786 | Apr 2009 | JP |
| 2009515238 | Apr 2009 | JP |
| 2009176060 | Aug 2009 | JP |
| 2009211632 | Sep 2009 | JP |
| 2010502109 | Jan 2010 | JP |
| 2010079902 | Apr 2010 | JP |
| 2012505436 | Mar 2012 | JP |
| 2012523614 | Oct 2012 | JP |
| 2108612 | Apr 1998 | RU |
| WO-0103410 | Jan 2001 | WO |
| WO-0110125 | Feb 2001 | WO |
| WO-0137479 | May 2001 | WO |
| WO-0169842 | Sep 2001 | WO |
| WO-0177778 | Oct 2001 | WO |
| WO-0213032 | Feb 2002 | WO |
| WO-0221841 | Mar 2002 | WO |
| WO-0242966 | May 2002 | WO |
| WO-02080556 | Oct 2002 | WO |
| WO-03038704 | May 2003 | WO |
| WO-03087799 | Oct 2003 | WO |
| WO-03093944 | Nov 2003 | WO |
| WO-2004027622 | Apr 2004 | WO |
| WO-2005015422 | Feb 2005 | WO |
| WO-2005031524 | Apr 2005 | WO |
| WO-2006020141 | Feb 2006 | WO |
| WO-2007060451 | May 2007 | WO |
| WO-2008070062 | Jun 2008 | WO |
| WO-2008080556 | Jul 2008 | WO |
| WO-2008083335 | Jul 2008 | WO |
| WO-2009020476 | Feb 2009 | WO |
| WO-2010136961 | Dec 2010 | WO |
| WO-2012021245 | Feb 2012 | WO |
| WO-2012114140 | Aug 2012 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| 5C Digital Transmission Content Protection White Paper, Hitachi, Ltd., et al., dated Jul. 14, 1998, 15 pages. |
| Abbott L. F. and Nelson S.B. (2000), “Synaptic plasticity: taming the beast”, Nature Neuroscience, 3, 1178-1183. |
| ALCATEL: “Delivering True Triple Play—Common Capabilities for the Delivery of Composite Services”, Internet Citation, Jun. 2006 (Jun. 2006), XP002418653, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/tripleplay [retrieved on Feb. 6, 2007] . |
| Asensio et al., “Robot Learning Control Based on Neural Network Prediction” ASME 8th Annual Dynamic Systems and Control Conference joint with the JSME 11th Motion and Vibration Conference 2012 [Retrieved on: Jun. 24, 2014]. Retrieved fro internet:http://msc.berkeley.edu/wjchen/publications/DSC12.sub.--8726.sub.--FI-.pdf<http: />. |
| Baluja S., et al., “Expectation-based Selective Attention for Visual Monitoring and Control of a Robot Vehicle,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 1997, pp. 329-344. |
| Bohte, ‘Spiking Nueral Networks’ Doctorate at the University of Leiden, Holland, Mar. 5, 2003, pp. 1-133 [retrieved on Nov. 14, 2012]. Retrieved from the interne http://homepages.cwi.nl/˜sbohte/publication/phdthesis.pdf<url: />. |
| Bouganis, Alexandros, et al.,“Training a Spiking Neural Network to Control a 4-DoF Robotic Arm based on Spike Timing-Dependent Plasticity”, Proceedings of WCCI 2010 IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, COB, Barcelona, Spain, Jul. 18-23, 2010, pp. 4104-4111. |
| Brette et al., Brian: a simple and flexible simulator for spiking neural networks, The Neuromorphic Engineer, Jul. 1, 2009, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.2417/1200906.1659. |
| Brette, et al., “Simulation ofNetworks of Spiking Neurons: A Review of Tools and Strategies”, Received Nov. 29, 2006, Revised Apr. 2, 2007, Accepted Apr. 12, 2007, Springer Science, 50 pages. |
| Cantor, et al., Assertions and Protocols for the OASIS Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) V2.0, OASIS Standard, Mar. 15, 2005. Document ID: saml-core-2.0-os (http://docs.oasis-open.org/security/saml/v2.0/saml-core-2.0-os.pdf). |
| Cantor, et al., Bindings for the OASIS Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) V2.0, OASIS Standard, Mar. 2005, Document ID saml-bindings-2.0-os , (http://docs.oasis-open.org/security/saml/v2.0/saml-bindings-2.0-os.pdf). |
| Cessac et al. ‘Overview of facts and issues about neural coding by spikes.’ Journal of Physiology, Paris 104.1 (2010): 5. |
| Chistiakova, Marina, et al., “Heterosynaptic plasticity in the neocortex.” Experimental brain research 199.3-4 (2009): 377-390. |
| Coupard, Pierre-Philippe, An Availabot-like computer-controlled push puppet for Linux, https://web.archive.org/web/20081106161941/http://myspace.voo.be/pcoupard/push_puppet_to_y/, 2008. |
| Cuntz et al., ‘One Rule to Grow Them All: A General Theory of Neuronal Branching and Its Paractical Application’ PLOS Computational Biology, 6 (8), Published Aug. 5, 2010. |
| Daniel Bush, “STDP, Rate-coded Hebbian Learning and Auto-Associative Network Models of the Hippocampus”, Sep. 2008, University of Sussex, pp. 1-109. |
| Davison et al., PyNN: a common interface for neuronal network simulators, Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, Jan. 2009, pp. 1-10, vol. 2, Article 11. |
| DCAS Authorized< gwmw class=“ginger-module-highlighter-mistake-type-3” id=“gwmw-15487095474138963691403”>Service Domain</gwmw>, Version 1.2, dated Nov. 4, 2008, 58 pages. |
| DCAS Authorized Service Domain, Version 1.2, Nov. 30, 2005, 56 pages. |
| DCAS Licensed Specification Abstracts, CableLabs Confidential Information, Jan. 12, 2006, 4 pages. |
| Djurfeldt, Mikael, The Connection-set Algebra: a formalism for the representation of connectivity structure in neuronal network models, implementations in Python and C++, and their use in simulators BMC Neuroscience Jul. 18, 2011 p. 1 12(Suppl 1):P80. |
| DLNA (Digital Living Network Alliance) protocols described in DLNA Networked Device Interoperability Guidelines Expanded, Mar. 2006 and subsequent expanded version dated Oct. 2006. |
| Dorval et al. ‘Probability distributions of the logarithm of inter-spike intervals yield accurate entropy estimates from small datasets.’ Journal of neuroscience methods 173.1 (2008): 129. |
| DVB (Digital Video Broadcasting), DVB Document A045 Rev. 3, Jul. 2004, “Head-end Implementation of SimulCrypt,” 289 pages. |
| DVB (Digital Video Broadcasting); DVB SimulCrypt; Part 1: “Head-end architecture and synchronization” Technical Specification—ETSI TS 101 197 V1.2.1 (Feb. 2002), 40 pages. |
| Federal Information Processing Standards Publication, US FIPS PUB 197, Nov. 26, 2001, “Advanced Encryption Standards (AES),” 47 pages. |
| Fidjeland, et al., “Accelerated Simulation of Spiking Neural Networks Using GPUs,” WCCI 2010 IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligience, Jul. 18-23, 2010—CCIB, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 536-543, [retrieved on Nov. 14, 2012]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL:http://www.doc.ic.ac.ukl-mpsha/IJCNN10b.pdf. |
| Fletcher, L., et al., “Correlating Driver Gaze with the Road Scene for Driver Assistance Systems,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2005, pp. 71-84. |
| Floreano et al., ‘Neuroevolution: from architectures to learning’ Evol. Intel. Jan. 2008 1:47-62, [retrieved Dec. 30, 2013] [retrieved online from URL:http://inforscienee.eptl.cb/record/112676/files/FloreanoDuerrMattiussi2008.pdf<http: />. |
| Florin L., et al., “Content Delivery and Management in Networked MPEG-4 System,” 2000 10th European Signal Processing Conference, IEEE, Sep. 4, 2000 (Sep. 4, 2000), pp. 1-4, XP032755920, ISBN: 978-952-15-0443-3 [retrieved on Mar. 31, 2015]. |
| Gewaltig et al.. ‘NEST (Neural Simulation Tool)’, Scholarpedia, 2007. pp. I-15. 2(4): 1430, doi: 1 0.4249/scholarpedia.1430. |
| Glackin, C. et al., Feature Extraction from Spectra-temporal Signals using Dynamic Synapses, recurrency, and lateral inhibition, Neural Networks (IJCNN), The 2010 International Joint Conference on DOI: 10.1109/IJCNN.2010.5596818 Publication Year: 2010, pp. 1-6. |
| Gleeson et al., NeuroML: A Language for Describing Data Driven Models of Neurons and Networks with a High Degree of Biological Detail, PLOS Computational Biology, Jun. 2010, pp. 1-19 vol. 6 Issue 6. |
| Gollisch et al., ‘Rapid neural coding in the retina with relative spike latencies.’ Science 319.5866 (2008): 1108-1111. |
| Goodman et al., Brian: a simulator for spiking neural networks in Python, Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, Nov. 2008, pp. 1-10, vol. 2, Article 5. |
| Gorchetchnikov et al., NineML: declarative, mathematically-explicit descriptions of spiking neuronal networks, Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, Conference Abstract: 4th INCF Congress of Neuroinformatics, doi: 1 0.3389/conffninf.2011.08.00098. |
| Graham, Lyle J., The Surf-Hippo Reference Manual Version 3.0 B, Mar. 2002, URL: http://www.neurophys.biomedicale.univparis5. fr/graham/surf-hippo-files/Surf-Hippo%20Reference%20Manual.pdf, pp. 1-128. |
| Hardware and Software Platform for Mobile Manipulation R&D, 2012, https://web.archive.org/web/20120128031010/http://www.willowgarage.com/pages/pr2/design. |
| Harmony Ultimate User Guide, Version 4, pp. 1-54 Oct. 31, 2013. |
| High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection System, Revision 1.091, dated Apr. 22, 2003, Digital Content< gwmw class=“ginger-module-highlighter-mistake-type-3” id=“gwmw-15487095483507149357216”>Protection LLC</gwmw> Draft, 78 pages. |
| Huh et al., “Generalized Power Law for Curve Movements” 2011. |
| Huh et al., “Real-Time Motor Control Using Recurrent Neural Networks” IEEEE Apr. 2009. |
| Huh, “Rethinking Optimal Control of Human Movements” Thesis 2012. |
| Ishii K., et al., Designing Laser Gesture Interface for Robot Control, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Proceedings, Part II 12th IFIP TC 13 International Conference, Uppsala, Sweden, Aug. 24-28, 2009, Proceedings, pp. 479-492. |
| Itti, Laurent, et al., “Computational Modelling of Visual Attention”, Nature Reviews—Neuroscience 2.3 (2001): 194-203. |
| Izhikevich E.M. (2006) Polychronization: Computation With Spikes. Neural Computation, 18:245-282. |
| Izhikevich, E,M. (2007) Dynamical Systems in Neuroscience: The Geometry of Excitability and Bursting, The MIT Press, 2007. |
| Izhikevich E.M., “Neural Excitability, Spiking and Bursting”, Neurosciences Institute, Received Jun. 9, 99, Revised Oct. 25, 1999, 1171-1266, 96 pages. |
| Izhikevich et al., ‘Relating STDP to BCM’, Neural Computation (2003) 15, 1511-1523. |
| Izhikevich, ‘Simple Model of Spiking Neurons’, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, vol. 14, No. 6, Nov. 2003, pp. 1569-1572. |
| Jain, Learning Trajectory Preferences for Manipulators via Iterative Improvement, 2013, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 26 (NIPS 2013). |
| Jin, et al., (2010) “Implementing Spike-Timing-Dependent Plasticity on SpiNNaker Neuromorphic Hardware”, WCCI 2010, IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence. |
| Judd, T., et al., “Learning to Predict where Humans look,” 12th International Conference on Computer Vision, 2009, 8 pages. |
| Karbowski et al., ‘Multispikes and Synchronization in a Large Neural Network with Temporal Delays’, Neural Computation 12. 1573-1606 (2000). |
| Kasabov, “Evolving Spiking Neural Networks for Spatio-and Spectro-Temporal Pattern Recognition”, IEEE 6th International Conference Intelligent Systems 2012 [Retrieved on Jun. 24, 2014], Retrieved from the Internet: http://ncs.ethz.ch/projects/evospike/publications/evolving-spiking-neural-networks-for-spatio-and-spectro-temporal-pattern-recognition-plenary-talk-ieee-is/view. |
| Kazantsev, et al., “Active Spike Transmission in the Neuron Model With a Winding Threshold Maniford”, 01/03112,205-211,7 pages. |
| Khotanzad. ‘Classification of invariant image representations using a neural network’ IEEE. Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, vol. 38, No. 6, Jun. 1990, pp. 1028-1038 [online], [retrieved on Dec. 10, 2013]. Retrieved from the Internet URL: http://www-ee.uta.edu/eeweb/IP/Courses/SPR/Reference/ Khotanzad.pdf. |
| Kienzle, W. et al., “How to find interesting locations in video: a spatiotemporal point detector learned from human eye movements.” Joint Pattern Recognition Symposium. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2007) 10 pp. |
| Kling-Petersen, PhD, “Sun and HPC: From Systems to PetaScale” Sun Microsystems, no date, 31 pages. |
| Knoblauch A., et al., “Memory Capacities for Synaptic and Structural Plasticity,” Neural Computation, 2010, vol. 22 (2), pp. 289-341. |
| Laurent, ‘Issue 1—nnql Refactor Nucleus into its own file—Neural Network Query Language’ [retrieved on Nov. 12, 2013]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://code.google.com/p/nnql/issues/detail?id=1. |
| Laurent, ‘The Neural Network Query Language (NNQL) Reference’ [retrieved on Nov. 12, 2013]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: https://code.google.com/p/ nnql/issues/detail?id=1. |
| Lazar et al. ‘A video time encoding machine’, in Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing ICIP '08 2008, pp. 717-720. |
| Lazar, et al., “Consistent recovery of sensory stimuli encoded with MIMO neural circuits,” Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2010, 13 pages. |
| Lazar, et al., ‘Multichannel time encoding with integrate-and-fire neurons.’ Neurocomputing 65 (2005): 401-407. |
| Leydesdorff L., et al., “Classification and Powerlaws: The Logarithmic Transformation, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (forthcoming)”, 2006. |
| Markram, Henry, et al. “Regulation of synaptic efficacy by coincidence of postsynaptic APs and EPSPs.” Science 275.5297 (1997): 213-215. |
| Martinez-Perez, et al., “Automatic Activity Estimation Based on Object Behavior Signature”, 2010, 10 pages. |
| Marusic, et al., “Share it !—Content Transfer in Home-to-Home Networks.” IEEE MELECON 2004, May 12-15, 2004, Dubrovnik, Croatia. |
| Masquelier, Timothee, ‘Relative spike time coding and STOP-based orientation selectivity in the early visual system in natural continuous and saccadic vision: a computational model.’ Journal of computational neuroscience 32.3 (2012): 425-441. |
| Matsugu, et al., “Convolutional Spiking Neural Network for Robust Object Detection with Population Code Using Structured Pulse Packets”, 2004, 39-55, 17 pages. |
| Media Server; 1 Device Template Version 1.01 Jun. 25, 2002. |
| Medin I.C., et al., Modeling Cerebellar Granular layer Excitability and Combinatorial Computation with Spikes, Bio-Inspired Computing: Theories and Applications (BIC-TA), 2010 IEEE Fifth International Conference on DOI: 10.1 109/BICTA.201 0.5645274, Publication Year: 2010, pp. 1495-1503. |
| Meinhardt, et al., “Pattern formation by local self-activation and lateral inhibition.” Bioessays 22.8 (2000): 753-760. |
| Mircea Badescu and Constantinos Mavroidis, Novel Smart Connector for Modular Robotics, Aug. 7, 2002, Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, 2001. Proceedings. 2001 IEEE/ASME International Conference on. |
| Mordatch et al., “Discovery of Complex Behaviors through Contract-Invariant Optimization” ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)—SIGGRAPH 2012 Conference. |
| Munn, S., et al., “Fixation-identification in Dynamic Scenes: Comparing an Automated Algorithm to Manual Coding,” Proceedings of the 5th symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization, 2008, pp. 33-42. |
| Nichols, A Reconfigurable Computing Architecture for Implementing Artificial Neural Networks on FPGA, Master's Thesis, The University of Guelph, 2003, pp. 1-235. |
| Niv, et al., Evolution of Reinforcement Learning in Uncertain Environments: A Simple Explanation for Complex Foraging Behaviors, International Society for Adaptive Behavior, 2002, vol. 10(1), pp. 5-24. |
| OpenCable Application Platform Specification, OCAP 2.0 Profile, OC-SP-OCAP2.0-I01-020419, Apr. 19, 2002. |
| OpenCable Application Platform Specifications, OCAP Extensions, OC-SP-OCAP--HNEXT-I03-080418, 2005-2008. |
| Opencable, Enhanced TV Binary Interchange, Format 1.0 OC-SP-ETV-BIF1.0-104-070921 Date: Sep. 21, 2007, 420 pages. |
| OpenCable Host Device, Core Functional Requirements, OC-SP-HOST-CFR-113-030707, Jul. 7, 2003. |
| Opencable, HOST-POD Interface Specification, OC-SP-HOSTPOD-IF-113-030707, Jul. 7, 2003. |
| OpenCable Specification, Home Networking Protocol 2.0, OC-SP-HNP2.0-I01-08418, 2007. |
| OpenCable Specifications, Home Networking Security Specification, OC-SP-HN-SEC-DO1-081027, draft (Oct. 27, 2008). |
| Ostojic, Srdjan, Nicolas Brunel, From Spiking Neuron Models to Linear-Nonlinear Models, Jan. 2011, vol. 7 (1), e1001056. |
| Pantjiaros C.A. P., et al., “Broadband Service Delivery: CY.T.A. ADSL Field Trial Experience”, Electrotechnical Conference, 2000 MELECON, 2000 10th Mediterranean, May 29-31, 2000, Piscataway, NJ, USA, IEEE, vol. 1, May 29, 2000 (May 29, 2000), pp. 221-224, XP010518859, ISBN: 978-0-7803-6290-1. |
| Paugam-Moisy, et al., “Computing with Spiking Neuron Networks” Handbook of Natural Computing, 40 pages Springer, Heidelberg (2009). |
| Pavlidis et al. ‘Spiking neural network training using evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings 2005 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networkds, 2005. IJCNN’05, vol. 4, pp. 2190-2194 Publication Date Jul. 31, 2005 [online] [Retrieved on Dec. 10, 2013] Retrieved from the Internet URL: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu! viewdoc/download?doi= 0.1.1.5.4346&rep-repl&type-pdf. |
| Pham et al., “Affine Invariance of Human Hand Movements: a direct test” 2012. |
| PR2 User Manual, Oct. 5, 2012. |
| Primergy BX300 SWITCH BLADE user's manual, Fujitsu Corp., Sep. 30, 2002, first edition, pp. 1 to 20. |
| Ramachandran, et al., “The Perception of Phantom Limbs”, The D.O. Hebb Lecture, Center for Brain and Cognition, University of California, 1998, 121, 1603-1630,28 pages. |
| Real System Media Commerce Suite Technical White Paper, Copyright 2011, Real Networks, Inc., 16 pages, (http://www.realnetworkis). |
| RealSystem Media Commerce Suite Technical White Paper, Copyrgt, 2001 RealNetworks, Inc., http://www.realnetworks.com, 16 pages. |
| Redux screenshot from http://www.redux.com, “Select a channel to start watching” @ 2014 Redux, Inc.014 Redux, Inc. All rights reserved; http://www.redux.com/; 2 pages. |
| Ruan, Chengmei, et al., Competitive behaviors of a spiking neural network with spike timing dependent plasticity, Biomedical Engineering and Informatics (BMEI), 2012 5th International Conference on DOI: 10.1109/BMEI.2012.6513088 Publication Year: 2012 , pp. 1015-1019. |
| Sato et al., ‘Pulse interval and width modulation for video transmission.’ Cable Television, IEEE Transactions on 4 (1978): 165-173. |
| Schaal et al., An Example Application of Policy Improvement with Path Integrals (PI.sup.2), Jun. 9, 2010. |
| Schemmel, J., et al., Implementing synaptic plasticity in a VLSI spiking neural network model. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Intenational Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN'06), IEEE Press (2006) Jul. 16-21, 2006, pp. 1-6 [online], [retrieved on Aug. 24, 2012]. Retrieved from the Internet URL: http://www.kip.uniheidelberg.deNeroeffentlichungen/download.cgi/4620/ps/1774.pdf. |
| Shepard et al., “Evaluation of Smart Grid and Civilian UAV Vulnerability to GPS Spoofing Attacks”, Northrop Grumman Information Systems, 2012 Ion GNSS Conference Nashville, TN, Sep. 19-21, 2012. |
| Siebenlist F., et al., “Global Grid Forum Specification Roadmap towards a Secure OGSA,” Jul. 2002, pp. 1-22. |
| Simulink.RTM. model [online], [Retrieved on Dec. 10, 2013] Retrieved from &It:URL: http://www.mathworks.com/ products/simulink/index.html. |
| Sinyavskiy et al. ‘Reinforcement learning of a spiking neural network in the task of control of an agent in a virtual discrete environment’ Rus, J. Nonlin. Dyn., 2011, vol. 7, No. 4 (Mobile Robots), pp. 859-875, chapters 1-8 (Russian Article with English Abstract). |
| Sjostrom et al., ‘Spike-Timing Dependent Plasticity’ Scholarpedia, 5(2):1362 (2010), pp. 1-18. |
| Steele, The Human Touch Makes Robots Defter, Nov. 6, 2013, Cornell Chronicle. http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2013/11/human-touch-makes-robots-defter. |
| Stringer, et al., “Invariant Object Recognition in the Visual System with Novel Views of 3D Objects”, 2002, 2585-2596, 12 pages. |
| Suzuki et al., Operation Direction to a Mobile Robot by Projection Lights, 2005 IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts, Jun. 12-15, 2005, pp. 160-165. |
| Swiercz, Waldemar, et al. “A new synaptic plasticity rule for networks of spiking neurons.” Neural Networks, IEEE Transactions on 17.1 (2006): 94-105. |
| Szatmary et al.,, “Spike-timing Theory of Working Memory” PLOS Computational Biology, vol. 6, Issue 8, Aug. 19, 2010 [retrieved on Dec. 30, 2013]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.ploscompbioLorg/article/info%3Adoi% 2F10.1371%2Fjournal,pcbi.1000879<url:></url:>. |
| Tank D.W., et al., “Neural Computation by Concentrating Information in Time,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1987, vol. 84 (7), pp. 1896-1900. |
| Thorpe, S.J., et al. (2001), Spike-based strategies for rapid processing. Neural Networks 14, pp. 715-725. |
| Thorpe, S.J., et al. (2004), SpikeNet: real-time visual processing with one spike per neuron, Neurocomputing, 58-60, pp. 857-864. |
| Todorov E., “Direct Cortical Control of Muscle Activation in Voluntary Arm Movements: a Model.,” Nature Neuroscience, 2000, vol. 3 (4), pp. 391-398. |
| UTF-32, IBM, retrieved from http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v5r3/index.jsp?topic=%2Fnls%2Frbagsutf32.htm on Aug. 28, 2013. |
| Van Moffaert, A., et al.< gwmw class=“ginger-module-highlighter-mistake-type-3” id=“gwmw-15487095623201874158750”>(</gwmw>“Digital Rights Management: DRM is a key enabler for the future growth of the broadband access market and the telecom/networking market in general”, Alcatel Telecommunications Review, Alcatel, Paris Cedex FR, Apr. 1, 2003, XP007005930ISSN; 8 pages. |
| Victor, T., et al., “Sensitivity of Eye-movement Measurements to in-vehicle Task Difficulty,” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behavior, 2005, pp. 167-190. |
| Voutsas K., et al., A Biologically Inspired Spiking Neural Network for Sound Source Lateralization Neural Networks, IEEE Transactions on vol. 18, Issue: 6 DOI: 10.11 09/TNN.2007.899623, Publication Year: 2007, pp. 1785-1799. |
| Wade, J.J. , et al., SWAT: A Spiking Neural Network Training Algorithm for Classification Problems, Neural Networks, IEEE Transactions on vol. 21 , Issue: 11 DOI: 10.1109/TNN.2010.2074212 Publication Year: 2010 , pp. 1817-1830. |
| Wang ‘The time dimension for scene analysis.’ Neural Networks, IEEE Transactions on 16.6 (2005): 1401-1426. |
| Wennekers, T., Analysis of Spatia-temporal Patterns in Associative Networks of Spiking Neurons Artificial Neural Networks, 1999. 1CANN 99. Ninth International Conference on (Conf. Publ. No. 470) vol. 1 DOI:10.1049/cp:I9991116 Publication Year: 1999, vol. 1, pp. 245-250. |
| Won, W.J., et al., “Implementation of Road Traffic Signs Detection based on Saliency Map Model,” IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, 2008, pp. 542-547. |
| Wu, QingXiang, et al., Edge Detection Based on Spiking Neural Network Model, ICIC 2007, LNAI 4682, pp. 26-34, 2007, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg. |
| Wu, QingXiang, et al. “Remembering Key Features of Visual Images based on Spike Timing Dependent Plasticity of Spiking Neurons.” Image and Signal Processing, 2009. CISP'09. 2nd International Congress on. IEEE, 2009. |
| Zhang, et al., “A Flexible Content Protection System for Media-on-Demand” Multimedia Software Engineering, 2002 Proceedings. Fourth International Symposium on Dec. 11-13, 2002, Piscataway, NJ, USAA, IEEE, Dec. 11, 2002, pp. 272-277, XP010632760ISBN: 978-0-7695-1857-2. |
| Savolainen T., et al., “IPv6 Addressing Strategies for IoT,” IEEE Sensors Journal, 2013, vol. 13 (10), pp. 3511-3519. |
| Spagna S., et al., “Design Principles of an Operator-owned Highly Distributed Content Delivery Network,” IEEE Communications Magazine, 2013, vol. 51 (4), pp. 132-140. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20210243501 A1 | Aug 2021 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 15905704 | Feb 2018 | US |
| Child | 17170514 | US | |
| Parent | 12834801 | Jul 2010 | US |
| Child | 15905704 | US |
