The present invention relates to the field of distributed gaming. More specifically, the present invention relates to the field of distributed gaming utilizing a mobile device.
In the United States alone there are over 170 million registered cell phones. With the expiration of the U.S. Pat. No. 4,592,546 to Fascenda et al., companies are able to now use the cell phone and other mobile communication devices utilizing a multicast network to control television viewers in games of skill based upon predicting, for example, what the quarterback may call on the next play. In addition, games of skill with a common start time can be conducted simultaneously among cell phone owners, based on classic card, dice, trivia, and other games. In order to avoid the anti-gaming laws in the various states, elements of chance must be virtually non-existent in such games and the winners therefore determined by the relative skill, experience and practice of the player in each discrete game.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,813,913 to Berner and Lockton provides for a central computing system which includes a means of grouping participants having similar skill levels together in simultaneous, but separate, levels of competition playing an identical game. The relative performances are communicated to only those participants competing at the same skill level. The Berner/Lockton patent also provides for a wireless receiving device to permanently store the specific skill level for each participant for each type of common event such as those based on televised sports or game shows. The Berner/Lockton patent provides for a telephonic link at the completion of the game to collect information and update the skill level of the participants of a particular game. When a person achieves sufficient points or meets other objective criteria to graduate into another skill level, a method is provided for accomplishing this in the central computer and then transmitting an alert to the participant notifying them of their promotion. The Berner/Lockton patent describes awarding prizes and providing recognition for the members of each discreet skill level in a common game. All users, no matter what level they are on, receive the same number of questions and thus the possibility of earning the same number of points. Thus direct comparisons between users at different levels, although not encouraged are possible. Such comparisons often times lead to user discouragement.
The subsequent development of the internet now allows subscribers of such a service to view virtually all relevant information concerning the results, standings, and promotions of all competitors at all skill levels. Because the Berner/Lockton patent provides an identical game with the same number of questions for all members of the skill level to play, the system described in the Berner/Lockton patent can result in discouragement of competitors at a lower skill level when the scores achieved by players playing at a higher skill level are viewed, either by visiting the internet site to view results, or directly from a friend playing at a higher skill level. The present application addresses a different competitive system which directly solves these issues, while improving the entertainment experience for the participants.
A game of skill played simultaneously by several players whereby each participant effectively competes only against players having a similar skill tier in order to provide a strong motivation. The system includes a central computer system with each remote participant having a mobile device such as a cell phone. The system also provides for effective promotion or updating to a higher skill tier of successful players of the game. Each skill tier adds complexity as well as increased point potentials, such as the addition of point doubling options. The game is relatively simple initially, permitting new users to understand, play and enjoy the game. As the user becomes more skilled and reaches higher tiers, the game becomes more challenging thus retaining a player's interest. Players are able to view all scores including those in other tiers, although they will know that players in other tiers had more opportunities to earn points. In one embodiment, a system for a game of skill played by one or more individuals viewing one or more common game events comprises a mobile device for receiving one or more game play inputs by the one or more individuals and scoring in response to the one or more game play inputs and a central computing system for defining a predetermined plurality of game skill tiers including an initial entry level skill tier and one or more advanced skill tiers for receiving one or more game scores and determining one of the plurality of the predetermined plurality of game skill tiers of the one or more individuals for a particular game and promoting to a relatively higher skill tier more successful players of each game, wherein each tier has an increasingly more sophisticated level of play. The mobile device is from a group consisting of a cellular phone, a PDA, an MP3 player, and a laptop computer. The mobile device includes means for permanently storing the game skill tier selected from the plurality of game skill tiers defined on the central computing system. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a sporting event. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a live game from a group consisting of football, baseball, hockey, basketball, boxing, golf, soccer and auto racing. The one or more common game events is from a group consisting of a televised game show, a reality show and an entertainment show. The one or more common game events is a non-televised game from a group consisting of cards, dice, word games, puzzles and trivia games. The one or more common game events is played on computers, the Internet, handhelds or cell phones. The game scores are communicated to the one or more individuals on a webpage. The game scores are communicated to the one or more individuals on the mobile device. The tiers are communicated to the one or more individuals. The central computing system communicates all game scores to individuals irregardless of game skill tier. Alternatively, The central computing system communicates all game scores in the game skill tier to individuals included in the individuals' game skill tier. The relatively higher skill tiers have more questions and more opportunities for points than respectively lower skill tiers. The system functions utilizing the Internet.
In another embodiment, a system for a game of skill played by one or more individuals viewing one or more common game events comprises a mobile device for receiving one or more game play inputs by the one or more individuals and scoring in response to the one or more game play inputs and a central computing system for defining a predetermined plurality of game skill tiers including an initial lowest skill tier and one or more advanced skill tiers for receiving one or more game scores and determining one of the plurality of the predetermined plurality of game skill tiers of the one or more individuals for a particular game and promoting to a relatively higher skill tier more successful players of each game, wherein each tier has a different level of play, further wherein the central computing system communicates all game scores to individuals irregardless of game skill tier. The mobile device is from a group consisting of a cellular phone, a PDA, an MP3 player, and a laptop computer. The mobile device includes means for permanently storing the game skill tier selected from the plurality of game skill tiers defined on the central computing system. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a sporting event. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a live game from a group consisting of football, baseball, hockey, basketball, boxing, golf, soccer and auto racing. The one or more common game events is from a group consisting of a televised game show, a reality show and an entertainment show. The one or more common game events is a non-televised game from a group consisting of cards, dice, word games, puzzles and trivia games. The one or more common game events is played on computers, the Internet, handhelds or cell phones. The game scores are communicated to the one or more individuals on a webpage. The game scores are communicated to the one or more individuals on the mobile device. The tiers are communicated to the one or more individuals. The relatively higher skill tiers have more questions and more opportunities for points than respectively lower skill tiers. The system functions utilizing the Internet.
In yet another embodiment, an apparatus for a game of skill played simultaneously by groups of participants, each group comprising several participants of a particular game skill tier, remote from each other in conjunction with at least one common game event where each participant player of a game receives one or more scores comprises means for providing the common game event and transmitting such event to each of the remote participants, control unit means associated with each remote participant for receiving game play inputs by each participant and scoring in response to the inputs, central computer system means for defining a predetermined plurality of game skill tiers including an initial entry skill tier and one or more advanced skill tiers and for receiving the game scores and determining one of the predetermined plurality of game skill tiers of each of the participants for a particular game and also promoting to a relatively higher skill tier more successful players of each game, wherein each tier has a different level of play, the central computer system also including means for communicating game scores to all participants and means for permanently storing the game skill tier of each participant for each type of common game event. The control unit means is from a group consisting of a cellular phone, a PDA, an MP3 player, and a laptop computer. The control unit means includes means for permanently storing the game skill tier selected from the plurality of game skill tiers defined on the central computing system. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a sporting event. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a live game from a group consisting of football, baseball, hockey, boxing, basketball, golf, soccer and auto racing. The one or more common game events is from a group consisting of a televised game show, a reality show and an entertainment show. The one or more common game events is a non-televised game from a group consisting of cards, dice, word games, puzzles and trivia games. The one or more common game events is played on computers, the Internet, handhelds or cell phones. The game scores are communicated to the groups of participants on a webpage. The game scores are communicated to the groups of participants on the mobile device. The tiers are communicated to the one or more individuals. More questions are asked and more points are awarded at the relatively higher skill tier. The apparatus functions utilizing the Internet.
In another embodiment, a method of controlling a game of skill comprises transmitting one or more common game events to one or more mobile devices, defining a predetermined plurality of game skill tiers, querying one or more users via the one or more mobile devices, wherein the querying is relative to the predetermined plurality of game skill tiers such that each tier has a different level of querying, promoting one or more individuals to a relatively higher tier of the predetermined plurality of game skill tiers based on correctness of responses to the querying, determining a score for the one or more individuals based on the correctness of responses to the querying and communicating the scores of the one or more users to the one or more users. The one or more mobile devices is from a group consisting of a cellular phone, a PDA, an MP3 player, and a laptop computer. The mobile device includes means for permanently storing the game skill tier selected from the plurality of game skill tiers defined on the central computing system. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a sporting event. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a live game from a group consisting of football, baseball, hockey, basketball, boxing, golf, soccer and auto racing. The one or more common game events is from a group consisting of a televised game show, a reality show and an entertainment show. The one or more common game events is a non-televised game from a group consisting of cards, dice, word games, puzzles and trivia games. The one or more common game events is played on computers, the Internet, handhelds or cell phones. Communicating the scores is by posting the scores on a webpage. Communicating the scores is by sending the scores to the one or more mobile devices. The method further comprises, communicating the tiers to the one or more users. More questions are asked and more points are awarded at the relatively higher skill tier. The method utilizes the Internet.
In yet another embodiment, a network for controlling a game of skill played by one or more individuals viewing one or more common game events comprises a plurality of devices for receiving one or more game play inputs by the one or more individuals and scoring in response to the one or more game play inputs and a central computing system for defining a predetermined plurality of game skill tiers including an initial lowest skill tier and one or more advanced skill tiers for receiving one or more game scores and determining one of the plurality of the predetermined plurality of game skill tiers of the one or more individuals for a particular game and promoting to a relatively higher skill tier more successful players of each game, wherein each tier has a different level of play. The plurality of devices are from a group consisting of cellular phones, PDAs, an MP3 players, and laptop computers. The plurality of devices include means for permanently storing the game skill tier selected from the plurality of game skill tiers defined on the central computing system. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a sporting event. The one or more common game events is a live television broadcast of a live game from a group consisting of football, baseball, hockey, basketball, boxing, golf, soccer and auto racing. The one or more common game events is from a group consisting of a televised game show, a reality show and an entertainment show. The one or more common game events is a non-televised game from a group consisting of cards, dice, word games, puzzles and trivia games. The one or more common game events is played on computers, the Internet, handhelds or cell phones. The game scores are communicated to the one or more individuals on a webpage. The game scores are communicated to the one or more individuals on the mobile device. The tiers are communicated to the one or more individuals. The central computing system communicates all game scores to individuals irregardless of game skill tier. Alternatively, the central computing system communicates all game scores in the game skill tier to individuals included in the individuals' game skill tier. The relatively higher skill tiers have more questions and more opportunities for points than respectively lower skill tiers. The network of devices function utilizing the Internet.
In yet another embodiment, a graphical user interface for displaying scores of a game of skill played by a plurality of players viewing one or more common game events comprises a representation of a plurality of tiers and a list of a plurality of scores of the plurality of players, wherein each player has an associated tier and further wherein the scores for each player are listed in the associated one of the plurality of tiers. The plurality of players play a game with different opportunities to score points. Alternatively, the plurality of players play a game with the same opportunities to score points. The plurality of scores are displayed in an order selected from a group including ascending, descending and alphabetical.
With the proliferation of mobile devices, a growing number of mobile device users are able to participate in a distributed online or network game. These games might be associated with various popular live and/or televised events. Participants of the game typically answer the same questions utilizing a mobile device as a live contestant at a game show (e.g., Wheel of Fortune®, Jeopardy®, etc.). Participants are also able to make predictions regarding the outcome of events and even play-by-play decisions for sporting events such as football, baseball, auto racing, or any of a number of other sporting events. The expansion to include participants utilizing mobile devices increases the number of participants in these network games almost limitlessly. For instance, the Super Bowl live audience numbers in the tens of thousands of spectators, while the television audience may number in excess of 100 million viewers. A majority of these viewers have access to an assortment of mobile devices, e.g., most commonly in the form of the ubiquitous cellular telephone.
For high bandwidth connections, games are typically controlled through a full time, two-way connection to a game server that routinely supplies information to the participants of the game. As is known in the art, two-way network connections provide comparatively reliable and secure service. However, forming a two-way connection between the high potential number of participants of a real-time game (e.g., associated with a broadcast event) and a central host server creates challenges because of the low latency demands of such a game played in realtime. Moreover, in the past, two-way networks posed scalability issues and became impractical for massive numbers of participants and for games over low bandwidth connections such as some mobile networks. Ultimately, the implementation of such a two-way system could be expensive because of the vast communication demands of continuously updating potentially millions of contestants of the status of their ongoing, changing, and fast paced predictions. This burden on the game server is significant because many games require acknowledgment by the server of the continuously changing predictions, which must be displayed on the mobile device in less than 500 milliseconds. The same problem also exists in non-television broadcast based games played over mobile devices that require a common start time for all competitors and where there are a large number of potential competitors. However, with the advancements of server speed and greater bandwidth, even for mobile networks, two-way connection is practical even with very large groups of participants. Furthermore, as the technology improves and becomes less expensive, the implementation of a two-way system is able to avoid high expenses. Even though a realtime game requires low latency, a two-way system utilizing proper configurations with powerful servers over ever growing networks is able to handle the needs of the game.
A system and method are provided for updating participants in a game. In some embodiments, the method selects a set of sampling participants from the set of all participants of a game. In some of these embodiments, the selection occurs prior to the start of the game. The method of some embodiments establishes a two-way connection between a server and each of the sampling participants. The method continuously maintains the two-way connection throughout the game. After each discrete game period, the method receives from a sampling participant, data for the sampling participant's game period performance. Based on the received data, the method determines the performance for the game period and broadcasts this information to a participant. Some embodiments base the data on a statistically projectable random sample that is representative of all the participants in the game. In some embodiments, the broadcast recipient is a non-sampling participant. A non-sampling participant is a participant who was not selected for the set of sampling participants. In some embodiments, the non-sampling participant, utilizing the projectable data, determines a standing relative to the other participants for the game period.
Another effective means of controlling a large-scale network game is to use a broadcast server topology to one-way multicast the same information to all participants simultaneously. Thus, some embodiments of the invention provide for a mobile device (e.g., cellular phone, PDA, etc.) as the receiver in a broadcast receiver topology. However, many current mobile devices are capable of operation in both one-way and two-way modes. These modes include small message service (SMS), instant messaging (IM) or Internet Relay Chat (IRC), email, voice and/or other data modes over a number of protocols such as transport control protocol (TCP) or universal datagram protocol (UDP).
Thus, the network game topology of some embodiments may include a mixture of one-way receivers and two-way clients to realize the benefits of both the one-way broadcast and two-way client/server architectures.
As shown in
When the server has configured the game event, the requesting mobile device receives a configuration message from the server at the step 225 and the process transitions to the step 230. At the step 230, the mobile device of some embodiments determines whether the configuration message from the server indicated that the mobile device should set up for one-way broadcast mode. If the message at the step 225 indicates that the mobile device should operate in broadcast mode, the process 200 transitions to the step 235 where the mobile device is configured to receive one-way broadcast transmissions from the server, and then the process 200 concludes. Otherwise, the process 200 transitions to the step 240 where the mobile device sets up a two-way client/server connection with the server for the selected game event, and the mobile device setup process 200 concludes.
Once the participant has selected the game and the mobile device has prepared the connection with the server. The participant may play the game over the mobile device.
As shown in
After the mobile device receives a lockout message at the step 315, the process 300 transitions to the step 320 where the mobile device receives the correct answer from the server, compares the received answer to the participant's prediction, and displays the comparison to the participant. Then, at the step 325, the mobile device receives a set of sampling results from the server. Prior to the commencement of the game, the server of some embodiments selects a statistically significant random sample of participants who have registered their intention to play the game. The server instructs these sampling participants' mobile devices to establish with the server a two-way connection to be maintained for the duration of the contest or game. Some embodiments establish the two-way connection transparently, which occurs with or without the participant's knowledge. The server of some embodiments monitors the period-by-period scores of this statistically significant set of sampling participants. In some embodiments, the sampling results contain a distribution of the performance of the sampling participants for the last period of the game that was tabulated. Some of these embodiments employ a histogram format to represent the sampling results.
After each discrete period in the contest, the server of some embodiments broadcasts some of the information collected from the sampling participants as well as the correct answers or predictions for each game period. In some of these embodiments, the game application software residing in the mobile device will compare the participant's current score to the sampling results. For example, a participant who won the maximum number of points possible on their last prediction might be informed they had moved up from the 72nd percentile to the 89th percentile at that point in the game. Some embodiments further provide a visual display of the current percentile standing for the participant based upon the comparison of the participant's score to the representative sample. For some of these embodiments, the sampling results include a histogram or another graphical representation of the sampling results. Generation and transmission of the sampling results will be further described below by reference to
When the mobile device receives the sampling results at the step 325, the process 300 transitions to the step 330 where the mobile device compares the participant's performance to the sampling results and displays the comparison to the participant. Then, the process 300 transitions to the step 335 where the mobile device tabulates and stores the participant's performance for the game. This tabulation and storage may include a ranking system. Once the mobile device determines the participant's performance, the process 300 transitions to the step 340 where the process 300 determines whether the participant has achieved a high degree of performance. For some embodiments, a high degree of performance indicates a greater likelihood that the participant will have high enough score(s) to win. In these embodiments, the method uploads the participant's performance to the server for comparison against the uploaded results of the other high performers. Thus, these embodiments monitor only the subset of high scorers, based on the particular game parameters, to determine the winner(s).
If the participant has not achieved notable performance, the process 300 concludes. Otherwise if the participant has performed well, the process 300 of some embodiments transitions to the step 345, where the process 300 determines whether the participant has exceeded one or more performance factors. If the participant has not exceeded the performance factor(s) then the process 300 transitions to the step 355 where the mobile device uploads the participant's performance information to the server, and the process 300 concludes. Otherwise, the participant exceeds the performance factor and the process 300 transitions to the step 350 where the mobile device switches to a two-way client/server mode. Then the mobile device uploads the participant's performance information to the server at the step 355 and the process concludes.
Some embodiments use the performance determination at the step 340 to check whether the participant's performance is high enough to warrant transmission to the server. In these embodiments, high performance may indicate whether the participant is likely to win. Some embodiments use the performance factor of the step 345 in
As mentioned above, the mixed network topology 100 illustrated in
Once the server of some embodiments receives the selection of a game event from a requesting mobile device, the server performs certain setup operations for the requested game event. In some embodiments, the server logs the mobile device and/or the participant operating the mobile device to one or more data storages maintained by the server. The server of some embodiments may request the identification explicitly, while the mobile device of other embodiments will transmit the identification separately, or in conjunction with another message to the server regardless of a specific identification request.
If at the step 515, the participant is likely to win, then the server setup process 500 transitions to the step 530 where the server sends a message to set the mobile device in a two-way client/server communications mode. In the two-way mode, the server monitors closely the participant's performance for the game event. In these embodiments, the server is constantly updated with only the most relevant data from a subset of participants who are likely to win. Otherwise, if at the step 515, the participant is not likely to win, then the process 500 transitions to the step 520, where the process 500 determines whether there is a proper statistical sampling of scores.
In some embodiments, the server setup process 500 determines whether the number of two-way (real-time) connections to the server is statistically significant, meaning that the number of connections is sufficient to provide a reasonably reliable representation of the population of all participants in the game event. If at the step 520, there is not a proper statistical sampling (e.g., there are not enough two-way connections for statistical significance) then the process 500 transitions to the step 530 where the server sends a message to set the mobile device in two-way client/server mode (thus, increasing the number of two-way connections toward statistical significance), and the process 500 concludes. Otherwise, the process 500 transitions to the step 525 where the server sends a message to set the mobile device in one-way mode to receive broadcasts from the server, and the server setup process 500 concludes. As mentioned above, some embodiments pre-select a set of sampling participants for two-way connections at the start of each game.
Once the server has set up and sent the mobile device configuration messages for the selected game, the server will then typically conduct and officiate the game.
The transmissions and/or broadcasts will continue at the step 605 until the conclusion of the game period as determined by the particular game parameters. Then the process 600 transitions to the step 610 where the server generates and sends a lockout message to notify the participating or subscribed mobile devices that the game period has concluded. In some embodiments, the lockout message includes a timestamp. After the lockout message, the server generates and sends the correct result for the recently concluded game period at the step 615. Then the process 600 transitions to the step 620 where the server compiles the available performance data from the two-way client/server mode participants. As mentioned above, in some embodiments the two-way mode participants form a representative sample of all participants competing during the particular game period. The server operation process 600 of some embodiments generates a graphical representation of the results obtained from the representative sample of participants. Some of these embodiments use a histogram format to illustrate the sampling results.
Once the server operation process 600 compiles the sampling results at the step 620, the process 600 transitions to the step 625 where the server sends the sampling results to the participants of the game period. In particular, the server typically broadcasts the sampling results to the one-way mode participants. After broadcasting the sampling results, the process 600 transitions to the step 630 where the server receives uploaded results from the high performing one-way mode participants. As described above in relation to
As shown in
When the server operation process 600 completes the various tasks at the step 635, the process 600 transitions to the step 640 where the process 600 determines whether the game, the event, and/or the period are over, based on a set of criteria specific to the selected game. If the game is not over, then the server operation process 600 returns to the step 605, otherwise the process 600 concludes. As one of ordinary skill will recognize, the officiating server during an online network game does not monitor a majority of the participants, particularly the one-way broadcast participants. In a network environment of heterogeneous mobile devices, this creates opportunities for participants to unfairly modify and report their performance.
As mentioned above, games broadcast to mobile devices pose specific challenges as to data validation and overall game integrity. For example, a participant using a mobile device in an online or network game is able to (1) access the mobile device client to probe the microprocessor, and/or the RAM to modify the local data at the client device; (2) “spoof” or emulate another mobile client device or; (3) apply other techniques to enter predictions after the answers are known. Thus, a crafty participant is able to create game scores that are not legitimately achieved out of view of the officiating secure server and submit the unfairly achieved performance for scoring against un-enhanced legitimate competitors.
To cope with this issue, some embodiments provide a method and system for detecting unusual performance in a game. The game has a participant. In some embodiments, the game is a game of skill, which, as with most games of skill, performance improves with repetitive play, until a participant reaches their general level of skill. The method calculates for the participant an average performance level. Based on the average performance level, the method tracks for the participant, a participant improvement factor and stores the participant improvement factor. The method compares the participant improvement factor to a threshold value. As mentioned above, some embodiments make this comparison at step 345, of the process flow 300, illustrated in
Some embodiments additionally track a game improvement factor (e.g., at step 635 in
Once a two-way connection is triggered, the server of some embodiments records data for the ongoing game play of the triggering participant and performs a variety of tests. The tests of some embodiments include the recording of each entry by the participant, and examining the time stamp, user input, and other data being received from the participant's mobile device. Some embodiments use the recorded data to identify anomalies in the participant's activities. The anomalies might include (1) abnormal improvement in results relative to other participants, (2) abnormal improvement in performance based an prior performance for the particular participant, (3) signs that the application software has been altered, (4) anomalies in the utilization of the game control interface, and/or (5) indications through encryption and additional non-obvious data that the final score upload has been altered.
Some embodiments, when detecting an anomaly, require future game play by the participant suspected of unfair activity to be conducted on a two-way basis with the server for close monitoring. For instance, during the game play of these embodiments, every play prediction is stored inside the mobile device and is sent periodically to the game server. Moreover, some embodiments store in a database, each participant's relative performance for each game in which the participant competes. In some embodiments, the participant's relative performance is stored in the form of a percentile standing. Some embodiments calculate and store the average performance level and the average incremental improvement in the percentile standing for each participant. As participants improve over time with practice and experience, some embodiments continually calculate an average improvement factor for both the game in general, as well as for a specific participant. For instance, the average improvement in percentile standing of a specific participant for a particular game might be two percentile points, while the average improvement for a group of participants at a particular skill level game-wide, might be three percentile points.
Thus, the threshold value used by some embodiments to gauge a participant's performance may vary for each participant, and for each game, and may also vary over time. The threshold values of these embodiments are adjusted based on one or more of these or other factors (e.g., the participant and game factors, over time). Moreover, some embodiments employ multiple checks against one or more of the threshold values. For instance, the participant's improvement may not be that notable based on the participant's history but is unusual for the particular game played.
In some embodiments, information regarding the average improvement in percentile standing for a participant and/or for the group of participants within a particular skill level for the game is stored to the participant's mobile device by using software that has been loaded into the participant's mobile device memory and/or that has been downloaded with an application's program. These embodiments continuously compare each participant's current percentile standing to the stored information that includes the improvement factors previously described.
For some embodiments, information is updated in realtime. This includes updating the sampling distribution representing the game-wide performance through the (realtime) two-way connections, as well as updating the broadcast participants utilizing the one-way connections. Also previously mentioned, during play of the game, performance or scoring information may be represented in some embodiments by a histogram format, which may be displayed at various times on the participant's mobile device. The histogram of these embodiments may contain the performance of a random sample of selected participants who are continually connected to the server. In some embodiments, the mobile device might generate the histogram, while for other embodiments, the histogram is broadcast to all participants by the server. The point values to win for each game being played is different and depends upon the following, among other things: the game; the difficulty of the game; and the performance of the players playing the game. Thus, the histogram is used to track the scores of a sampling of the players and communicate those scores to all of the players during the game. Each mobile device will then be able to determine bow the corresponding player is performing in the current game relative to the other players.
As previously mentioned, the server 105 illustrated in
In some embodiments, initial messages received by the system 705 are handled by the communication layer 710. In these embodiments, the communication layer 710 might include dedicated servers to handle the communication needs of a large scale hosted network game. For instance, the communication layer 710 of some embodiments includes a Connection Cluster, a Game Session Cluster, a Score Cluster, a Broadcast Cluster, and a Web Cluster, all provided by AirPlay Network, Inc. In these embodiments, the task of sending and receiving data in the processes of for example, setting up a game, providing an event list, providing game parameters during a game, and updating scores, is divided among the separate servers and/or clusters.
Also shown in
In the embodiments described above, each participant among potentially millions of participants may receive data on a one-way basis that indicates a highly accurate approximation of the participant's percentile standing after each event in real-time throughout the game. Some embodiments of the invention enable the server providing game control to utilize a one-way broadcast transmission for all but a small fraction of the participants, which significantly reduces the number of servers required to conduct a massive real time game. These embodiments also reduce the communications traffic on the cellular networks. These communications and infrastructure costs of operating the game could otherwise be insurmountable.
In addition to the benefit of providing current standings to all participants, the present invention also dramatically reduces the number of scoring calls both during and at the conclusion of an event, which represents a significant improvement over the art. The present invention establishes and maintains an ongoing two-way connection with a sample of participants throughout the game. The present invention monitors this sample and makes the information available game-wide in real-time. Therefore, the present invention does not require additional time to collect, process, and rebroadcast to the game participants instructions to later establish a two-way connection and upload scores for verification and ranking. Further, the present invention permits an almost immediate data collection, verification, and notification process, from only the most relevant group of participants in a game.
Moreover, the present invention addresses issues of integrity that are critical to a large-scale network game, which particularly may involve a number of mobile devices. A sponsor of such a large or network game offering may charge for the service and award prizes to winners. As mentioned above, the participation for such events can number potentially in the tens of millions of simultaneous subscribers, particularly by using the multicast mobile or cellular network configuration of some embodiments. However, such a game will draw little market response if the sponsor cannot maintain the integrity of the game. Issues of cheating may be addressed by employing two-way connections to closely monitor participants, but this quickly becomes impractical for large numbers of participants. Also, in some games based on rapidly unfolding events, such as a live telecast of a sporting event, the latency inherent in controlling a client utilizing a two-way connection (e.g., a cellular telephone) to a secure server makes keeping up with the telecast problematic. Some embodiments of the present invention incur the high overhead of two-way monitoring for only the set of participants who have a higher risk of cheating and/or have a high risk of winning. Such a system dramatically improves the economics of staging the network game and the quality of service for all the subscribed participants.
The present invention also provides for a system for enabling fair competition between people of similar experience or skill. It further provides for a system and method for promoting competitors to higher levels of competition as they improve with practice, knowledge and experience. The competitors are rewarded for improved performance by competing for greater prizes and being able to compete in more sophisticated and complex games by allowing modifications in the design of the game elements and rules themselves, where discrete elements of complexity are added to the games played at each higher skill level which are not available to players at a lower skill level.
A user starts out at the lowest tier of competition, where for example, he might be asked a minimal number of questions, thus keeping the game simple and fun so that the user is able to learn and perform well. By correctly answering questions and meeting a certain level of performance during the game, he is able to obtain a promotion to the next tier. Upon being promoted to the next tier of competition, the central game server determines at what tier the player is now playing and using the methods described below to cause the application software in the cell phone (client) to add levels of complexity to the game rules. Additional questions and/or increased opportunities for scoring are then provided to the user, providing more opportunities for points. Upon promotion, for example, to a third tier of skill, communication between the client and the central computer will modify software to allow the competitor to obtain an incrementing number of points for every consecutive correct prediction that they make without a wrong prediction. Preferably, the failure to make any prediction will not jeopardize this bonus. This further increases the level of sophistication of the underlying game by requiring the competitor to make a decision as to whether to venture a prediction at all. A wrong prediction would cancel an ever-increasing bonus for getting a growing number of plays, called correctly. This system also increases the total possible number of points which are able to be earned in the game at higher tiers of competition.
In a football game, there are a number of situations where users are queried as to what they predict will occur next. The users are awarded points based upon their accuracy in their predictions.
In the Challenger tier 800, the user is asked two questions, for example, what the quarterback will call next and which direction the play will go. The optional answers for the play a quarterback will call are RUN or PASS and the directional choices are LEFT, MIDDLE or RIGHT. If the user is correct in choosing PASS and LEFT, when the actual play results in a pass to the left, then the user is awarded two points, for example.
In the Champion tier 802, the user is asked the same two questions as above for the Challenger tier 800, but additional opportunities to earn points are scalable as well. For instance, if a user picks RUN, he is then queried who the runner will be: QB, HB, FB or WR. Or if a user picks PASS, he is then queried who the receiver will be: WR1, WR2, WR3, TE or RB. Jersey numbers are able to be used instead of picking by position as well. The user is also queried as to what type of specific play will be called with options such as SNEAK, DRAW, SWEEP and BOOTLEG for a RUN play or SCREEN, DEEP OUT, SLANT and POST for a PASS play. With two additional questions, a user on the Champion tier 802 has an opportunity to obtain additional points. Thus, someone on the Champion tier 802 only needs to correctly choose fifty percent of the answers correctly to achieve the same number of points as a user on the Challenger tier 800 would if he picked one hundred percent of the answers correctly. Hence, there is no comparison of scores between players at the Champion and Challenger levels.
In the Legend tier 804, the user is asked the same questions asked to the Challengers and Champions, but is then asked additional questions as well. After a user answers the Champion tier 802 questions, the user is asked what the result of the play will be with possible answers of TD, FUMBLE, INT, SACK and FIRST DOWN. Furthermore, bonus points are earned for correctly answering questions in a row. Again, at the higher tier there are more opportunities to earn more points, such that a Legend only needs to correctly predict one third of the plays to receive the same score as if the Challenger predicted perfectly. Hence, Challenger users will know not only are they are not competing against Champion users for prizes, but their scores are not comparable because they do not have the same opportunities to obtain points. Thus there will be no discouragement that the Challenger has less points because it is not a fair comparison. A Challenger can only compare himself to other Challengers.
Finally, a greatly simplified system might be utilized, wherein trial subscribers, or new customers who have not established their relative skill yet, are able to play only the simplest version of the games. After conversion to full subscribership on sufficiently establishing their relative skill, they are enabled to play a more complex version of the game available at all the rest of the skill levels.
The example demonstrated in
There are two methods that are used to expose more advanced tiers of the game to the user. The first method is to have all of the possible skills available at all tiers already coded into the application. The application will expose to the users only the possible features of the game based on the user's skill tier. As the scores are maintained in either the central computer or the client, and the promotion criteria is met, a “promotion” message is broadcast by the central computer to the client. Through this message, the next tier of skill is automatically enabled on the client without communication back to the client or intervention by the subscriber. The customer is instantly enabled to play the more sophisticated game. Concurrently, software will also be enabled to cause the client's phone to receive the game play information on the results among those players now competing at the newly enabled skill tier.
Another method that will be used is to make sure that the user has the correct version of the application based on his skill tier. The user will initially download from the central server the application that corresponds to his skill tier. Once the user starts the application, the application checks to make sure that the skill tier matches the version of the application. If the application does not match the skill tier, the application downloads from the central server the correct version. The user will also be able to download the updated application once his is promoted to a new skill tier.
The example of
To utilize the present invention, a number of steps are involved. A user must first download the software to his mobile device. The user then is able to communicate with the server via the software. The software queries the user if he wants to enter a game. The user selects a game to play where the game is coordinated with a live event such as a football game. The software prompts users to make predictions and the users select their answers at appropriate times. By selecting the proper choices, users earn points. If the user correctly answers a specified amount of questions and scores over a promotion threshold level, then the user will be promoted to the next tier to receive more advanced questions and more opportunities to earn points. Users are able to view and compare their scores with all other users even though the only comparison worth while is their score with others in the same tier as them. The scores are available to be viewed online or via the user's mobile device. Users are also able to win prizes based on how well they do in competitions.
There are numerous benefits of the present invention over the prior art. Instead of a system of skill tiers for a common game where the results of the competitors at different skill tiers would be known only to members of a specific group, the present invention allows all competitors to view all of the scores. The Internet allows subscribers of the service to view all results, and since all competitors competed in a single game in the prior art, users would directly compare all of their scores even Challengers with Legends. However, in the present invention, since at each discrete tier there is a separate copyrightable game, specifically designed with elements that allow increased point values at each skill tier, comparisons of one's score in the entry tier to the scores of the next highest tier, are meaningless. In its full embodiment, the games and the score potential are completely different at each tier. Competitors who will never advance far through the tiers of competition can be content to compete with people at their own skill tier. In a subscription-based business, the elimination of negative feedback from the comparison of one's score to those playing an identical game at a higher tier will increase customer satisfaction and correspondingly decrease customer “chum” or voluntary disconnect. A decrease by a small fraction in customer chum has significant impact on a service's profitability.
In addition, eliminating complex alternatives from the games played for entry tier competitors makes the games easier to lean, a fundamental requirement for the success of any game. On the other hand, a successful game must also be difficult to master. The present invention provides the incentive for a competitor who has now reached the top level of their tier, and is on the verge of promotion, the incentive of not only the opportunity to increase the level of prizes which can be won at their new level of skill, but rewards them by providing an increasingly richer game with more sophisticated decisions and challenges.
The present invention has been described in terms of specific embodiments incorporating details to facilitate the understanding of principles of construction and operation of the invention. Such reference herein to specific embodiments and details thereof is not intended to limit the scope of the claims appended hereto. It will be readily apparent to one skilled in the art that other various modifications may be made in the embodiment chosen for illustration without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the claims.
This Patent Application is a continuation application of the co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/298,901, filed Dec. 9, 2005 and entitled “A GAME OF SKILL PLAYED BY REMOTE PARTICIPANTS UTILIZING WIRELESS DEVICES IN CONNECTION WITH A COMMON GAME EVENT,” which claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) of the co-owned U.S. Provisional Patent Application, Ser. No. 60/635,221, filed Dec. 10, 2004, and entitled “A GAME OF SKILL PLAYED BY REMOTE PARTICIPANTS UTILIZING WIRELESS DEVICES SUCH AS CELL PHONES IN CONNECTION WITH A COMMON GAME EVENT WHERE PARTICIPANTS ARE GROUPED BY RELATIVE SKILL.” The U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/298,901, filed Dec. 9, 2005 and entitled “A GAME OF SKILL PLAYED BY REMOTE PARTICIPANTS UTILIZING WIRELESS DEVICES IN CONNECTION WITH A COMMON GAME EVENT,” and the Provisional Patent Application, Ser. No. 60/635,221, filed Dec. 10, 2004, and entitled “A GAME OF SKILL PLAYED BY REMOTE PARTICIPANTS UTILIZING WIRELESS DEVICES SUCH AS CELL PHONES IN CONNECTION WITH A COMMON GAME EVENT WHERE PARTICIPANTS ARE GROUPED BY RELATIVE SKILL” are all also hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. The patent application Ser. No. 11/298,901, filed Dec. 9, 2005 and entitled “A GAME OF SKILL PLAYED BY REMOTE PARTICIPANTS UTILIZING WIRELESS DEVICES IN CONNECTION WITH A COMMON GAME EVENT,” is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/166,596, filed on Jun. 24, 2005 and entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR DISTRIBUTED GAMING OVER A MOBILE DEVICE” which claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) of the U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/588,273, filed Jul. 14, 2004 and entitled “A METHODOLOGY FOR PROVIDING ALL CONTESTANTS IN GAMES OF SKILL PLAYABLE ON CELL PHONES WITH THEIR CURRENT STANDING WHILE RECEIVING GAME CONTROL INFORMATION ONE-WAY VIA A ‘BROADCAST’ TRANSMISSION.” The U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/166,596, filed on Jun. 24, 2005 and entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR DISTRIBUTED GAMING OVER A MOBILE DEVICE” and the U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/588,273, filed Jul. 14, 2004 and entitled “A METHODOLOGY FOR PROVIDING ALL CONTESTANTS IN GAMES OF SKILL PLAYABLE ON CELL PHONES WITH THEIR CURRENT STANDING WHILE RECEIVING GAME CONTROL INFORMATION ONE-WAY VIA A ‘BROADCAST’ TRANSMISSION” are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2831105 | Parker | Apr 1958 | A |
3562650 | Gossard et al. | Feb 1971 | A |
4141548 | Everton | Feb 1979 | A |
4270755 | Willhide et al. | Jun 1981 | A |
4386377 | Hunter, Jr. | May 1983 | A |
4496148 | Morstain et al. | Jan 1985 | A |
4521803 | Gittinger | Jun 1985 | A |
4592546 | Fascenda et al. | Jun 1986 | A |
4816904 | McKenna et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4918603 | Hughes et al. | Apr 1990 | A |
4930010 | MacDonald | May 1990 | A |
5013038 | Luvenberg | May 1991 | A |
5018736 | Pearson et al. | May 1991 | A |
5035422 | Berman | Jul 1991 | A |
5073931 | Audebert et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5083271 | Thatcher et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5083800 | Lockton | Jan 1992 | A |
5119295 | Kapur | Jun 1992 | A |
5120076 | Luxenberg et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5213337 | Sherman | May 1993 | A |
5227874 | Von Kohom | Jul 1993 | A |
5256863 | Ferguson | Oct 1993 | A |
5263723 | Pearson et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5283734 | Von Kohom | Feb 1994 | A |
5327485 | Leaden | Jul 1994 | A |
5343236 | Koppe et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5343239 | Lappington et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5417424 | Snowden | May 1995 | A |
5462275 | Lowe et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5479492 | Hofstee et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5488659 | Miliani | Jan 1996 | A |
5519433 | Lappington | May 1996 | A |
5530483 | Cooper | Jun 1996 | A |
5553120 | Katz | Sep 1996 | A |
5566291 | Boulton et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5585975 | Bliss | Dec 1996 | A |
5586257 | Perlman | Dec 1996 | A |
5589765 | Ohmart et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5594938 | Engel | Jan 1997 | A |
5618232 | Martin | Apr 1997 | A |
5628684 | Jean-Etienne | May 1997 | A |
5636920 | Shur et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5638113 | Lappington | Jun 1997 | A |
5643088 | Vaughn et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5663757 | Morales | Sep 1997 | A |
5759101 | Won Kohom | Jun 1998 | A |
5761606 | Wolzien | Jun 1998 | A |
5762552 | Voung et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5764275 | Lappington et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5794210 | Goldhaber et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5805230 | Staron | Sep 1998 | A |
5813913 | Bemer et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5818438 | Howe et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5828843 | Grimm | Oct 1998 | A |
5838774 | Weiser, Jr. | Nov 1998 | A |
5846132 | Junkin | Dec 1998 | A |
5848397 | Marsh et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5860862 | Junkin | Jan 1999 | A |
5894556 | Grimm | Apr 1999 | A |
5916024 | Von Kohom | Jun 1999 | A |
5870683 | Wells et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5970143 | Schneier et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5971854 | Pearson et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5987440 | O'Neil et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6009458 | Hawkins et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6015344 | Kelly et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6016337 | Pykalisto | Jan 2000 | A |
6042477 | Addink | Mar 2000 | A |
6064449 | White | May 2000 | A |
6104815 | Alcorn et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6110041 | Walker et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6117013 | Elba | Sep 2000 | A |
6126543 | Friedman | Oct 2000 | A |
6128660 | Grimm | Oct 2000 | A |
6135881 | Abbott et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6174237 | Stephenson | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6182084 | Cockrell et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6193610 | Junkin | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6222642 | Farrell et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6233736 | Wolzien | May 2001 | B1 |
6251017 | Leason et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6267670 | Walker | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6287199 | McKeown et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6293868 | Bernard | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6312336 | Handelman et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6345297 | Grimm | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6371855 | Gavriloff | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6373462 | Pan | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6411969 | Tam | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6416414 | Stadelmann | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6425828 | Walker et al. | Jul 2002 | B2 |
6434398 | Inselberg | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6470180 | Kotzin et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6475090 | Gregory | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6524189 | Rautila | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6527641 | Sinclair et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6530082 | Del Sesto et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6536037 | Guheen et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6578068 | Bowma-Amuah | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6594098 | Sutardja | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6604997 | Saidakovsky et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6610953 | Tao et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6611755 | Coffee | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6648760 | Nicastro | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6659860 | Yamamoto et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6659861 | Faris | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6659872 | Kaufman et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6690661 | Agarwal et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6718350 | Karbowski | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6752396 | Smith | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6758754 | Lavanchy et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6758755 | Kelly et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6760595 | Insellberg | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6763377 | Balknap et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6766524 | Matheny et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6774926 | Ellis et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785561 | Kim | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6801380 | Saturdja | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6806889 | Malaure et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6807675 | Millard et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6811482 | Letovsky | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6811487 | Sengoku | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6816628 | Sarachik et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6817947 | Tanskanen | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6824469 | Allibhoy et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6837789 | Garahi et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6837791 | McNutt et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6840861 | Jordan et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6845389 | Sen | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6846239 | Washio | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6857122 | Takeda et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6863610 | Vancraeynest | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6870720 | Iwata et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6871226 | Ensley et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6873610 | Noever | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6884166 | Leen et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6884172 | Lloyd et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6887159 | Leen et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6888929 | Saylor | May 2005 | B1 |
6893347 | Zilliacus et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6898762 | Ellis et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6899628 | Leen et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6903681 | Faris | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6908389 | Puskala | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6942574 | LeMay et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6944228 | Dakss et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6960088 | Long | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6978053 | Sarachik et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7001279 | Barber et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7029394 | Leen et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7035626 | Luciano, Jr. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7035653 | Simon et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7058592 | Heckerman et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7076434 | Newnam et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7085552 | Buckley | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7116310 | Evans et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7117517 | Milazzo et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7120924 | Katcher et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7125336 | Anttila et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7136871 | Ozer et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7144011 | Asher et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7169050 | Tyler | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7191447 | Ellis et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7192352 | Walker et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7194758 | Waki et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7228349 | Barone, Jr. et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7231630 | Acott et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7233922 | Asher et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7240093 | Danieli et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7244181 | Wang et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7249367 | Bove, Jr. et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7254605 | Strum | Aug 2007 | B1 |
7260782 | Wallace et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
RE39818 | Slifer | Sep 2007 | E |
7283830 | Buckley | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7288027 | Overton | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7341517 | Asher et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7343617 | Kartcher et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7347781 | Schultz | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7351149 | Simon et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7367042 | Dakss et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7379705 | Rados et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7389144 | Osorio | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7430718 | Gariepy-Viles | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7452273 | Amaitis et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7460037 | Cattone et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7461067 | Dewing et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7502610 | Maher | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7517282 | Pryor | Apr 2009 | B1 |
7534169 | Amaitis et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7562134 | Fingerhut et al. | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7614944 | Hughes et al. | Nov 2009 | B1 |
7630986 | Herz et al. | Dec 2009 | B1 |
7693781 | Asher et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7699707 | Bahou | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7711628 | Davie et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7753772 | Walker | Jul 2010 | B1 |
7753789 | Walker et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7780528 | Hirayama | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7828661 | Fish | Nov 2010 | B1 |
7835961 | Davie et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7886003 | Newman | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7907211 | Oostveen et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7926810 | Fisher et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7937318 | Davie et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7976389 | Cannon et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8002618 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
8006314 | Wold | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8025565 | Leen et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8028315 | Barber | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8082150 | Wold | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8086445 | Wold et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8086510 | Amaitis et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8092303 | Amaitis et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8105141 | Leen et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8107674 | Davis et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8109827 | Cahill et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8128474 | Amaitis et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8147313 | Amaitis et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8149530 | Lockton et al. | Apr 2012 | B1 |
8176518 | Junkin et al. | May 2012 | B1 |
8186682 | Amaitis et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8204808 | Amaitis et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8240669 | Asher et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8246048 | Amaitis et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8267403 | Fisher et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8342924 | Leen et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8342942 | Amaitis et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8353763 | Amaitis et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8376855 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8397257 | Barber | Mar 2013 | B1 |
8465021 | Asher et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8473393 | Davie et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8474819 | Asher et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8535138 | Amaitis et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8538563 | Barber | Sep 2013 | B1 |
8543487 | Asher et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8555313 | Newman | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8556691 | Leen et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8585490 | Amaitis et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8622798 | Lockton et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8638517 | Lockton et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8641511 | Ginsberg et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8659848 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8672751 | Leen et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8699168 | Lockton et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8705195 | Lockton | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8708789 | Asher et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8717701 | Lockton et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8727352 | Amaitis et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8734227 | Leen et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8737004 | Lockton et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8738694 | Huske et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8771058 | Alderucci et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8780482 | Lockton et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8805732 | Davie et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8813112 | Cibula et al. | Aug 2014 | B1 |
8814664 | Amaitis et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8817408 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8837072 | Lockton et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8849225 | Choti | Sep 2014 | B1 |
8858313 | Selfors | Oct 2014 | B1 |
8870639 | Lockton et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8935715 | Cibula et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
9056251 | Lockton | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9067143 | Lockton et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9069651 | Barber | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9076303 | Park | Jul 2015 | B1 |
9098883 | Asher et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9111417 | Leen et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9205339 | Cibula et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9233293 | Lockton | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9258601 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9270789 | Huske et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9289692 | Barber | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9306952 | Burman et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9314686 | Lockton | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9314701 | Lockton et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9355518 | Amaitis et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9406189 | Scott et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9457272 | Lockton et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9498724 | Lockton et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9501904 | Lockton | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9504922 | Lockton et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9511287 | Lockton et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9526991 | Lockton et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9536396 | Amaitis et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9556991 | Furuya | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9604140 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9652937 | Lockton | May 2017 | B2 |
9662576 | Lockton et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9662577 | Lockton et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9672692 | Lockton | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9687738 | Lockton et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9687739 | Lockton et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9707482 | Lockton et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
9716918 | Lockton et al. | Jul 2017 | B1 |
9724603 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9744453 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9805549 | Asher et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
9821233 | Lockton et al. | Nov 2017 | B2 |
9878243 | Lockton et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
9881337 | Jaycob et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
9901820 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
9908053 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9919210 | Lockton | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9919211 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9919221 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9978217 | Lockton | May 2018 | B2 |
9993730 | Lockton et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
9999834 | Lockton et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
10052557 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2018 | B2 |
10089815 | Asher et al. | Oct 2018 | B2 |
10096210 | Amaitis et al. | Oct 2018 | B2 |
10137369 | Lockton et al. | Nov 2018 | B2 |
10150031 | Lockton et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
10165339 | Huske et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
10186116 | Lockton | Jan 2019 | B2 |
10195526 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2019 | B2 |
10226698 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2019 | B1 |
10226705 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2019 | B2 |
10232270 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2019 | B2 |
10248290 | Galfond | Apr 2019 | B2 |
20010004609 | Walker et al. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010005670 | Lahtinen | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010013125 | Kitsukawa et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010020298 | Rector, Jr. et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20010032333 | Flickinger | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010036272 | Hirayama | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010036853 | Thomas | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020010789 | Lord | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020026321 | Faris | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020029381 | Inselberg | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020035609 | Lessard | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020037766 | Muniz | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020069265 | Bountour | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020042293 | Ubale et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020046099 | Frengut et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020054088 | Tanskanen et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020055385 | Otsu | May 2002 | A1 |
20020056089 | Houston | May 2002 | A1 |
20020059094 | Hosea et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020059623 | Rodriguez et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020069076 | Faris | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020076084 | Tian | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020078176 | Nomura et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020083461 | Hutcheson | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020091833 | Grimm | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020095333 | Jokinen et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020097983 | Wallace et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020099709 | Wallace | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020100063 | Herigstad et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020103696 | Huang et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020105535 | Wallace et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020107073 | Binney | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020108112 | Wallace et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020108125 | Joao | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020108127 | Lew et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020112249 | Hendricks et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020115488 | Berry et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020119821 | Sen | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020120930 | Yona | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020124247 | Houghton | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020132614 | Vanlujit et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020133817 | Markel | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020133827 | Newman et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020142843 | Roelofs | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020144273 | Reto | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020147049 | Carter, Sr. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020157002 | Messerges et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020157005 | Brunk | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020159576 | Adams | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162031 | Levin et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162117 | Pearson | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020165020 | Koyama | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020165025 | Kawahara | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020177483 | Cannon | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020187825 | Tracy | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020198050 | Patchen | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030002638 | Kaars | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030013528 | Allibhoy et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023547 | France | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030040363 | Sandberg | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030054885 | Pinto | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030060247 | Goldberg et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030066089 | David Anderson | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030069828 | Blazey et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030070174 | Solomon | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030078924 | Liechty et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030086691 | Yu | May 2003 | A1 |
20030087652 | Simon et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030088648 | Bellaton | May 2003 | A1 |
20030114224 | Anttila et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030115152 | Flaherty | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030134678 | Tanaka | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030144017 | Inselberg | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030154242 | Hayes et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030165241 | Fransdonk | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177167 | Lafage et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177504 | Paulo et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030189668 | Newman et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195023 | Di Cesare | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195807 | Maggio | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030208579 | Brady et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030211856 | Zilliacus | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030212691 | Kuntala et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030216185 | Varley | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030216857 | Feldman et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030233425 | Lyons et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040005919 | Walker et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040014524 | Pearlman | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040022366 | Ferguson et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040056897 | Ueda | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040060063 | Russ et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040073915 | Dureau | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040025190 | McCalla | May 2004 | A1 |
20040088729 | Petrovic et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040093302 | Baker et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040152454 | Kauppinen | May 2004 | A1 |
20040107138 | Maggio | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040117831 | Ellis et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040117839 | Watson et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040128319 | Davis et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040139482 | Hale | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040148638 | Weisman et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040152517 | Hardisty | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040152519 | Wang | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040158855 | Gu et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040162124 | Barton et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040166873 | Simic | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040176162 | Rothschild | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040178923 | Kuang | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040183824 | Benson | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040185881 | Lee | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040190779 | Sarachik et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040198495 | Cisneros et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040201626 | Lavoie | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040203667 | Shroder | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040203898 | Bodin et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040210507 | Asher et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040215756 | VanAntwerp | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040216161 | Barone, Jr. et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040216171 | Barone, Jr. et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040224750 | Ai-Ziyoud | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040242321 | Overton | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040266513 | Odom | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050005303 | Barone, Jr. et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050021942 | Diehl et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050026699 | Kinzer et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050028208 | Ellis | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050043094 | Nguyen et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050076371 | Nakamura | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050060219 | Ditering et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050097599 | Potnick et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050101309 | Croome | May 2005 | A1 |
20050113164 | Buecheler et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050003878 | Updike | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050131984 | Hofmann et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050138668 | Gray et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050144102 | Johnson | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050155083 | Oh | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050177861 | Ma et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050210526 | Levy et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050216838 | Graham | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050235043 | Teodosiu et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050239551 | Griswold | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050255901 | Kreutzer | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050256895 | Dussault | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050266869 | Jung | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050273804 | Preisman | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283800 | Ellis et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288080 | Lockton et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288101 | Lockton et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288812 | Cheng | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060025070 | Kim et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060046810 | Tabata | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060047772 | Crutcher | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060053390 | Gariepy-Viles | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060058103 | Danieli | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060059161 | Millett et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060063590 | Abassi et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060082068 | Patchen | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060087585 | Seo | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060089199 | Jordan et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060111168 | Nguyen | May 2006 | A1 |
20060135253 | George et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060148569 | Beck | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060156371 | Maetz et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060174307 | Hwang et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060183547 | Mc Monigle | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060183548 | Morris et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060205483 | Meyer et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060205510 | Lauper | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060217198 | Johnson | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060236352 | Scott, III | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060248553 | Mikkelson et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060256865 | Westerman | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060256868 | Westerman | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060269120 | Nehmadi et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060285586 | Westerman | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070004516 | Jordan et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070013547 | Boaz | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070019826 | Horbach et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070028272 | Lockton | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070037623 | Romik | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070054695 | Huske et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070078009 | Lockton et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070083920 | Mizoguchi et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070086465 | Paila et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070093296 | Asher | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070106721 | Schloter | May 2007 | A1 |
20070107010 | Jolna et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070129144 | Katz | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070147870 | Nagashima et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070162328 | Reich | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070183744 | Koizumi | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070210908 | Putterman et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070219856 | Ahmad-Taylor | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070222652 | Cattone et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070226062 | Hughes et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070238525 | Suomela | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070243936 | Binenstock et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070244570 | Speiser et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070244585 | Speiser et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070244749 | Speiser et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070265089 | Robarts | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080013927 | Kelly et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080051201 | Lore | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080066129 | Katcher et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080076497 | Kiskis et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080104630 | Bruce | May 2008 | A1 |
20080146337 | Halonen | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080169605 | Shuster et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080240681 | Fukushima | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080248865 | Tedesco | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080270288 | Butterly et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080288600 | Clark | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090011781 | Merrill et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090094632 | Newman et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090103892 | Hirayama | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090186676 | Amaitis et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090163271 | George et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090228351 | Rijsenbrij | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090234674 | Wurster | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090264188 | Soukup | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100099421 | Patel et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100099471 | Feeney et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100107194 | McKissick et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100120503 | Hoffman et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100137057 | Fleming | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100203936 | Levy | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100279764 | Allen et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110053681 | Goldman | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110065490 | Lutnick | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110081958 | Herman | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110130197 | Bythar et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110227287 | Reabe | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110269548 | Barclay et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110306428 | Lockton et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120058808 | Lockton | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120115585 | Goldman | May 2012 | A1 |
20120157178 | Lockton | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120264496 | Behrman et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120282995 | Allen et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120295686 | Lockton | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20130005453 | Nguyen et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130072271 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130079081 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130079092 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130079093 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130079135 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130079150 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130079151 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130196774 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130225285 | Lockton | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130225299 | Lockton | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20140031134 | Lockton et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140100011 | Gingher | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140106832 | Lockton et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140128139 | Shuster et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140155130 | Lockton et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140155134 | Lockton | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140206446 | Lockton et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140237025 | Huske et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140248952 | Cibula et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140256432 | Lockton et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140279439 | Brown | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140287832 | Lockton et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140335961 | Lockton et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140335962 | Lockton et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140378212 | Sims | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150011310 | Lockton et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150067732 | Howe et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150148130 | Cibula et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150238839 | Lockton | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150238873 | Arnone et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150258452 | Lockton et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20160023116 | Wire | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160045824 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160049049 | Lockton | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160054872 | Cibula et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160082357 | Lockton | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160121208 | Lockton et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160134947 | Huske et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160217653 | Beyer | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160271501 | Balsbaugh | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160361647 | Lockton et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160375362 | Lockton et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170036110 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170036117 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170043259 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170053498 | Lockton | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170065891 | Lockton et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170098348 | Odom | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170103615 | Theodospoulos | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170128840 | Croci | May 2017 | A1 |
20170221314 | Lockton | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170225071 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170225072 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170232340 | Lockton | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170243438 | Merati | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170249801 | Malek | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170252649 | Lockton et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170259173 | Lockton et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170264961 | Lockton | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170282067 | Lockton et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170296916 | Lockton et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170304726 | Lockton et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170345260 | Strause | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20180025586 | Lockton | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180071637 | Baazov | Mar 2018 | A1 |
20180104582 | Lockton et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180104596 | Lockton et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180117464 | Lockton et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
20180140955 | Lockton et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
20180154255 | Lockton | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180169523 | Lockton et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180190077 | Hall | Jul 2018 | A1 |
20180236359 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180243652 | Lockton et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180264360 | Lockton et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
20180300988 | Lockton | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180318710 | Lockton et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20190054375 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2019 | A1 |
20190060750 | Lockton et al. | Feb 2019 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2252074 | Nov 1997 | CA |
2252021 | Nov 1998 | CA |
2279069 | Jul 1999 | CA |
2287617 | Oct 1999 | CA |
0649102 | Jun 1996 | EP |
2364485 | Jan 2002 | GB |
11-46356 | Feb 1999 | JP |
11-239183 | Aug 1999 | JP |
2000-165840 | Jun 2000 | JP |
2000-217094 | Aug 2000 | JP |
2000-358255 | Dec 2000 | JP |
2001-28743 | Jan 2001 | JP |
2000-209563 | Jul 2008 | JP |
330242 | Oct 1989 | NZ |
01039506 | May 2001 | WO |
0165743 | Sep 2001 | WO |
0203698 | Oct 2002 | WO |
2005064506 | Jul 2005 | WO |
2006004855 | Jan 2006 | WO |
2006004856 | Jan 2006 | WO |
2007002284 | Jan 2007 | WO |
2007016575 | Feb 2007 | WO |
2007041667 | Apr 2007 | WO |
2008027811 | Mar 2008 | WO |
2008115858 | Sep 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Two Way TV Patent and Filing Map www.twowaytv.com/version4/technologiesitech_patents.asp. |
‘Ark 4.0 Standard Edition, Technical Overview ’www.twowaytv.com/version4/technologies/tech_ark_professionals.asp. |
“Understanding the Interactivity Between Television and Mobile commerce”, Robert Davis and David Yung, Communications of the ACM, Jul. 2005, vol. 48, No. 7, pp. 103-105. |
“Re: Multicast Based Voting System” www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/mbone-eu-op/1997/msg00100html. |
“IST and Sportal.com: Live on the Internet Sep. 14, 2004 by Clare Spoonheim”, www.isk.co.usk/NEWS/dotcom/ist_sportal.html. |
“Modeling User Behavior in Networked Games byTristan Henderson and Saleem Bhatti”, www.woodworm.cs.uml.edu/rprice/ep/henderson. |
“SMS Based Voting and Survey System for Meetings”, www.abbit.be/technology/SMSSURVEY.html. |
“PurpleAce Launches 3GSM Ringtone Competition”, www.wirelessdevnet.com/news/2005/jan/31/news6html. |
“On the Perfomance of Protocols for collecting Responses over a Multiple-Access Channel”, Mostafa H. Ammar and George N. Rouskas, IEEE INCOMFORM '91, pp. 1490-1499, vol. 3, IEEE, New York, NY. |
Merriam-Webster, “Game” definition, <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agme.pg.1. |
Ducheneaut et al., “The Social Side of Gaming: A Study of Interaction Patterns in a Massively Multiplayer Online Game”, Palo Alto Research Center, Nov. 2004, vol. 6, Issue 4, pp. 360-369. |
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/tourn/tourn-03.html. |
Pinnacle, “The basics of reverse line movement,” Jan. 19, 2018, Retrieved on Jan. 22, 2020 , http://www.pinnacle.com/en/betting-articles educational/basics-of-reverse-line-movement/QAH26XGGQQS7M3GD. |
Gambling Commission,“Virtual currencies, eSports and social casino gaming-position paper,” Mar. 2017, Retrieved on Jan. 22, 2020, http://gamblingcomission.gov.uk/PDF/Virtual-currencies-eSports-and-social-casino-gaming.pdf. |
Sipko et al.,“Machine learning for the prediction of professional tennis matches,” In: MEng computing-final year project, Imperial College London, Jun. 15, 2015, http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/teaching/distinguished-projects/2015/m.sipko.pdf. |
Winview Game Producer, “Live TV Sports Play Along App WinView Games Announces Sponsorship With PepsiCo to Start This Holiday Season,” In Winview Games. Dec. 21, 2016, Retrieved on Jan. 21, 2020 from , http://www.winviewgames./press-release/live-tv-sports-play-along-app-winview-games-announces-sponsorship-pepsico-start-holiday-season/. |
The International Search Report and the Written Opinion for the PCT/US2019/054859 dated Feb. 4, 2020. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190168114 A1 | Jun 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60635221 | Dec 2004 | US | |
60588273 | Jul 2004 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11298901 | Dec 2005 | US |
Child | 16266081 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11166596 | Jun 2005 | US |
Child | 11298901 | US |