Linear predictive coding implementation of digital watermarks

Abstract
Z-transform calculations may be used to encode (and/or decode) carrier signal independent data (e.g., digital watermarks) to a digital sample stream. Deterministic and non-deterministic components of a digital sample stream signal may be analyzed for the purposes of encoding carrier signal independent data to the digital sample stream. The carrier signal independent data may be encoded in a manner such that it is restricted or concentrated primarily in the non-deterministic signal components of the carrier signal. The signal components can include a discrete series of digital samples and/or a discreet series of carrier frequency sub-bands of the carrier signal. Z-transform calculations may be used to measure a desirability of particular locations and a sample stream in which to encode the carrier signal independent data.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Digital distribution of multimedia content (audio, video, etc.) and the impending convergence of industries that seek to make this goal a reality (computer, telecommunications, media, electric power, etc.) collide with the simplicity of making perfect digital copies. There exists a vacuum in which content creators resist shifts to full digital distribution systems for their digitized works, due to the lack of a means to protect the copyrights of these works. In order to make such copyright protection possible, there must exist a mechanism to differentiate between a master and any of its derivative copies. The advent of digital watermarks makes such differentiation possible. With differentiation, assigning responsibility for copies as they are distributed can assist in the support and protection of underlying copyrights and other “neighboring rights,” as well as, the implementation of secure metering, marketing, and other as yet still undecided applications. Schemes that promote encryption, cryptographic containers, closed systems, and the like attempt to shift control of copyrights from their owners to third parties, requiring escrow of masters and payment for analysis of suspect, pirated copies. A frame-based, master-independent, multi-channel watermark system is disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/489,172 filed on Jun. 7, 1995 and entitled “STEGANOGRAPHIC METHOD AND DEVICE” (now U.S. Pat. No. 5,613,004 issued Mar. 18, 1997), U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/587,944 filed on Jan. 17, 1996 and entitled “METHOD FOR HUMAN-ASSISTED RANDOM KEY GENERATION AND APPLICATION FOR DIGITAL WATERMARK SYSTEM” (now U.S. Pat. No. 5,822,432 issued Oct. 13, 1998), and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/587,943 filed on Jan. 16, 1996 and entitled “METHOD FOR STEGA-CIPHER PROTECTION OF COMPUTER CODE” (now U.S. Pat. No. 5,745,569 issued Apr. 28, 1998). These applications describe methods by which copyright holders can watermark and maintain control over their own content. Any suspect copies carry all necessary copyright or other “rights” information within the digitized signal and possession of an authorized “key” and the software (or even hardware) described in these applications would make determination of ownership or other important issues a simple operation for the rights holder or enforcer.


Optimizing watermark insertion into a given signal is further described in the U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/677,435 filed on Jul. 2, 1996 and entitled “OPTIMIZATION METHODS FOR THE INSERTION, PROJECTION AND DETECTION OF DIGITAL WATERMARKS IN DIGITIZED DATA”, (now U.S. Pat. No. 5,889,868 issued Mar. 30, 1999). This application discloses accounting for the wide range of digitally-sampled signals including audio, video, and derivations thereof that may constitute a “multimedia” signal. The optimization techniques described in that application take into account the two components of all digitization systems: error coding and digital filters. The premise is to provide a better framework or definition of the actual “aesthetic” that comprises the signal being reproduced, whether through commercial standards of output (NTSC, CD-quality audio, etc.) or lossless and lossy compression (MPEG-2, Perceptual Audio Coding, AC-3, Linear Adaptive Coding, and the like), so that a watermark may be targeted at precisely the part of the signal comprising such an “aesthetic” in order that it be as robust as possible (i.e., difficult to remove without damaging the perceptual quality of the signal). However the content is stored, the signal still carries the digital watermark. Additionally, transmission media may be characterized as a set of “filters” that may be pre-analyzed to determine the best “areas” of the signal in which watermarks “should” be encoded, to preserve watermarks in derivative copies and ensure maximum destruction of the main, carrier signal when attempts are made to erase or alter the watermarked content.


Optimal planning of digital watermark insertion can be based on the inversion of digital filters to establish or map areas comprising a given content signal's “insertion envelope.” That is, the results of the filter operation are considered in order to “back out” a solution. In the context of this discussion, the phrase “inverting” a filter may mean, alternatively, mathematical inversion, or the normal computation of the filter to observe what its effect would be, were that filter applied at a later time. Planning operations will vary for given digitized content: audio, video, multimedia, etc. Planning will also vary depending on where a given “watermarker” is in the distribution chain and what particular information needs that user has in encoding a given set of information fields into the underlying content. The disclosures described take into account discrete-time signal processing which can be accomplished with Fast Fourier Transforms that are well-known in the art of digital signal processing. Signal characteristics are also deemed important: a specific method for analysis of such characteristics and subsequent digital watermarking is disclosed in further detail in this application. The antecedents of the present invention cover time and frequency domain processing, which can be used to examine signal characteristics and make modifications to the signal. A third way would be to process with z-transforms that can establish signal characteristics in a very precise manner over discrete instances of time. In particular, z-transform calculations can be used to separate the deterministic, or readily predictable, components of a signal from the non-deterministic (unpredictable or random) components. It should be apparent to those skilled in the art that non-deterministic is a subjective term whose interpretation is implicitly affected by processing power, memory, and time restrictions. With unlimited DSP (digital signal processing) power, memory, and time to process, we might theoretically predict every component of a signal. However, practicality imposes limitations. The results of the z-transform calculations will yield an estimator of the signal in the form of a deterministic approximation. The difference between a signal reconstituted from the deterministic estimator and the real signal can be referred to as error, and the error in an estimator can be further analyzed for statistical characteristics. Those skilled in the art will be aware that Linear Predictive Coding (LPC) techniques make use of these properties. So the error can be modeled, but is difficult to reproduce exactly from compressed representations. In essence, this error represents the randomness in a signal which is hard to compress or reproduce, but in fact may contribute significantly to the gestalt perception of the signal.


The more elements of error determined with z-transforms, the better able a party is at determining just what parts of a given carrier signal are deterministic, and thus predictable, and what elements are random. The less predictable the watermark-bearing portion of a signal is and the more it contributes to the perception of the signal, as previously disclosed, the more secure a digital watermark can be made. Z-transform analysis would disclose just which phase components are deterministic and which are random. This is because it is difficult to compress or otherwise remove unpredictable signal components. Error analysis further describes the existence of error function components and would reliably predict what signals or data may later be removed by additional z-transform analysis or other compression techniques. In effect, the error analysis indicates how good an approximation can be made, another way of stating how predictable a signal is, and by implication, how much randomness it contains. Z-transforms are thus a specialized means to optimize watermark insertion and maximize the resulting security of encoded data from attempts at tampering. The results of a Z-transform of input samples could be analyzed to see “exactly” how they approximate the signal, and how much room there is for encoding watermarks in a manner that they will not be removed by compression techniques which preserve a high degree of reproduction quality.


Time is typically described as a single independent variable in signal processing operations but in many cases operations can be generalized to multidimensional or multichannel signals. Analog signals are defined continuously over time, while digital signals are sampled at discrete time intervals to provide a relatively compact function, suitable for storage on a CD, for instance, defined only at regularly demarcated intervals of time. The accrued variables over time provide a discrete-time signal that is an approximation of the actual non-discrete analog signal. This discreteness is the basis of a digital signal. If time is unbounded and the signal comprises all possible values, a continuous-valued signal results. The method for converting a continuous-valued signal into a discrete time value is known as sampling. Sampling requires quantization and quantization implies error. Quantization and sampling are thus an approximation process.


Discreteness is typically established in order to perform digital signal processing. The issue of deterministic versus random signals is based on the ability to mathematically predict output values of a signal function at a specific time given a certain number of previous outputs of the function. These predictions are the basis of functions that can replicate a given signal for reproduction purposes. When such predictions are mathematically too complicated or are not reasonably accurate, statistical techniques may be used to describe the probabilistic characteristics of the signal. In many real world applications, however, determinations of whether a signal, or part of a signal, is indeed random or not is difficult at best. The watermark systems described in earlier disclosures mentioned above have a basis in analyzing signals so that analysis of discrete time frames can be made to insert information into the signal being watermarked. When signal characteristics are measured, a key factor in securely encoding digital watermarks is the ability to encode data into a carrier signal in a way that mimics randomness or pseudo randomness so that unauthorized attempts at erasing the watermark necessarily require damage to the content signal. Any randomness that exists as a part of the signal, however, should be estimated in order that a party seeking to optimally watermark the input signal can determine the best location for watermark information and to make any subsequent analysis to determine the location of said watermarks more difficult. Again, typical implementations of signal processing that use z-transforms seek to describe what parts of the signal are deterministic so that they may be described as a compact, predictable function so that the signal maybe faithfully reproduced. This is the basis for so-called linear predictive coding techniques used for compression. The present invention is concerned with descriptions of the signal to better define just what parts of the signal are random so that digital watermarks may be inserted in a manner that would make them more or less tamperproof without damage to the carrier signal. Additional goals of the system are dynamic analysis of a signal at discrete time intervals so that watermarks may be dynamically adjusted to the needs of users in such instances as on-the-fly encoding of watermarks or distribution via transmission media (telephone, cable, electric powerlines, wireless, etc.)


Signal characteristics, if they can be reasonably defined, are also important clues as to what portion or portions of a given signal comprise the “aesthetically valuable” output signal commonly known as music or video. As such, perceptual coding or linear predictive coding is a means to accurately reproduce a signal, with significant compression, in a manner that perfectly replicates the original signal (lossless compression) or nearly replicates the signal (lossy compression). One tool to make better evaluations of the underlying signal includes the class of linear time-invariant (LTI) systems. As pointed out in Digital Signal Processing (Principles, Algorithms, and Applications), 3rd Ed. (Proakis and Manolakis), (also Practical DSP Modeling, Techniques, and Programming in C by Don Morgan) the z-transform makes possible analysis of a continuous-time signal in the same manner as discrete-time signals because of the relationship between “the convolution of two time domain signals is equivalent to multiplication of their corresponding z-transforms.” It should be clear that characterization and analysis of LTI systems is useful in digital signal processing; meaning DSP can use a z-transform and invert the z-transform to deterministically summarize and recreate a signal's time domain representation. Z-transforms can thus be used as a mathematical way in which to describe a signal's time domain representation where that signal may not be readily processed by means of a Fourier transform. A goal of the present invention is to use such analysis so as to describe optimal locations for watermarks in signals which typically have components both of deterministic and non-deterministic (predictable and unpredictable, respectively) nature. Such insertion would inherently benefit a system seeking to insert digital watermarks, that contain sensitive information such as copyrights, distribution agreements, marketing information, bandwidth rights, more general “neighboring rights,” and the like, in locations in the signal which are not easily accessible to unauthorized parties and which cannot be removed without damaging the signal. Such a technique for determining watermark location will help ensure “pirates” must damage the content in attempts at removal, the price paid without a legitimate “key.”


Some discussion of proposed systems for a frequency-based encoding of “digital watermarks” is necessary to differentiate the antecedents of the present invention which processes signals frame-by-frame and may insert information into frequencies without requiring the resulting watermark to be continuous throughout the entire clip of the signal. U.S. Pat. No. 5,319,735 to Preuss et al. discusses a spread spectrum method that would allow for jamming via overencoding of a “watermarked” frequency range and is severely limited in the amount of data that can be encoded—4.3 8-bit symbols per second. Randomization attacks will not result in audible artifacts in the carrier signal, or degradation of the content as the information signal is subaudible due to frequency masking. Decoding can be broken by a slight change in the playback speed. It is important to note the difference in application between spread spectrum in military field use for protection of real-time radio signals versus encoding information into static audio files. In the protection of real-time communications, spread spectrum has anti jam features since information is sent over several channels at once, and in order to jam the signal, you have to jam all channels, including your own. In a static audio file, however, an attacker has all the time and processing power in the world to randomize each sub-channel in the signaling band with no penalty to themselves, so the anti jam features of spread spectrum do not extend to this domain if the encoding is sub-audible. Choosing where to encode in a super-audible range of the frequency, as is possible with the present invention's antecedents, can better be accomplished by computing the z-transforms of the underlying content signal, in order to ascertain the suitability of particular locations in the signal for watermark information.


Instead of putting a single subaudible, digital signature in a sub-band as is further proposed by such entities as NEC, IBM, Digimarc, and MIT Media Lab, the antecedent inventions' improvement is its emphasis on frame-based encoding that can result in the decoding of watermarks from clips of the original full signal (10 seconds, say, of a 3 minute song). With signatures described in MIT's PixelTag or Digimarc/NEC proposals, clipping of the “carrier signal” (presently only based on results from tests on images, not video or audio signals which have time domains), results in clipping of the underlying watermark. Additionally, the present invention improves on previous implementations by providing an alternative computational medium to time/amplitude or frequency/energy domain (Fourier Transform) calculations and providing an additional measure by which to distinguish parts of a signal which are better suited to preserve watermarks through various DSP operations and force damage when attempts at erasure of the watermarks are undertaken. Further, the necessity of archiving or putting in escrow a master copy for comparison with suspect derivative copies would be unnecessary with the present invention and its proposed antecedents. Further, statistical techniques, not mathematical formulas, that are used to determine a “match” of a clip of a carrier signal to the original signal, both uneconomical and unreasonable, would not be necessary to establish ownership or other information about the suspect clip. Even if such techniques or stochastic processes are used, as in an audio spread-spectrum-based watermarking system being proposed by Thorn-EMI's CRL, called ICE, the further inability to decode a text file or other similar file that has been encoded using a watermark system as previously disclosed by above-mentioned U.S. patent applications including “Steganographic Method and Device”, “Method for Human-Assisted Random Key Generation and Application for Digital Watermark System”, “Method for Stega-cipher Protection of Computer Code”, and “Optimal Methods for the insertion, Protection and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digitized Data”, where all “watermark information” resides in the derivative copy of a carrier signal and its clips (if there has been clipping), would seem archaic and fail to suit the needs of artists, content creators, broadcasters, distributors, and their agents. Indeed, reports are that decoding untampered watermarks with ICE in an audio file experience “statistical” error rates as high as 40%. This is a poor form of “authentication” and fails to establish more clearly “rights” or ownership over a given derivative copy. Human listening tests would appear a better means of authentication versus such “probabalistic determination”. This would be especially true if such systems contain no provision to prevent purely random false-positive results, as is probable, with “spread spectrum” or similar “embedded signaling”—type “watermarks,” or actually, with a better definition, frequency-based, digital signatures.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to a method of using z-transform calculations to encode (and/or decode) independent data (e.g., digital watermark data) to a digital sample stream.


The present invention additionally relates to a method of analyzing deterministic and non-deterministic components of a signal comprised of a digital sample stream. Carrier signal independent data is encoded in the digital sample stream and encoding of the carrier signal independent data is implemented in a manner such that it is restricted to or concentrated primarily in the non-deterministic signal components of the carrier signal. The signal components can include a discrete series of digital samples and/or a discrete series of frequency sub-bands of the carrier signal.


The present invention additionally relates to a method of using z-transform calculations to measure a desirability of particular locations of a sample stream in which to encode carrier signal independent data. The desirability includes a difficulty in predicting a component of the sample stream at a given location which can be measured by the error function.


The component and location may be comprised of information regarding at least one of the following: wave, amplitude, frequency, band energy, and phase energy. The present invention additionally relates to a method of encoding digital watermarks at varying locations in a sample stream with varying envelope parameters.


The present invention additionally relates to a method of using z-transform calculations to determine portions of a signal which may be successfully compressed or eliminated using certain processing techniques, without adverse impact on signal quality.


The present invention additionally relates to a method of encoding a digital watermark into a digital sample stream such that the watermark information is carried entirely in the most non-deterministic portions of the signal.







DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The Z-transform is a way of describing the characteristics of a signal. It is an alternative to time/amplitude and frequency/energy domain measures which expresses an estimate of periodic components of a discrete signal. In a digital signal processing environment, a sampling theorem, known specifically as the Nyquist Theorem, proves that band limited signals can be sampled, stored, processed, transmitted, reconstructed, desampled or processed as discrete values. For the theorem to hold, the sampling must be done at a frequency that is twice the frequency of the highest signal frequency one seeks to capture and reproduce. The time and frequency domains are thus implicitly important in developing functions that can accurately replicate a signal. In a third domain, the z-transform enables analysis of the periodic nature of discrete-time signals (and linear time-invariant systems) much as the Laplace transform plays a role in the analysis of continuous-time signals (and linear time-invariant systems). The difference is that the z-transform expresses results on the so-called z-plane, an imaginary mathematical construct which may be thought of as a Cartesian coordinate system with one axis replaced by imaginary numbers (numbers expressed in relation to the square root of −1). This may allow manipulations of signals which are not possible with Fourier Transform analyses (the frequency/energy domain). At the least, the z-transform is an alternative way to represent a signal. The imaginary number axis serves as a representation of the phase of the signal, where the phase oscillates through an ordered, bounded set of values over a potentially infinite series of discrete time values. Phase is the framework for representing the periodic nature of the signal. This third method of describing a discrete-time signal has the property of equating the convolution of two time-domain signals in the result of the multiplication of those signals' corresponding z-transforms. By inverting a z-transform, the time-domain representation of the signal may be approximately or wholly reconstructed.


To better define the z-transform, it is a power series of a discrete-time signal and is mathematically described hence:







X


(
z
)


=




n
=

-












x


(
n
)




z

-
n








where, x(n) is a discrete-time signal X(z) is a complex plane representation z is a complex variable


Because the z-transform is an infinite power series, a region of convergence (ROC) is the set of all values of z where X(z) has a finite value, in other words, this is where the series has a computable value. Conversely, nonconvergence would mean randomness of the signal.


Where z=0 or z=∞, the series is unbounded and thus the z-plane cannot be defined. What is required is a closed form expression that can only be described with a region of convergence (ROC) being specified. A coordinate in the imaginary z-plane can be interpreted to convey both amplitude and phase information. Phase is closely related to frequency information. Again, phase can be understood to oscillate at regular periods over infinite discrete time intervals, and is used to express information on the periodic nature of signals. Thus, as an alternative representation of a signal, the z-transform helps describe how a signal changes over time.


Some parameters of the region of convergence (ROC) necessitate the establishment of the duration (finite versus infinite) and whether the ROC is causal, anticasual, or two-sided. Special cases of signals include one that has an infinite duration on the right side, but not the left side; an infinite duration on the left side, but not the right side; and, one that has a finite duration on both the right and left sides—known, respectively, as right-sided, left-sided, and finite-duration two-sided. Additionally, in order to correctly obtain the time domain information of a signal from its z-transform, further analysis is done. When a signal's z-transform is known the signal's sequence must be established to describe the time domain of the signal—a procedure known as inverse z-transform, Cauchy integral theorem is an inversion formula typically used. Properties of the z-transform will now be described so that those skilled in the art are able to understand the range of computations in which z-transforms may be used for watermark related calculations.


Property Time Domain z-Domain ROC Notation x(n) X(z) ROC: r.sub.2<[z]<r.sub.1 x.sub.1 (n) X.sub.1 (z) ROC.sub.1 x.sub.2 (n) X.sub.2 (z) ROC.sub.2 Linearity a.sub.1 x.sub.1 (n)+a.sub.2x.sub.2 (n) a.sub.1 X.sub.1 (z)+a.sub.2 X.sub.2 (z) At least the intersection of ROC.sub.1 and ROC.sub.2 Time shifting x(n−k) z.sup.−k X(z) That of X(z), except z=0 if k>0 nd z=.infin. if k>0 Scaling in the z-domain a.sup.n x(n) X(a.sup.−1 z) [a]r.sub.2<[z]<[a]r.sub.1 Time reversal x(−n) X(z.sup.−1) 1/r.sub.1<[z]<1/r.sub.2 Conjugation x*(n) X*(z*) ROC Real Part Re{x(n)} ½{X(z)+X*(z*)} Includes ROC Imaginary Part Im{x(n)} ½{X(z)−X*(z*)} Includes ROC Differential in the nx(n)−z{−z((dX(z)/(dz))} r.sub.2<[z]<r.sub.1 z-domain Convolution (x.sub.1 (n))*(x2(n)) X.sub.1 (z)X.sub.2 (z) At least the intersection of ROC.sub.1 and ROC.sub.2 Correlation rx.sub.1 x.sub.2 (1)=x.sub.1 (1)*x.sub.2 (−1) Rx.sub.1 x.sub.2 (z)=X.sub.1 (z)X.sub.2 (z.sup.−1) At least the intersection of ROC of X.sub.1 (z) and X.sub.2 (z.sup.−1) Initial value theorem If x(n) causal x(0)=lim X(z) Multiplication x.sub.1 (n)x.sub.2 (n) ##EQU2## At least r.sub.11 r.sub.21<[z]<r.sub.1u r.sub.2u Parseval's relation ##EQU3##


Note: “[ ]” denote absolute values; For “Multiplication” and “Parseval's relation” the “.intg.” is for “O.sub.c” a circle in the ROC. From Digital Signal Processing (Principles, Algorithms, and Applications)—3rd Ed. Proakis & Manolakis”;















Property
Time Domain
z-Domain
ROC







Notation
x(n)
X(z)
ROC: r2 < [z] < r1



x1(n)
X1(z)
ROC1



x2(n)
X2(z)
ROC2


Linearity
a1x1(n) + a2x2(n)
a1X1(z) + a2X2(z)
At least the





intersection of ROC1





and ROC2


Time shifting
X(n − k)
z−1X(Z)
That of X(z), except





z = 0 if k > 0 nd = ∞





if k > 0


Scaling in
anx(n)
X(a−1z)
[a]r2 < [z] < [a]r1


the z-domain





Time reversal
x(−n)
X(z−1)
1/r1 < [z] < 1/r2


Conjugation
x*(n)
X*(z*)
ROC


Real Part
Re{x(n)}
1/2{X(z) + X*(z*)}
Includes ROC


Imaginary Pail
Im{x(n)}
1/2{X(z) − X*(z*)}
Includes ROC


Differential in
nx(n)
−z(−z((dX(z)/(dz))}
r2 < [z] < r1


the z-domain





Convolution
(x1(n)) * (x2(n))
X1(z)X2(z)
At least the





intersection of ROC1





and ROC2


Correlation
rx1x2(1) = x1(1) * x2(−1)
Rx1x2(z) = X1(z)X2(z−1)
At least the





intersection of ROC





of X1(z) and X2(z−1)


Initial value
If x(n) causal
x(0) = lim X(z)



theorem








Multiplication
x1(n)x2(n)





1
/
2






πj


{




z





1000


z





1000






X
1



(
v
)





X
2

(


(

z
/
v

)



v

-
1





v


}








At least r11r21 < [z] < r1ur2u





Parseval's relation













X
1



(
n
)





X
2




(
n
)




=


1
/
2






πj


{





X
1



(
v
)





X
2


(


(

1
/

v



)



v

-
1





v






}











Note:


“[ ]” denote absolute values; For “Multiplication” and “Parseval's relation” the “∫” is for “0c” a circle in the ROC. From Digital Signal Processing (Principles, Algorithms, and Applications) - 3rd Ed. Proakis & Manolakis






The inversion of the z-transform with three methods further described, in Digital Signal Processing (Principles, Algorithms, and Applications)—3rd Ed. Proakis & Manolakis, as 1) Direct evaluation by contour integration 2) Expansion into a series of terms, in the variables z, and z−1 and 3) Partial-fraction expansion and table lookup. Typically the Cauchy theorem is used for direct evaluation. In determining causality, LTI systems are well-suited in establishing the predictability of time-domain characteristics with pole-zero locations. For applications of digital watermarks as described in the present invention the importance of both alternatively describing a signal and establishing deterministic characteristics of the signal's components is clear to those skilled in the art. Placing watermarks in the “random” parts of a signal, those that are difficult to predict and thereby compress, would enhance the security from attacks by pirates seeking to identify the location of said watermarks or erase them without knowing their specific location. Use of z-transforms to establish a more secure “envelope” for watermark insertion works to the advantage of those seeking to prevent such attacks. Similarly, creation of linear predictive coding filters is an excellent example that benefits from preanalysis of content signals prior to the insertion of watermarks.


This is an extension of the application of optimal filter design for applications for frame-based watermark systems as described in the above-mentioned patent applications entitled “STEGANOGRAPHIC METHOD AND DEVICE”, “METHOD FOR HUMAN-ASSISTED RANDOM KEY GENERATION AND APPLICATION FOR DIGITAL WATERMARK SYSTEM”, and “METHOD FOR STEGA-CIPHER PROTECTION OF COMPUTER CODE”, “OPTIMAL METHODS FOR THE INSERTION, PROTECTION AND DETECTION OF DIGITAL WATERMARKS IN DIGITIZED DATA”. Recursive digital filters are efficient for applications dependent on previous inputs and outputs and current inputs at a given time—a dynamic filter. The z-transform makes possible high performance of time domain digital filtering with implementation of recursive filters where signal characteristics are efficiently identified.


In one embodiment of the present invention, z-transform calculations are performed as an intermediate processing step, prior to the actual encoding of a digital watermark into a sample stream. The Argent™ digital watermark software, developed by The DICE Company, for example, uses a modular architecture which allows access to the sample stream and related watermark data at various stages of computation, and further allows modules to pass their results on (or back) to other modules. Z-transform calculations can be integrated into this processing architecture either directly in the CODEC module, which is responsible for encoding information to a series of samples, or decoding it from them, or as a FILTER module, which provides other modules with information on how specific types of filters will affect the sample stream. During processing, a series of sample frames are separated into groupings called “windows”. Typically the groupings are comprised of contiguous series of samples, but this need not be the case. Any logical arrangement might be handled. Each sample window comprises a finite duration two-sided signal, a special case for z-transform calculations discussed above.


Each window may then be fed to a z-transform calculator (in a FILTER or CODEC module) which derives phase composition information from the signal using a z-transform algorithm. This information summarizes estimates of any regular phase components of the signal. Note that windows may be dynamically adjusted to be longer or shorter duration, or they may be computed in an overlapping fashion, with information about adjacent windows and their z-transforms being considered with regard to the current transform. Windows might have weightings applied to sample frames in order to emphasize some portions or de-emphasize others. Using these additional modifications may help to smooth discontinuities between window calculations and provide a better average estimate over longer portions of a signal.


The resulting z-transform information could be visualized by placing points of varying brightness or color (which corresponds to an amplitude) on the unit circle in the complex z-plane (the circle centered at z=0.0, 0.0 with radius 1). These points symbolize recurrent signal components at particular phases (where phase is determined by the angle of the line drawn between the point on the perimeter of the circle and its center). A deterministic approximation of the signal could then be reconstructed with all possible times represented by multiplying phase by the number of revolutions about the circle. Positive angle increments move forward in time, while negative increments move backward. The phase components yielded by the z-transform are then used to summarize and reproduce an estimate of the deterministic portion of the signal. Typically one may invert the z-transform calculations to produce this estimate in terms of a series of wave amplitude samples. By calculating the error rate and location of such errors in the estimated signal versus the original, the system can determine exactly where a signal is “most non-deterministic,” which would constitute promising locations within the sample stream to encode watermark information. Note that location could be construed to mean any combination of sample, frequency or phase information.


The process described above is, in principle, an inversion of the type of process used for Linear Predictive Coding (LPC) and is a general example of “filter inversion” for optimal watermark planning. The type calculations are performed in order to determine what parts of the signal will survive the LPC process intact, and are thus good places to place watermarks which are to survive LPC. In LPC, the deterministic portion of a signal is compressed and the non-deterministic portion is either preserved as a whole with lossless compression or stochastically summarized and recreated randomly each time the “signal” is played back.

Claims
  • 1. An article of manufacture comprising a non-transitory machine-readable medium, having thereon stored in non-transitory form instructions adapted to be executed by a processor, which instructions when executed by said processor result in a process of removing carrier signal independent data from a digital sample stream, comprising: receiving a digital sample stream encoded with carrier signal independent data;using linear predictive coding calculations to identify signal components of said digital sample stream; andextracting carrier signal independent data from said digital sample stream.
  • 2. The article of claim 1, wherein said carrier signal independent data comprises digital watermark data.
  • 3. The article of claim 1, wherein the step of extracting comprises: extracting carrier signal independent data based on one or more locations within said identified signal components.
  • 4. The article of claim 1, wherein the step of extracting comprises: extracting carrier signal independent data with a key.
  • 5. The article of claim 1, wherein said signal components comprise at least one of: a) a discrete series of digital samples, andb) a discrete series of carrier frequency sub-bands of the digital sample stream.
  • 6. An article of manufacture comprising a non-transitory machine-readable medium, having thereon stored in non-transitory form instructions adapted to be executed by a processor, which instructions when executed by said processor result in a process of analyzing signal components in a digital sample stream, comprising: receiving a content signal comprising a digital sample stream;using linear predictive coding calculations to analyze signal components of said digital sample stream, said signal components being characterized by at least one of the following group:a) a discrete series of digital samples, andb) a discrete series of carrier frequency sub-bands of the content signal; andencoding carrier signal independent data in the signal components of the digital sample stream.
  • 7. The article of claim 6, wherein said carrier signal independent data comprises digital watermark data.
  • 8. The article of claim 6, wherein the step of encoding carrier signal independent data comprises: encoding carrier signal independent data such that it is concentrated primarily in the non-deterministic signal components of the content signal and such that said carrier signal independent data is located within the non-deterministic signal components using information about the position of a watermarking party in a distribution chain.
  • 9. An article of manufacture comprising a non-transitory machine-readable medium, having thereon stored in non-transitory form instructions adapted to be executed by a processor, which instructions when executed by said processor result in a process of using linear predictive coding calculations to measure a desirability of locations in a digital signal in which to encode carrier signal independent data, comprising: receiving a digital signal;and using linear predictive coding calculations to identify locations in said digital signal which would be desirable for encoding carrier signal independent data; andwherein said locations are identified using at least one of the following characteristics of said digital signal: wave, amplitude, frequency, band energy, and phase energy.
  • 10. The article of claim 9, further comprising: encoding said carrier signal independent data into said identified locations of said digital signal to produce an embedded digital signal.
  • 11. The article of claim 10, further comprising: compressing the carrier signal independent data before the encoding step.
  • 12. The article of claim 10, further comprising: compressing the digital signal before using linear predictive coding information to identify locations.
  • 13. The article of claim 10, further comprising: compressing the embedded digital signal.
  • 14. The article of claim 10, further comprising: compressing the carrier signal independent data before the encoding step and compressing the embedded digital signal.
  • 15. An article of manufacture comprising a non-transitory machine-readable medium, having thereon stored in non-transitory form instructions adapted to be executed by a processor, which instructions when executed by said processor result in a process of using linear predictive coding calculations to detect at least one of a plurality of digital watermarks from a content signal, comprising: receiving a content signal;using linear predictive coding calculations to identify signal components of said content signal, said signal components being characterized by at least one of the following groups:a) a discrete series of digital samples, andb) a discrete series of carrier frequency sub-bands of the content signal; anddetecting the at least one of a plurality of digital watermarks from said signal components of said content signal.
  • 16. The article of claim 15, wherein the content signal is an analog waveform.
  • 17. The article of claim 15, wherein the signal components are non-contiguous.
  • 18. The article of claim 15, wherein the content signal may first be decompressed before using linear predictive coding to identify signal components.
  • 19. The article of claim 15, wherein the location of at least a portion of the at least one of a plurality of digital watermarks is represented by at least one of the following: sample, frequency, phase or combinations thereof.
  • 20. The article of claim 15, wherein the step of detecting comprises: detecting the at least one of a plurality of digital watermarks based on one or more locations within said signal components.
  • 21. The article of claim 15, wherein the signal components are identified using at least one of the following characteristics of the content signal: wave, amplitude, frequency, band energy, and phase energy.
  • 22. The article of claim 15, wherein the linear predictive coding calculations enable compression of predictable signal components and at least one of the following: a) preservation of unpredictable signal components andb) stochastic representation of unpredictable signal components.
  • 23. The method of claim 15, wherein at least one of the plurality of digital watermarks is accessible with a key.
RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of pending U.S. patent application No. 11/592,079, filed Nov. 2, 2006, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,730,317 issued Jun. 1, 2010, which is a continuation of U.S. application No. 11/026,234, filed Dec. 30, 2004, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,152,162 issued Dec. 19, 2006, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application No. 09/456,319, filed Dec. 8, 1999, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,853,726 issued Feb. 8, 2005, which is a division of U.S. patent application No. 08/772,222, filed Dec. 20, 1996, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,078,664 issued Jun. 20, 2000. The previously identified patents and/or patent applications are hereby incorporated by reference, in their entireties. This application relates to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/489,172 filed on Jun. 7, 1995, now U.S. Pat. No. 5,613,004 issued Mar. 18, 1997, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/587,944 filed on Jan. 17, 1996, now U.S. Pat. No. 5,822,432 issued Oct. 13, 1998, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/587,943 filed on Jan. 16, 1996, now U.S. Pat. No. 5,745,569 issued Apr. 28, 1998, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/677,435 filed on Jul. 2, 1996, now U.S. Pat. No. 5,889,868 issued Mar. 30, 1999. Each of these related applications is incorporated herein by reference in their entirety.

US Referenced Citations (386)
Number Name Date Kind
3947825 Cassada Mar 1976 A
3984624 Waggener Oct 1976 A
3986624 Cates, Jr. et al. Oct 1976 A
4038596 Lee Jul 1977 A
4200770 Hellman et al. Apr 1980 A
4218582 Hellman et al. Aug 1980 A
4339134 Macheel Jul 1982 A
4390898 Bond et al. Jun 1983 A
4405829 Rivest et al. Sep 1983 A
4424414 Hellman et al. Jan 1984 A
4528588 Lofberg Jul 1985 A
4672605 Hustig et al. Jun 1987 A
4748668 Shamir et al. May 1988 A
4789928 Fujisaki Dec 1988 A
4827508 Shear May 1989 A
4876617 Best et al. Oct 1989 A
4896275 Jackson Jan 1990 A
4908873 Philibert et al. Mar 1990 A
4939515 Adelson Jul 1990 A
4969204 Jones et al. Nov 1990 A
4972471 Gross et al. Nov 1990 A
4977594 Shear Dec 1990 A
4979210 Nagata et al. Dec 1990 A
4980782 Ginkel Dec 1990 A
5050213 Shear Sep 1991 A
5073925 Nagata et al. Dec 1991 A
5077665 Silverman et al. Dec 1991 A
5113437 Best et al. May 1992 A
5136581 Muehrcke Aug 1992 A
5136646 Haber et al. Aug 1992 A
5136647 Haber et al. Aug 1992 A
5142576 Nadan Aug 1992 A
5161210 Druyvesteyn et al. Nov 1992 A
5210820 Kenyon May 1993 A
5243423 DeJean et al. Sep 1993 A
5243515 Lee Sep 1993 A
5287407 Holmes Feb 1994 A
5319735 Preuss et al. Jun 1994 A
5341429 Stringer et al. Aug 1994 A
5341477 Pitkin et al. Aug 1994 A
5363448 Koopman et al. Nov 1994 A
5365586 Indeck et al. Nov 1994 A
5369707 Follendore, III Nov 1994 A
5379345 Greenberg Jan 1995 A
5394324 Clearwater Feb 1995 A
5398285 Borgelt et al. Mar 1995 A
5406627 Thompson et al. Apr 1995 A
5408505 Indeck et al. Apr 1995 A
5410598 Shear Apr 1995 A
5412718 Narasimhalv et al. May 1995 A
5418713 Allen May 1995 A
5428606 Moskowitz Jun 1995 A
5450490 Jensen et al. Sep 1995 A
5469536 Blank Nov 1995 A
5471533 Wang et al. Nov 1995 A
5478990 Montanari et al. Dec 1995 A
5479210 Cawley et al. Dec 1995 A
5487168 Geiner et al. Jan 1996 A
5493677 Balogh et al. Feb 1996 A
5497419 Hill Mar 1996 A
5506795 Yamakawa Apr 1996 A
5513126 Harkins et al. Apr 1996 A
5513261 Maher Apr 1996 A
5530739 Okada Jun 1996 A
5530751 Morris Jun 1996 A
5530759 Braudaway et al. Jun 1996 A
5539735 Moskowitz Jul 1996 A
5548579 Lebrun et al. Aug 1996 A
5568570 Rabbani Oct 1996 A
5579124 Aijala et al. Nov 1996 A
5581703 Baugher et al. Dec 1996 A
5583488 Sala et al. Dec 1996 A
5598470 Cooper et al. Jan 1997 A
5606609 Houser et al. Feb 1997 A
5613004 Cooperman et al. Mar 1997 A
5617119 Briggs et al. Apr 1997 A
5625690 Michel et al. Apr 1997 A
5629980 Stefik et al. May 1997 A
5633932 Davis et al. May 1997 A
5634040 Her et al. May 1997 A
5636276 Brugger Jun 1997 A
5636292 Rhoads Jun 1997 A
5640569 Miller et al. Jun 1997 A
5646997 Barton Jul 1997 A
5657461 Harkins et al. Aug 1997 A
5659726 Sandford, II et al. Aug 1997 A
5664018 Leighton Sep 1997 A
5673316 Auerbach et al. Sep 1997 A
5677952 Blakley et al. Oct 1997 A
5680462 Miller et al. Oct 1997 A
5687236 Moskowitz et al. Nov 1997 A
5689587 Bender et al. Nov 1997 A
5696828 Koopman, Jr. Dec 1997 A
5719937 Warren et al. Feb 1998 A
5721788 Powell et al. Feb 1998 A
5734752 Knox Mar 1998 A
5737416 Cooper et al. Apr 1998 A
5737733 Eller Apr 1998 A
5740244 Indeck et al. Apr 1998 A
5745569 Moskowitz et al. Apr 1998 A
5748783 Rhoads May 1998 A
5751811 Magnotti et al. May 1998 A
5754697 Fu et al. May 1998 A
5757923 Koopman, Jr. May 1998 A
5765152 Erickson Jun 1998 A
5768396 Sone Jun 1998 A
5774452 Wolosewicz Jun 1998 A
5790677 Fox et al. Aug 1998 A
5799083 Brothers et al. Aug 1998 A
5809139 Grirod et al. Sep 1998 A
5809160 Powell et al. Sep 1998 A
5818818 Soumiya Oct 1998 A
5822432 Moskowitz et al. Oct 1998 A
5828325 Wolosewicz et al. Oct 1998 A
5832119 Rhoads Nov 1998 A
5842213 Odom Nov 1998 A
5848155 Cox Dec 1998 A
5850481 Rhoads Dec 1998 A
5859920 Daly et al. Jan 1999 A
5860099 Milios et al. Jan 1999 A
5862260 Rhoads Jan 1999 A
5870474 Wasilewski et al. Feb 1999 A
5884033 Duvall et al. Mar 1999 A
5889868 Moskowitz et al. Mar 1999 A
5893067 Bender et al. Apr 1999 A
5894521 Conley Apr 1999 A
5903721 Sixtus May 1999 A
5905800 Moskowitz et al. May 1999 A
5905975 Ausubel May 1999 A
5912972 Barton Jun 1999 A
5915027 Cox et al. Jun 1999 A
5917915 Hirose Jun 1999 A
5918223 Blum Jun 1999 A
5920900 Poole et al. Jul 1999 A
5923763 Walker et al. Jul 1999 A
5930369 Cox et al. Jul 1999 A
5930377 Powell et al. Jul 1999 A
5940134 Wirtz Aug 1999 A
5943422 Van Wie et al. Aug 1999 A
5949055 Fleet Sep 1999 A
5963909 Warren et al. Oct 1999 A
5973731 Schwab Oct 1999 A
5974141 Saito Oct 1999 A
5991426 Cox et al. Nov 1999 A
5999217 Berners-Lee Dec 1999 A
6009176 Gennaro et al. Dec 1999 A
6029126 Malvar Feb 2000 A
6041316 Allen Mar 2000 A
6044471 Colvin Mar 2000 A
6049838 Miller et al. Apr 2000 A
6051029 Paterson et al. Apr 2000 A
6061793 Tewfik et al. May 2000 A
6067622 Moore May 2000 A
6069914 Cox May 2000 A
6078664 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2000 A
6081251 Sakai et al. Jun 2000 A
6081587 Reyes et al. Jun 2000 A
6081597 Hoffstein Jun 2000 A
6088455 Logan et al. Jul 2000 A
6131162 Yoshiura et al. Oct 2000 A
6141753 Zhao et al. Oct 2000 A
6141754 Choy Oct 2000 A
6148333 Guedalia Nov 2000 A
6154571 Cox et al. Nov 2000 A
6192138 Yamadaji Feb 2001 B1
6199058 Wong et al. Mar 2001 B1
6205249 Moskowitz Mar 2001 B1
6208745 Florenio et al. Mar 2001 B1
6226618 Downs May 2001 B1
6230268 Miwa et al. May 2001 B1
6233347 Chen et al. May 2001 B1
6233684 Stefik et al. May 2001 B1
6240121 Senoh May 2001 B1
6263313 Milsted et al. Jul 2001 B1
6272634 Tewfik et al. Aug 2001 B1
6275988 Nagashima et al. Aug 2001 B1
6278780 Shimada Aug 2001 B1
6278791 Honsinger et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282300 Bloom et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282650 Davis Aug 2001 B1
6285775 Wu et al. Sep 2001 B1
6301663 Kato et al. Oct 2001 B1
6310962 Chung et al. Oct 2001 B1
6330335 Rhoads Dec 2001 B1
6330672 Shur Dec 2001 B1
6345100 Levine Feb 2002 B1
6351765 Pietropaolo et al. Feb 2002 B1
6363483 Keshav Mar 2002 B1
6373892 Ichien et al. Apr 2002 B1
6373960 Conover et al. Apr 2002 B1
6374036 Ryan et al. Apr 2002 B1
6377625 Kim Apr 2002 B1
6381618 Jones et al. Apr 2002 B1
6381747 Wonfor et al. Apr 2002 B1
6385324 Koppen May 2002 B1
6385329 Sharma et al. May 2002 B1
6385596 Wiser May 2002 B1
6389538 Gruse et al. May 2002 B1
6405203 Collart Jun 2002 B1
6415041 Oami et al. Jul 2002 B1
6418421 Hurtado Jul 2002 B1
6425081 Iwamura Jul 2002 B1
6430301 Petrovic Aug 2002 B1
6430302 Rhoads Aug 2002 B2
6442283 Tewfik et al. Aug 2002 B1
6446211 Colvin Sep 2002 B1
6453252 Laroche Sep 2002 B1
6457058 Ullum et al. Sep 2002 B1
6463468 Buch et al. Oct 2002 B1
6484264 Colvin Nov 2002 B1
6493457 Quackenbush Dec 2002 B1
6502195 Colvin Dec 2002 B1
6522767 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2003 B1
6522769 Rhoads et al. Feb 2003 B1
6523113 Wehrenberg Feb 2003 B1
6530021 Epstein et al. Mar 2003 B1
6532284 Walker et al. Mar 2003 B2
6539475 Cox et al. Mar 2003 B1
6557103 Boncelet, Jr. et al. Apr 2003 B1
6584125 Katto Jun 2003 B1
6587837 Spagna et al. Jul 2003 B1
6590996 Reed Jul 2003 B1
6598162 Moskowitz Jul 2003 B1
6606393 Xie et al. Aug 2003 B1
6611599 Natarajan Aug 2003 B2
6647424 Pearson et al. Nov 2003 B1
6658010 Enns et al. Dec 2003 B1
6665489 Collart Dec 2003 B2
6668246 Yeung et al. Dec 2003 B1
6668325 Collberg et al. Dec 2003 B1
6674858 Kimura Jan 2004 B1
6687683 Harada et al. Feb 2004 B1
6725372 Lewis et al. Apr 2004 B1
6754822 Zhao Jun 2004 B1
6775772 Binding et al. Aug 2004 B1
6784354 Lu et al. Aug 2004 B1
6785815 Serret-Avila et al. Aug 2004 B1
6785825 Colvin Aug 2004 B2
6792548 Colvin Sep 2004 B2
6792549 Colvin Sep 2004 B2
6795925 Colvin Sep 2004 B2
6799277 Colvin Sep 2004 B2
6813717 Colvin Nov 2004 B2
6813718 Colvin Nov 2004 B2
6823455 Macy et al. Nov 2004 B1
6834308 Ikezoye et al. Dec 2004 B1
6842862 Chow et al. Jan 2005 B2
6853726 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2005 B1
6857078 Colvin Feb 2005 B2
6865747 Mercier Mar 2005 B1
6931534 Jandel et al. Aug 2005 B1
6957330 Hughes Oct 2005 B1
6966002 Torrubia-Saez Nov 2005 B1
6968337 Wold Nov 2005 B2
6977894 Achilles et al. Dec 2005 B1
6978370 Kocher Dec 2005 B1
6986063 Colvin Jan 2006 B2
6990453 Wang Jan 2006 B2
7007166 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2006 B1
7020285 Kirovski et al. Mar 2006 B1
7035049 Yamamoto Apr 2006 B2
7035409 Moskowitz Apr 2006 B1
7043050 Yuval May 2006 B2
7046808 Metois et al. May 2006 B1
7050396 Cohen et al. May 2006 B1
7051208 Venkatesan et al. May 2006 B2
7058570 Yu et al. Jun 2006 B1
7093295 Saito Aug 2006 B1
7095874 Moskowitz et al. Aug 2006 B2
7103184 Jian Sep 2006 B2
7107451 Moskowitz Sep 2006 B2
7123718 Moskowitz et al. Oct 2006 B1
7127615 Moskowitz Oct 2006 B2
7150003 Naumovich et al. Dec 2006 B2
7152162 Moskowitz et al. Dec 2006 B2
7159116 Moskowitz Jan 2007 B2
7162642 Schumann et al. Jan 2007 B2
7177429 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2007 B2
7177430 Kim Feb 2007 B2
7206649 Kirovski et al. Apr 2007 B2
7231524 Bums Jun 2007 B2
7233669 Candelore Jun 2007 B2
7240210 Michak et al. Jul 2007 B2
7266697 Kirovski et al. Sep 2007 B2
7286451 Wirtz Oct 2007 B2
7287275 Moskowitz Oct 2007 B2
7289643 Brunk et al. Oct 2007 B2
7343492 Moskowitz et al. Mar 2008 B2
7346472 Moskowitz et al. Mar 2008 B1
7362775 Moskowitz Apr 2008 B1
7363278 Schmelzer et al. Apr 2008 B2
7409073 Moskowitz et al. Aug 2008 B2
7457962 Moskowitz Nov 2008 B2
7460994 Herre et al. Dec 2008 B2
7475246 Moskowitz Jan 2009 B1
7530102 Moskowitz May 2009 B2
7532725 Moskowitz et al. May 2009 B2
7568100 Moskowitz et al. Jul 2009 B1
7647502 Moskowitz Jan 2010 B2
7647503 Moskowitz Jan 2010 B2
7664263 Moskowitz Feb 2010 B2
7743001 Vermeulen Jun 2010 B1
7761712 Moskowitz Jul 2010 B2
7779261 Moskowitz Aug 2010 B2
20010010078 Moskowitz Jul 2001 A1
20010029580 Moskowitz Oct 2001 A1
20010043594 Ogawa et al. Nov 2001 A1
20020009208 Alattar Jan 2002 A1
20020010684 Moskowitz Jan 2002 A1
20020026343 Duenke Feb 2002 A1
20020056041 Moskowitz May 2002 A1
20020071556 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020073043 Herman et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020097873 Petrovic Jul 2002 A1
20020103883 Haverstock et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020161741 Wang et al. Oct 2002 A1
20030002862 Rodriguez Jan 2003 A1
20030126445 Wehrenberg Jul 2003 A1
20030133702 Collart Jul 2003 A1
20030200439 Moskowitz Oct 2003 A1
20030219143 Moskowitz et al. Nov 2003 A1
20040028222 Sewell et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040037449 Davis et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040049695 Choi et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040059918 Xu Mar 2004 A1
20040083369 Erlingsson et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040086119 Moskowitz May 2004 A1
20040093521 Hamadeh et al. May 2004 A1
20040117628 Colvin Jun 2004 A1
20040117664 Colvin Jun 2004 A1
20040125983 Reed et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040128514 Rhoads Jul 2004 A1
20040225894 Colvin Nov 2004 A1
20040243540 Moskowitz et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050135615 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050160271 Brundage et al. Jul 2005 A9
20050177727 Moskowitz et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050246554 Batson Nov 2005 A1
20060005029 Petrovic et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060013395 Brundage et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060013451 Haitsma Jan 2006 A1
20060041753 Haitsma Feb 2006 A1
20060101269 Moskowitz et al. May 2006 A1
20060140403 Moskowitz Jun 2006 A1
20060251291 Rhoads Nov 2006 A1
20060285722 Moskowitz et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070011458 Moskowitz Jan 2007 A1
20070028113 Moskowitz Feb 2007 A1
20070064940 Moskowitz et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070079131 Moskowitz et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070083467 Lindahl et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070110240 Moskowitz et al. May 2007 A1
20070113094 Moskowitz et al. May 2007 A1
20070127717 Herre et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070226506 Moskowitz Sep 2007 A1
20070253594 Lu et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070294536 Moskowitz et al. Dec 2007 A1
20070300072 Moskowitz Dec 2007 A1
20070300073 Moskowitz Dec 2007 A1
20080005571 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080005572 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080016365 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080022113 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080022114 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080028222 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080046742 Moskowitz Feb 2008 A1
20080075277 Moskowitz et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080109417 Moskowitz May 2008 A1
20080133927 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080151934 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2008 A1
20090037740 Moskowitz Feb 2009 A1
20090089427 Moskowitz et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090190754 Moskowitz et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090210711 Moskowitz Aug 2009 A1
20090220074 Moskowitz et al. Sep 2009 A1
20100002904 Moskowitz Jan 2010 A1
20100005308 Moskowitz Jan 2010 A1
20100064140 Moskowitz Mar 2010 A1
20100077219 Moskowitz Mar 2010 A1
20100077220 Moskowitz Mar 2010 A1
20100098251 Moskowitz Apr 2010 A1
20100106736 Moskowitz Apr 2010 A1
20100153734 Moskowitz Jun 2010 A1
20100182570 Matsumoto et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100202607 Moskowitz Aug 2010 A1
20100220861 Moskowitz Sep 2010 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (29)
Number Date Country
0372601 Jun 1990 EP
0565947 Oct 1993 EP
0581317 Feb 1994 EP
0581317 Feb 1994 EP
0649261 Apr 1995 EP
0651554 May 1995 EP
0872073 Jul 1996 EP
1547337 Mar 2006 EP
1354276 Dec 2007 EP
1005523 Sep 1998 NL
WO 9514289 May 1995 WO
WO9701892 Jun 1995 WO
WO 9629795 Sep 1996 WO
WO 9642151 Dec 1996 WO
WO 9726733 Jan 1997 WO
WO 9724833 Jul 1997 WO
WO9726732 Jul 1997 WO
WO 9802864 Jul 1997 WO
WO 9744736 Nov 1997 WO
WO9802864 Jan 1998 WO
WO9837513 Aug 1998 WO
WO 9952271 Oct 1999 WO
WO 9962044 Dec 1999 WO
WO 9963443 Dec 1999 WO
WO 0057643 Sep 2000 WO
WO 0118628 Mar 2001 WO
WO 0143026 Jun 2001 WO
WO0203385 Jan 2002 WO
WO0203385 Oct 2002 WO
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20100202607 A1 Aug 2010 US
Divisions (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 08772222 Dec 1996 US
Child 09456319 US
Continuations (3)
Number Date Country
Parent 11592079 Nov 2006 US
Child 12798959 US
Parent 11026234 Dec 2004 US
Child 11592079 US
Parent 09456319 Dec 1999 US
Child 11026234 US