Patent Application
20140324716
The invention relates to the authentication of merchandise units, and in particular, to authentication after final purchase of merchandise units identified by unique identifiers.
Counterfeiting, the illegal manufacturing and selling of brand copyright-protected articles, poses a huge and still increasing threat to global businesses—including organizations in the life sciences, consumer products, media, apparel, luxury goods, and food and beverages industries. Likewise, stolen merchandise which is then resold through traditional or “parallel” distribution channels seriously affects trade market in general.
According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the total domestic value of the fake goods seized in fiscal year 2010 was $188.1 million. That corresponded to an estimated manufacturer's suggested retail price totaling US$1.4 billion, if the products were legitimate.
According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director John Morton, “The protection of intellectual property is a top priority for Homeland Security Investigations, as counterfeit products represent a triple threat by delivering shoddy and sometimes dangerous, goods into commerce, by funding organized criminal activities and by denying Americans good-paying jobs”. Trade in counterfeit and pirated goods poses significant threats to the innovation-based economies, including the US and Europe. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the value of counterfeit goods that crossed international borders in 2007 was more than $250 billion.
Major repercussions of these activities include of course loss of revenue for the enterprise, but undermine the trade market globally. It is threatening branding, intellectual property, and research and development. It might carry along also a negative impact on brand image when customers eventually realize they are not getting the quality of products they come to expect from the trademark or the quality label they thought they own. In other cases, particularly when relating to luxury goods, even when customers receive legitimate merchandise, their perception of value and uniqueness may be reduced when they see counterfeit merchandise in the hands of other consumers. Finally, counterfeiting and piracy also affect the labor market, as many jobs are lost as a consequence of these fraudulent activities.
Counterfeited merchandise may be inserted in the distribution channel at varied points. The state of the art already includes a number of methods that can be used to control or alleviate the introduction of fake merchandise on these legitimate channels. One problem that has not been satisfactorily solved is the distribution of fake merchandise though “secondary” channels, i.e., channels that, in essence, only sell fake merchandise, and, in many cases, with the buyer/consumer having full knowledge that the merchandise is not legitimate. For these cases, manufacturers can only find mild protection, by means of a number of techniques that produces tags or other devices which are hard to reproduce. This is, however, an incomplete and unsatisfactory solution. First, there is high cost in producing these hard-to-reproduce tags. Second, if a close enough version can be produced, this may be enough to many buyers. After all, many buyers may be fully aware of the nature of the fake merchandise. In such cases, the legitimate manufacturer is left with the high cost of producing such a tag, while the illegitimate manufacturer may get away with a lower cost tag. And third, if said tags are stolen, they cannot be differentiated from the legitimate ones at all.
Thus, there is need for improved technologies that provide disincentives for consumers to knowingly acquire fake merchandise.
After production of object's series, manufacturer, using a means for transportation 110 (air freight, marine transport or by road), sends the object's series to a wholesaler 115 who is in charge to dispatch subset of object's series to various trusted retailer 125. Wholesalers use generally transportation by road (120) for delivery to retailer.
Finally, the retailer 125 sells the branded goods to a customer 130. Today, large distribution companies take in charge the objects from the manufacturer to the retailer. Thin arrows depict samples of counterfeited objects and different means to distribute these counterfeited objects to customers, as well as branded goods that are stolen before being sold. A counterfeiter 135 produces copies of branded goods and via a dishonest dealer 140 distributes said counterfeited branded goods directly to the customer 130 or re-injects them in the normal distribution chain with or without the complicity of a third party working in this normal distribution chain. Re-injection of counterfeited branded goods may be done at different levels of the distribution chain as the transit 110, the wholesaler 115, the distribution 120, or finally the retailer 125. So, even if a customer buys a branded good in a shop, he/she has no guaranty about the authenticity of said branded object. Likewise, branded goods stealing may be done at different levels of the chain by thief 145: in the manufacturer area 105 or in the distribution chain at the transit 110, the wholesaler 115, the distribution 120, the retailer 125, or, even the customer 130. Furthermore, the theft may be assisted or facilitated by one of the parties in the chain, or by an employee of said part. For example, a manufacturer may overproduce certain merchandise with intent to sell it through an unauthorized channel.
A customer 130 who buys this stolen branded good directly from thief 140 or 145 generally knows that the object has been stolen, or that is not legitimate. This willing customer of illegitimate merchandise constitutes one of the biggest challenges for counterfeiting prevention, and a key focus of the current invention.
Whatever the way looking at it, counterfeit and theft problems can't and won't be totally eliminated. So existing technology mostly consists in trying to keep them under control on the distribution and manufacturing channels. Existing technologies do that by raising the barriers to casual violations, and by requiring a concerted and even more complex effort by attackers. In the current invention, we describe a method to raise a barrier, or create an inconvenience, to the final customer of illegitimate merchandise. This has not been addressed by any of the existing technologies. With the use of the methods described in the present invention, even merchandise that was stolen directly from the production line can be later identified as have being illegally acquired, reducing its value for the (dishonest) consumer.
Conversely, by making illegitimate merchandise distinguishable from legitimate ones, we preserve revenue for the brand owner, and increase the value of the merchandise to the consumer, by making sure the value provided by the uniqueness of the product design is not diminished by the proliferation of unauthorized reproductions.
The scale of the threat is prompting new efforts by multinationals to stop, or at least curb, the spread of counterfeits. Steps have been taken to protect by law, which can be a disincentive for some potential violators of rights. Companies are also more and more pressuring governments to crack down on counterfeiting, trying to ensure a way to protect Intellectual Property.
There is a need to help brand companies to implement solutions based on strong prevention, detection, and response strategies and tactics.
As factories across the world gain experience with high-end manufacturing, counterfeits have become more sophisticated as well. Counterfeiters have become so proficient that it can take an expert to recognize a fake product. Even worse, some counterfeit merchandise may, actually, be produced at the same factory, with the same raw material, by the same machinery and personnel. They may, in fact, be identical in all practical aspects; except for they are illegally produced and no royalties have been paid.
This is one of the reasons why IT-based solutions are envisioned as great technological contributors in acting against counterfeiters, putting innovation to work to protect a global economy itself driven by innovation.
Some solutions using electronic tagging are being experimented today in specific industries. For instance, a company has developed an electronic pedigree software and provides the expertise to safeguard and secure the pharmaceutical supply chain. This pedigree system, based on a Radio Frequency Identifier (RFID) tag with a unique Electronic Product Code (EPC), tracks all the information about a product as it moves through the supply chain, from the manufacturer all the way to the point of sale. Although this methodology represents a step forward in the war against counterfeiting and theft, a potential limitation rises from the fact that the Pedigree itself could be read and possibly copied or imitated, and then used abusively by fraudulent parties until the illegal procedure is detected and acted upon.
Other existing technologies create and securely manage a digital Certificate of Authenticity that will be encrypted and uniquely bound to the corresponding product and its accompanying media—a certificate container—. This Certificate may integrate a mechanism for protecting its digital content against unauthorized copy and reproduction. This Certificate would be used to verify and hopefully guarantee the authenticity of a product through a process checking that there is a perfect match between a Product Identifier Code and information derived from its Certificate of Authenticity. This solution, and a number of related solutions, helps a legitimate customer to verify whether a certain product is authentic or not. Note, however, these techniques are useless in combating cases where the customer is willingly buying a counterfeit product. In such cases, the (dishonest) consumer already knows the product is not legitimate.
Other type of protection involves making hard-to-reproduce tags, and includes some of the most widely used techniques. Older techniques include from simple metallic logos, to holograms, but all these became increasingly easy to reproduce. More recent solutions include complex 3D materials that have unique signatures when read by a dedicated device, these signatures then signed with a digital certificate. Again, these solutions have very weak or no effectiveness against, for example, the case of a customer willingly buying counterfeit merchandise. In particular, even for technologies where the legitimacy could be verified after the purchase, the requirement of proximity to the tag and expensive readers prevents from subtle authenticity verification: the consent and knowledge of the owner of the merchandise is essentially required, making the process too intrusive.
Thus, none of the existing technologies satisfactorily addresses the problem of the dishonest consumer intentionally acquiring illegitimate merchandise, be it a stolen unit or an unauthorized reproduction.
The following is a brief summary of subject matter that is described in greater detail herein. This summary is not intended to be limiting as to the scope of the claims.
Described herein are various technologies pertaining to provide means to verify the legitimacy of a product. One of the unique characteristics of these technologies is that it can be used to verify legitimacy even after the final purchase has taken place, and that it can be done without explicit consent by the owner.
In an exemplary embodiment, a serial number or unique identifier is associated with each instance of a legitimate product. An association between a legitimate purchaser of such a product and such unique identifier is performed at time of purchase, and made available for subsequent verification by the general public. In an exemplary embodiment, the association may be the name or a picture of the legitimate purchaser, recorded by the authorized retailer at time of sale. The unique identifier may be a tag containing a unique code, which is visibly displayed when such merchandise is used in public. The verification method may be performed by capturing a picture of that visible identifier, and visiting the manufacturer website to verify the legitimate owner of such merchandise.
For instance, a consumer called Mary Doe purchases a FancyProducts brand handbag at a legitimate retailer. The handbag has an associated unique identifier, say a wearable tag that visibly displays the bag's serial number, 12345. The (legitimate) retailer has secure access to the manufacturer site AuthRetailer.FancyProducts.com, and upon sale, associates the serial number 12345 to customer Mary Doe. Mary subsequently wears the handbag in public situations. A third party, interested in knowing whether or not the handbag is legitimate, reads or captures a picture of the serial number. Such third party, subsequently visits the public facing portion of the manufacturer website www.FancyProducts.com, and asks for the name of the owner of handbag number 12345. The site than informs such third party that the legitimate owner is Mary Doe, does confirming the legitimacy of the product.
Note that a counterfeit or even stolen product may look exactly like the legitimate one, and may display a serial number as well. However, the un-authorized seller has no means to update the site to reflect the name of the owner. Thus, any third party trying to verify the legitimacy of the merchandise will get clued in that the merchandise is not legitimate.
As described in more detail later, other aspects of the invention include alternate ways of displaying a unique identifier that is not a serial number, other ways of identifying the legitimate purchaser that do not include making his or her name public, and aspects to allow the consumer to subsequently transfer or gift the merchandise to a different user. It also includes extensions to usage during the manufacturing and distribution process.
The above summary presents a simplified summary in order to provide a basic understanding of some aspects of the systems and/or methods discussed herein. This summary is not an extensive overview of the systems and/or methods discussed herein. It is not intended to identify key/critical elements or to delineate the scope of such systems and/or methods. Its sole purpose is to present some concepts in a simplified form as a prelude to the more detailed description that is presented later.
Various technologies pertaining to merchandise authenticity verification are now described with reference to the drawings, wherein like reference numerals are used to refer to like elements throughout. In the following description, for purposes of explanation, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of one or more aspects. It may be evident, however, that such aspect(s) may be practiced without these specific details. In other instances, well-known structures and devices are shown in block diagram form in order to facilitate describing one or more aspects. Further, it is to be understood that functionality that is described as being carried out by certain system components may be performed by multiple components. Similarly, for instance, a component may be configured to perform functionality that is described as being carried out by multiple components.
Moreover, the term “or” is intended to mean an inclusive “or” rather than an exclusive “or.” That is, unless specified otherwise, or clear from the context, the phrase “X employs A or B” is intended to mean any of the natural inclusive permutations. That is, the phrase “X employs A or B” is satisfied by any of the following instances: X employs A; X employs B; or X employs both A and B. In addition, the articles “a” and “an” as used in this application and the appended claims should generally be construed to mean “one or more” unless specified otherwise or clear from the context to be directed to a singular form.
Further, as used herein, the terms “component” and “system” are intended to encompass computer-readable data storage that is configured with computer-executable instructions that cause certain functionality to be performed when executed by a processor. The computer-executable instructions may include a routine, a function, or the like. It is also to be understood that a component or system may be localized on a single device or distributed across several devices. Further, as used herein, the term “exemplary” is intended to mean serving as an illustration or example of something, and is not intended to indicate a preference.
Further advantages of the present invention will become apparent to the ones skilled in the art upon examination of the drawings and detailed description. It is intended that any additional advantages be incorporated herein.
According to the invention, an identifier and one or more entries in an authenticity database are associated to the branded goods to be checked for detecting counterfeiting or theft. The identifier can be associated with the merchandise at any stage in the distribution channel, as early as pre-manufacture, or as late as the final retailer.
The identifier referred in the previous paragraph can be re-utilized by a number of product units. In such case, the database may have as many entries as units sharing the same identifier. This may be a way of reducing the number of identifiers, particularly in cases where the database provides only confirmation of ownership, as later described in paragraph
However, in the preferred embodiment, each product unit caries a unique identifier.
The identifier can be in a form of a tag, or can be incorporated directly in the product design. Traditional identifiers like barcodes, QR codes, digits, alphanumeric codes and the alike are all valid identifiers for the purpose of practicing this invention. More specifically, a handbag or other product could have, either attached on a tag, or directly incorporated into the product a number or code which uniquely identifies each unit of that product. Typically, however, barcodes and serial numbers and alphanumeric codes are not very fashionable as design elements. Thus, particularly for fashion items, other unique identifiers can be used.
Still in relation to
Finally, 260 illustrates a QR code, which can also be used as a unique identifier. Other examples of barcodes include the Microsoft Tag, and other mechanisms that can easily be read by automatic means.
Note also that while visible identifiers are a preferred embodiment, non-visible identifiers can also be used, as long as they can be read by a third party. Examples include RFID, ultraviolet markers, digital watermarks, and others.
According to the invention, information about the legitimate owner of the product has to be uploaded to a database before public use of the product containing the unique identifier. This can be done in a number of manners. In a preferred embodiment, described in the next paragraph in association with
Is part of the assumptions regarding the invention that the customer will use the product in public. Is also part of the assumptions, that a customer that would otherwise be willing to wear illegitimate merchandise in public would be embarrassed if other people could easily verify that said merchandise is illegitimate. Is further part of the assumptions that such risk of embarrassment is sufficient, at least to reduce the number of people willing to buy or wear such fake merchandise. Thus, it is a key element of the invention to provide means for a third party to verify information about the legitimacy of a product. According to the invention, verification of legitimacy is done by verification of ownership. An example method for the verification process is described in the next paragraph, in association with
In another embodiment, the process continues, and, in optional step 440 the third party provides personal information about the product, or about the bearer or owner of the product, or about its usage. The system receives such information and, in optional step 450, compares such information with the corresponding information, public or private, stored in the database in association with the unique identifier. Based on that comparison, in step 460 the systems provides to the third party information about the likelihood of a match, or, in other words, the likelihood of the merchandise being authentic.
By means of example, if the public information provided by the database in 430 was a picture of the buyer, the third party could compare the picture with his own picture of the person wearing the product, and from that reach his own conclusions about the authenticity of the merchandise. Alternatively, the third party could in optional step 440 upload the picture of the owner, and the system could perform a face recognition based on the face information stored in the database, providing the likelihood of a match in step 450. A person skilled in the art will be familiar with face recognition software and technologies.
Privacy may be a concern, depending on the type of information provided by the manufacturer in step 430. Some users may not feel comfortable with their names being released to anyone snatching a picture of their handbag. We note, however, that by providing a picture of the person, no additional personal information is provided, since the third party had a picture of the person to begin with.
In another embodiment, as exemplified in steps 440 to 460, to preserve the privacy of the wearer, only confirmation is give. More specifically, the third party has to provide the unique code, along with a name, zip code, picture, or something else. The manufacturer site simply confirms or denies that the association is correct. A person skilled in the art of passwords and authentication will know techniques that can be used to alleviate a brute force attack, including Human Interactive Proofs, IP based throttling, etc.
Yet in another embodiment, the detection of the unique identifier is automatically done. More specifically, the third party provides, e.g., by uploading, a picture of the unique identifier, enough information for the manufacturer to recover the unique code, and thus reply with the associated data. In such cases, the unique identifier can be more subtle, e.g., a digital watermark or alike. Existing unique identifier satisfying this requirement for automatic detection include QR codes and Microsoft Tag. Other more fashionable designs can be easily developed and incorporated in a tag or as integral part of the product.
In Another embodiment, instead of the uniqueness of the identifier being visible, the unique information is imperceptibly embedded in an image or graphic by adding a digital watermark. Automatic detection is done by reading the embedded watermark, included in an image or graphics which is part of, or attached to, the product. In this case, the image is uploaded the manufacturer's server, and the watermarking extracted. In an alternative embodiment, the watermark detector is downloaded to a device. A person skilled in the art will recognize hundreds of ways of embedding and detecting (or reading) such a watermark.
In another embodiment, instead a graphical element, the unique identifier consists of a device that can be read by electromagnetic means. Examples include RFID and near filed communication devices.
The identification tag or identifier can be attached to the product at any point in the manufacturing and distribution process. If it is embedded in the product itself, it may, of course, have to be done during the manufacturing process. If it is simply attached to the device, it can be attached closer to the product being transferred to the final customer.
In any case, an association between the unique identifier and the current owner (e.g., the customer) has to be done before it can be verified by the third party.
In a preferred embodiment, the unique identifier is associated to the product during the manufacturing process. Then at the final, retail sale, the authorized reseller obtains some personal information about the customer, and associates that to the unique identifier. For example, the retailer may associate a picture of the customer to the specific identifier associated with the unit of merchandise said customer bought.
When the uploading of the customer information is done by the retailer, it will be necessary to authenticate the retailer or seller. A person skilled in the art will be familiar with a number of ways of authentication, including passwords, hardware tokens, etc. In a preferred embodiment, the manufacturer has a list of unique identifiers belonging to the retailer, and currently for sale. Even after authentication, the retailer is only authorized to upload associated with those unique identifiers. Depending on the way the technology is used, the retailer, after associating the customer with a unique identifier, may lose access to further modifications of that information.
In another preferred embodiment, the object containing the unique identifier is also associated with an authentication code that allows a customer to modify the information associated with the unique identifier after the purchase. For example, if the merchandise is bought as a gift to someone else, the retailer may leave not update any information to the site, or may associate the product with the purchaser. The purchaser, or final owner of the product, then uses such code to update the centralized database with the correct information of the final product user or owner.
In another preferred embodiment, such authentication code is a one-time use code. In a preferred embodiment, such code is hidden and becomes evident it was read. This can be achieved, for example, with scratch codes, as used in lottery tickets and the alike. In yet another embodiment, it is a one-time code, but a new one time code is automatically generated online whenever the last issued code is used.
The information is stored in a database or other storage mechanism under the control of the manufacturer or brand owner.
Still referring to
Finally, and still referring to
In a preferred embodiment, the public information includes a link, url, or enough other detail as to give access to a public profile of the customer on a social site, e.g., Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn in, etc.
In another embodiment, the public information includes a link to a site freely selected by the customer.
A person skilled in the art will appreciate that the particular kind of information to be considered public or private will depend on the application.
In another embodiment, there is an application or selection process before a customer can acquire certain merchandise. For example, a university may reserve a certain kind of product only for alumni. The product can then be identified with a unique identifier, wherein the unique identifier, when scanned or entered at an appropriate page at the university site will provide information about the specific alumni which the tag or unique identifier was issued to.
A similar process can be used for other selective groups. For example, a designer, tired of ugly people wearing his designs, may decide only beautiful people are allowed to use his creations. The selection or authorization process may include an interview at the store, or submitting a picture. Once a customer is approved, that is, authorized to wear that specific brand or design, a unique identifier is associated with him/her, or with each product to be worn by him/her. Note that this can be done either in advance or on the fly. More specifically, if each product already has a unique identifier, all those identifiers can be associated to a single person. Similarly, if the identifiers are produced after the association, many copies of the same identifier can be produced, and thus will all point to the legitimate owner.
In another embodiment, the user may participate in the design of the unique identifier himself. After the customer proposes the design, the design is checked for collision with existing designs, and, if no collision is found, the design is accepted.
Note that many aspects of the invention need one or more computing devices to perform various functions. These will include servers, personal computers, smartphones and other existing or future computing devices. Furthermore, as evident from the invention description, information needs to be transmitted between the devices. Such transmission may instant or delayed, and may be performed using the Internet, cellular phone network, or other communication medium. Similarly, each of these computing devices will need to run specialized software to perform the functions described herein. These may include database software, web servers, web browsers, encryption, and others. A person skilled in the art will be familiar with all these, and will easily be able to implement all parts of a system able to perform the teachings described herein.
