The present disclosure relates generally to monitoring media and, more particularly, to methods and apparatus to determine media impressions using distributed demographic information.
Traditionally, audience measurement entities determine audience engagement levels for media programming based on registered panel members. That is, an audience measurement entity enrolls people who consent to being monitored into a panel. The audience measurement entity then monitors those panel members to determine media programs (e.g., television programs or radio programs, movies, DVDs, etc.) exposed to those panel members. In this manner, the audience measurement entity can determine exposure measures for different media content based on the collected media measurement data.
Techniques for monitoring user access to Internet resources such as web pages, advertisements and/or other content has evolved significantly over the years. Some known systems perform such monitoring primarily through server logs. In particular, entities serving content on the Internet can use known techniques to log the number of requests received for their content at their server.
Techniques for monitoring user access to Internet resources such as web pages, advertisements and/or other content has evolved significantly over the years. At one point in the past, such monitoring was done primarily through server logs. In particular, entities serving content on the Internet would log the number of requests received for their content at their server. Basing Internet usage research on server logs is problematic for several reasons. For example, server logs can be tampered with either directly or via zombie programs that repeatedly request content from the server to increase the server log counts. Secondly, content is sometimes retrieved once, cached locally and then repeatedly viewed from the local cache without involving the server in the repeat viewings. Server logs cannot track these views of cached content. Thus, server logs are susceptible to both over-counting and under-counting errors.
The inventions disclosed in Blumenau, U.S. Pat. No. 6,108,637, fundamentally changed the way Internet monitoring is performed and overcame the limitations of the server side log monitoring techniques described above. For example, Blumenau disclosed a technique wherein Internet content to be tracked is tagged with beacon instructions (e.g., tag instructions). In particular, monitoring instructions are associated with the HTML of the content (e.g., advertisements or other Internet content) to be tracked. When a client requests the content, both the content and the beacon or tag instructions are downloaded to the client either simultaneously (e.g., with the tag instructions present in the HTML) or via subsequent requests (e.g., via execution of a request to retrieve the monitoring instructions embedded in the HTML of the content). The tag instructions are, thus, executed whenever the content is accessed, be it from a server or from a cache.
The tag instructions cause monitoring data reflecting information about the access to the content to be sent from the client that downloaded the content to a monitoring entity. The monitoring entity may be an audience measurement entity that did not provide the content to the client and who is a trusted third party for providing accurate usage statistics (e.g., The Nielsen Company, LLC). Advantageously, because the tag instructions are associated with the content (e.g., embedded in or otherwise linked to some portion of the content) and executed by the client browser whenever the content is accessed, the monitoring information is provided to the audience measurement company irrespective of whether the client is a panelist of the audience measurement company.
In some instances, it is important to link demographics to the monitoring information. To address this issue, the audience measurement company establishes a panel of users who have agreed to provide their demographic information and to have their Internet browsing activities monitored. When an individual joins the panel, they provide detailed information concerning their identity and demographics (e.g., gender, race, income, home location, occupation, etc.) to the audience measurement company. The audience measurement entity sets a cookie (e.g., a panelist cookie) on the panelist computer that enables the audience measurement entity to identify the panelist whenever the panelist accesses tagged content (e.g., content associated with beacon or tag instructions) and, thus, sends monitoring information to the audience measurement entity.
Since most of the clients providing monitoring information from the tagged pages are not panelists and, thus, are unknown to the audience measurement entity, it has heretofore been necessary to use statistical methods to impute demographic information based on the data collected for panelists to the larger population of users providing data for the tagged content. However, panel sizes of audience measurement entities remain small compared to the general population of users. Thus, a problem is presented as to how to increase panel sizes while ensuring the demographics data of the panel is accurate.
There are many database proprietors operating on the Internet. These database proprietors provide services to large numbers of subscribers or registered users. In exchange for the provision of the service, the subscribers register with the proprietor. As part of this registration, the subscribers provide detailed demographic information. Examples of such database proprietors include social network providers such as Facebook, Myspace, etc. These database proprietors set cookies on the computing device (e.g., computer, cell phone, etc.) of their subscribers to enable the database proprietors to recognize the users when they visit their websites.
The protocols of the Internet make cookies inaccessible outside of the domain (e.g., Internet domain, domain name, etc.) on which they were set. Thus, a cookie set in the HFZlaw.com domain is accessible to servers in the HFZlaw.com domain, but not to servers outside that domain. Therefore, although an audience measurement entity might find it advantageous to access the cookies set by the database proprietors, they are unable to do so.
In view of the foregoing, it would be advantageous to leverage the existing databases of database proprietors to collect more extensive Internet usage and demographic data. However, there are several problems in accomplishing this end. For example, a problem is presented as to how to access the data of the database proprietors without compromising the privacy of the subscribers, the panelists, and/or the proprietors of the tracked content. Another problem is how to access this data given the technical restrictions imposed by the Internet protocols that prevent the audience measurement entity from accessing cookies set by the database proprietor. Example methods, apparatus and articles of manufacture disclosed herein solve these problems by extending the beaconing process to encompass partnered database proprietors and by using such partners as sources of distributed demographic information.
Example methods, apparatus, systems, and/or articles of manufacture disclosed herein cooperate with one or more database proprietors (also referred to herein as partners). The database proprietors provide Internet services to their registered users (e.g., users of those database proprietors) and store demographic information (e.g., in user account records) for those registered users. As part of this effort, the database proprietor agrees to provide demographic information of its registered users to the audience measurement entity for purposes of measuring demographic-based exposures to media such as content and/or advertisements. To prevent violating privacy agreements with the registered users of the database proprietor, examples disclosed herein employ cookie mapping techniques. That is, the database proprietor can maintain a mapping of its registered user cookies (i.e., partner cookies assigned by the database proprietor to its registered users) to cookies assigned by the audience measurement entity (i.e., audience measurement entity (AME) cookies) to the same registered users. In this manner, the audience measurement entity can log impressions of registered users based on the AME cookies and send full or partial AME cookie-based impression logs to a database proprietor. The database proprietor can, in turn, match its registered users to the AME cookie-based impressions based on its partner-to-AME cookie map. The database proprietor can then use the matches to associate demographic information for the matching registered users with corresponding impression logs. The database proprietor can then remove any identifying data (i.e., partner cookie data) from the demographic-based impression logs and provide the demographic-based impression logs to the audience measurement entity without revealing the identities of the database proprietor's registered users to the audience measurement entity. Thus, example techniques disclosed herein may be implemented without compromising privacies of registered users of database proprietors that partner with an audience measurement entity to track impressions based on audience demographics.
A database proprietor (e.g., Facebook) can access cookies it has set on a client device (e.g., a computer) to thereby identify the client based on the internal records (e.g., user account records) of the database proprietor. Because the identification of client devices is done with reference to enormous databases of registered users far beyond the quantity of persons present in a typical audience measurement panel, this process may be used to develop data that is extremely accurate, reliable, and detailed.
Because the audience measurement entity remains the first leg of the data collection process (i.e., receives tag requests generated by tag instructions from client devices to log impressions), the audience measurement entity is able to obscure the source of the content access being logged as well as the identity of the content (e.g., advertisements and/or other types of media) itself from the database proprietors (thereby protecting the privacy of the content sources), without compromising the ability of the database proprietors to provide demographic information corresponding to ones of their subscribers for which the audience measurement entity logged impressions.
Example methods, apparatus, and/or articles of manufacture disclosed herein can be used to determine impressions or exposures to advertisements and/or other types of media such as content using demographic information, which is distributed across different databases (e.g., different website owners, different service providers, etc.) on the Internet. Not only do example methods, apparatus, and articles of manufacture disclosed herein enable more accurate correlation of demographics to media impressions, but they also effectively extend panel sizes and compositions beyond persons participating (and/or willing to participate) in the panel of a ratings entity to persons registered in other Internet databases such as the databases of social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. This extension effectively leverages the content tagging capabilities of the audience ratings entity and the use of databases of non-ratings entities such as social media and other websites to create an enormous, demographically accurate panel that results in accurate, reliable measurements of exposures to Internet content such as advertising and/or programming.
Traditionally, audience measurement entities (also referred to herein as “ratings entities”) determine demographic reach for advertising and media programming based on registered panel members. That is, an audience measurement entity enrolls people that consent to being monitored into a panel. During enrollment, the audience measurement entity receives demographic information from the enrolling people so that subsequent correlations may be made between advertisement/media exposure to those panelists and different demographic markets. Unlike traditional techniques in which audience measurement entities rely solely on their own panel member data to collect demographics-based audience measurements, example methods, apparatus, and/or articles of manufacture disclosed herein enable an audience measurement entity to obtain demographic information from other entities that operate based on user registration models. As used herein, a user registration model is a model in which users subscribe to services of those entities by creating user accounts and providing demographic-related information about themselves. Obtaining such demographic information associated with registered users of database proprietors enables an audience measurement entity to extend or supplement its panel data with substantially reliable demographics information from external sources (e.g., database proprietors), thus extending the coverage, accuracy, and/or completeness of their demographics-based audience measurements. Such access also enables the audience measurement entity to monitor persons who would not otherwise have joined an audience measurement panel.
Any entity having a database identifying demographics of a set of individuals may cooperate with the audience measurement entity. Such entities are referred to herein as “database proprietors” and include entities such as Facebook, Google, Yahoo!, MSN, Twitter, Apple iTunes, Experian, etc. Such database proprietors may be, for example, online web services providers. For example, a database proprietor may be a social network site (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, etc.), a multi-service site (e.g., Yahoo!, Google, Experian, etc.), an online retailer site (e.g., Amazon.com, Buy.com, etc.), and/or any other web services site that maintains user registration records and irrespective of whether the site fits into none, one or more of the categories noted above.
Example methods, apparatus, and/or articles of manufacture disclosed herein may be implemented by an audience measurement entity, a ratings entity, or any other entity interested in measuring or tracking audience exposures to advertisements and/or any other media.
To increase the likelihood that measured viewership is accurately attributed to the correct demographics, example methods, apparatus, and/or articles of manufacture disclosed herein use demographic information located in the audience measurement entity's records as well as demographic information located at one or more database proprietors (e.g., web service providers) that maintain records or profiles of users having accounts therewith. In this manner, example methods, apparatus, and/or articles of manufacture may be used to supplement demographic information maintained by a ratings entity (e.g., an audience measurement company such as The Nielsen Company of Schaumburg, Ill., United States of America, that collects media exposure measurements and/or demographics) with demographic information from one or more different database proprietors (e.g., web service providers).
The use of demographic information from disparate data sources (e.g., high-quality demographic information from the panels of an audience measurement company and/or registered user data of web service providers) results in improving the reporting effectiveness of metrics for online and/or offline advertising campaigns. Examples disclosed herein use online registration data to identify demographics of users. Such examples also use server impression counts, tagging (also referred to as beaconing), and/or other techniques to track quantities of advertisement and/or content impressions attributable to those users. Online web service providers such as social networking sites and multi-service providers (collectively and individually referred to herein as online database proprietors) maintain detailed demographic information (e.g., age, gender, geographic location, race, income level, education level, religion, etc.) collected via user registration processes. An impression corresponds to a home or individual having been exposed to the corresponding media content and/or advertisement. Thus, an impression represents a home or an individual having been exposed to an advertisement or content or group of advertisements or content. In Internet advertising, a quantity of impressions or impression count is the total number of times an advertisement or advertisement campaign has been accessed by a web population (e.g., including number of times accessed as decreased by, for example, pop-up blockers and/or increased by, for example, retrieval from local cache memory).
Example impression reports generated using example methods, apparatus, and/or articles of manufacture disclosed herein may be used to report TV GRPs and online GRPs in a side-by-side manner. For instance, advertisers may use impression reports to report quantities of unique people or users that are reached individually and/or collectively by TV and/or online advertisements.
Although examples are disclosed herein in connection with advertisements, advertisement exposures, and/or advertisement impressions, such examples may additionally or alternatively be implemented in connection with other types of media in addition to or instead of advertisements. That is, processes, apparatus, systems, operations, structures, data, and/or information disclosed herein in connection with advertisements may be similarly used and/or implemented for use with other types of media such as content. “Media” refers to content and/or advertisements. Websites, movies, television and/or other programming is generally referred to herein as content. Advertisements are typically distributed with content. Traditionally, content is provided at little or no cost to the audience because it is subsidized by advertisers who pay to have their advertisements distributed with the content.
Turning now to
In the illustrated example, content providers and/or advertisers distribute advertisements 110 via the Internet to users that access websites and/or online television services (e.g., web-based TV, Internet protocol TV (IPTV), etc.). In the illustrated example, the advertisements 110 may be individual, stand alone ads and/or may be part of one or more ad campaigns. The ads of the illustrated example are encoded with identification codes (i.e., data) that identify the associated ad campaign (e.g., campaign ID, if any), a creative type ID (e.g., identifying a Flash-based ad, a banner ad, a rich type ad, etc.), a source ID (e.g., identifying the ad publisher), and/or a placement ID (e.g., identifying the physical placement of the ad on a screen). The advertisements 110 of the illustrated example are also tagged or encoded to include computer executable monitoring instructions (e.g., Java, java script, or any other computer language or script) that are executed by web browsers that access the advertisements 110 via, for example, the Internet. In the illustrated example of
In some examples, advertisements tagged with such tag instructions are distributed with Internet-based media content such as, for example, web pages, streaming video, streaming audio, IPTV content, etc. As noted above, methods, apparatus, systems, and/or articles of manufacture disclosed herein are not limited to advertisement monitoring but can be adapted to any type of content monitoring (e.g., web pages, movies, television programs, etc.) Example techniques that may be used to implement such monitoring, tag and/or beacon instructions are described in Blumenau, U.S. Pat. No. 6,108,637, which is hereby incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
In the illustrated example of
To overcome the domain limitations associated with collecting cookie information, the impression monitoring system 102 monitors impressions of users of the client devices 108 that are registered users of one or both of the partner A and partner B database proprietors 104a and 104b. When a user of one of the client devices 108 logs into a service of one of the database proprietors 104a or 104b, the client device 108 performs an initialization (INIT) AME cookie message exchange 116 with the impression monitor system 102 and sends a login reporting message 118 to the database proprietor providing that service. For example, as described in more detail below in connection with
Subsequently, the impression monitor system 102 receives the tag requests 112 based on ads and/or content presented via the client devices 108 and logs impressions based on the presented ads and/or content in association with respective AME cookies of the client devices 108 as described in detail below in connection with
Each of the partner database proprietors 104a-b may subsequently use their respective AME cookie-to-partner cookie mappings to match demographics of users of the client devices 108 identified based on partner cookies with impressions logged based on AME cookies in the AME impression logs 122. Example demographic matching and reporting is described in greater detail below in connection with
In the illustrated example of
A web browser of the client device 108 may execute the cookie reporter 202 to monitor for login events associated with the login page 204. When a user logs in to a service of the partner A database proprietor 104a via the login page 204, the cookie reporter 202 initiates the INIT AME message exchange 116 by sending a request 206 to the impression monitor system 102. In the illustrated example of
The request 206 of the illustrated example is implemented using an HTTP request that includes a header field 210, a cookie field 212, and a payload field 214. The header field 210 stores standard protocol information associated with HTTP requests. When the client device 108 does not yet have an AME cookie set therein, the cookie field 212 is empty to indicate to the impression monitor system 102 that it needs to create and set the AME cookie 208 in the client device 108. In response to receiving a request 206 that does not contain an AME cookie 208, the impression monitor system 102 generates an AME cookie 208 and sends the AME cookie 208 to the client device 108 in a cookie field 218 of a response message 216 as part of the INIT AME cookie message exchange 116 of
In the illustrated example of
In the illustrated example of
Although the login reporting message 118 is shown in the example of
In some examples, the partner A database proprietor 104a uses the partner A cookie 228 to track online activity of its registered users. For example, the partner A database proprietor 104a may track user visits to web pages hosted by the partner A database proprietor 104a, display those web pages according to the preferences of the users, etc. The partner A cookie 228 may also be used to collect “domain-specific” user activity. As used herein, “domain-specific” user activity is user Internet activity associated within the domain(s) of a single entity. Domain-specific user activity may also be referred to as “intra-domain activity.” In some examples, the partner A database proprietor 104a collects intra-domain activity such as the number of web pages (e.g., web pages of the social network domain such as other social network member pages or other intra-domain pages) visited by each registered user and/or the types of devices such as mobile devices (e.g., smart phones) or stationary devices (e.g., desktop computers) used for access. The partner A database proprietor 104a may also track account characteristics such as the quantity of social connections (e.g., friends) maintained by each registered user, the quantity of pictures posted by each registered user, the quantity of messages sent or received by each registered user, and/or any other characteristic of user accounts.
In some examples, the cookie reporter 202 is configured to send the request 206 to the impression monitor system 102 and send the login reporting message 118 to the partner A database proprietor 104a only after the partner A database proprietor 104a has indicated that a user login via the login page 204 was successful. In this manner, the request 206 and the login reporting message 118 are not performed unnecessarily should a login be unsuccessful. In the illustrated example of
In the illustrated example of
The partner cookie map 236 stores partner cookies (e.g., the partner A cookie 228) in association with respective AME cookies (e.g., the AME cookie 208) and respective timestamps (e.g., the timestamp 220). In the illustrated example of
Returning to
Turning in detail to
In the illustrated example of
In the illustrated example, in response to receiving the tag request 112, the impression monitor system 102 logs an impression associated with the client device 108 in the AME impressions store 114 by storing the AME cookie 208 in association with a content identifier (e.g., the ad campaign information 316 and/or the publisher site ID 318). In addition, the impression monitor system 102 generates a timestamp indicative of the time/date of when the impression occurred and stores the timestamp in association with the logged impression. An example implementation of the example AME impression store 114 is shown in
In the illustrated example, the apparatus 400 is provided with an example cookie matcher 402, an example demographics associator 404, an example demographics analyzer 406, an example demographics modifier 408, an example user ID modifier 410, an example report generator 412, an example data parser 414, an example mapper 416, and an example instructions interface 418. While an example manner of implementing the apparatus 400 has been illustrated in
Turning in detail to
In the illustrated example, the apparatus 400 is provided with the cookie matcher 402 to match AME user IDs from AME cookies (e.g., the AME cookie 208 of
In some examples, the cookie matcher 402 uses login timestamps (e.g., the login timestamp 220 of
In the illustrated example, the cookie matcher 402 compiles the matched results into an example partner-based impressions data structure 700, which is shown in detail in
Returning to
In the illustrated example of
In the illustrated example, to remove user IDs from the partner-based impressions structure 700 after adding the demographics information and before providing the data to the AME 103, the apparatus 400 of the illustrated example is provided with a user ID modifier 410. In the illustrated example, the user ID modifier 410 is configured to at least remove partner user IDs (from the partner user ID column 712) to protect the privacy of registered users of the partner A database proprietor 104a. In some examples, the user ID modifier 410 may also remove the AME user IDs (e.g., from the AME user ID column 702) so that the impression reports 106a generated by the apparatus 400 are demographic-level impression reports. “Removal” of user IDs (e.g., by the user ID modifier 410 and/or by the report generator 412) may be done by not providing a copy of the data in the corresponding user ID fields as opposed to deleting any data from those fields. If the AME user IDs are preserved in the impressions data structure 700, the apparatus 400 of the illustrated example can generate user-level impression reports.
In the illustrated example of
In the illustrated example of
In the illustrated example of
In the illustrated example of
In the illustrated example, to generate login timestamps (e.g., the login timestamp 220 of
In the illustrated example, to receive messages and/or information from client devices 108 and send messages and/or information to client devices 108 and/or to partner database proprietors 104a and 104b, the impression monitor system 102 is provided with a communication interface 1512. For example, the communication interface 1512 may receive messages such as the tag requests 112 (
In the illustrated example, to detect whether AME cookies (e.g., the AME cookie 208 of
In the illustrated example, to retrieve cookies from storage locations in client devices (e.g., the client devices 108 of
In the illustrated example, to generate messages (e.g., the tag requests 112 of
While example manners of implementing the apparatus 102 and 202 have been illustrated in
Turning to
To track frequencies of impressions per unique user per day, the impressions totalization structure 800 is provided with a frequency column 802. A frequency of 1 indicates one exposure per day of an ad campaign to a unique user, while a frequency of 4 indicates four exposures per day of the same ad campaign to a unique user. To track the quantity of unique users to which impressions are attributable, the impressions totalization structure 800 is provided with a UUIDs column 804. A value of 100,000 in the UUIDs column 804 is indicative of 100,000 unique users. Thus, the first entry of the impressions totalization structure 800 indicates that 100,000 unique users (i.e., UUIDs=100,000) were exposed once (i.e., frequency=1) in a single day to a particular ad campaign.
To track impressions based on exposure frequency and UUIDs, the impressions totalization structure 800 is provided with an impressions column 806. Each impression count stored in the impressions column 806 is determined by multiplying a corresponding frequency value stored in the frequency column 802 with a corresponding UUID value stored in the UUID column 804. For example, in the second entry of the impressions totalization structure 800, the frequency value of two is multiplied by 200,000 unique users to determine that 400,000 impressions are attributable to a particular ad campaign.
Turning to
The ad campaign-level age/gender and impression composition structure 900 is provided with an age/gender column 902, an impressions column 904, a frequency column 906, and an impression composition column 908. The age/gender column 902 of the illustrated example indicates different age/gender demographic groups. The impressions column 904 of the illustrated example stores values indicative of the total impressions for a particular ad campaign for corresponding age/gender demographic groups. The frequency column 906 of the illustrated example stores values indicative of the frequency of exposure per user for the ad campaign that contributed to the impressions in the impressions column 904. The impressions composition column 908 of the illustrated example stores the percentage of impressions for each of the age/gender demographic groups.
In some examples, the demographics analyzer 406 and the demographics modifier 408 of
Although the example ad campaign-level age/gender and impression composition structure 900 shows impression statistics in connection with only age/gender demographic information, the report generator 412 of
As used herein, the term tangible computer readable medium is expressly defined to include any type of computer readable storage and to exclude propagating signals. Additionally or alternatively, the example processes of
Alternatively, the example processes of
Although the example processes of
Turning in detail to
Initially, as part of the client device process 1002, the login event detector 1602 (
As shown in the example impression monitor system process 1004, the communication interface 1512 (
After storing the AME cookie 208 in the response 216 (block 1022) or if the cookie status detector 1502 determines at block 1018 that the AME cookie 208 is already set in the client device 108, the timestamp generator 1506 generates a login timestamp (e.g., the login timestamp 220 of
Returning to the client device process 1002, the communication interface 1610 (
Turning now to
Initially, the partner A database proprietor 104a receives the login reporting message 118 (
Now turning to
Initially, the communication interface 1512 (
If the impression logger 1510 determines that it should send the AME impression logs 122 to one or more partner database proprietors (block 1206), the communication interface 1512 sends the AME impression logs 122 to the one or more partner database proprietors (block 1208). In response, the communication interface 1512 receives one or more impression reports (e.g., the impression reports 106a and 106b of
After receiving the one or more impression reports (block 1210) or if at block 1206 the impression logger 1510 determines that it should not send the AME impression logs 122 to one or more partner database proprietors, the impression monitor system 102 determines whether it should continue to monitor impressions (block 1212). For example, the impression monitor system 102 may be configured to monitor impressions until it is turned off or disabled. If the impression monitor system 102 determines that it should continue to monitor impressions (block 1212), control returns to block 1202. Otherwise, the example process of
Turning now to
Initially, the apparatus 400 receives the AME impression logs 122 (
The demographics associator 404 (
The user ID modifier 410 removes user IDs from the demographics-based impressions data structure 700 (block 1310). For example, the user ID modifier 410 can remove UUIDs from the AME user ID column 702 corresponding to AME cookies (e.g., the AME cookie 208 of
The demographics analyzer 406 (
After modifying demographics information at block 1316 or if at block 1314 the demographics analyzer 406 determines that none of the demographics information requires modification, the report generator 412 generates one or more impression reports (e.g., the impression reports 106a of
The processor 1412 of
In general, the system memory 1424 may include any desired type of volatile and/or non-volatile memory such as, for example, static random access memory (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (DRAM), flash memory, read-only memory (ROM), etc. The mass storage memory 1425 may include any desired type of mass storage device including hard disk drives, optical drives, tape storage devices, etc. The optical media 1427 may include any desired type of optical media such as a digital versatile disc (DVD), a compact disc (CD), or a blu-ray optical disc. The instructions of any of
The I/O controller 1422 performs functions that enable the processor 1412 to communicate with peripheral input/output (I/O) devices 1426 and 1428 and a network interface 1430 via an I/O bus 1432. The I/O devices 1426 and 1428 may be any desired type of I/O device such as, for example, a keyboard, a video display or monitor, a mouse, etc. The network interface 1430 may be, for example, an Ethernet device, an asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) device, an 802.11 device, a digital subscriber line (DSL) modem, a cable modem, a cellular modem, etc. that enables the processor system 1410 to communicate with another processor system.
While the memory controller 1420 and the I/O controller 1422 are depicted in
Although the above discloses example methods, apparatus, systems, and articles of manufacture including, among other components, firmware and/or software executed on hardware, it should be noted that such methods, apparatus, systems, and articles of manufacture are merely illustrative and should not be considered as limiting. Accordingly, while the above describes example methods, apparatus, systems, and articles of manufacture, the examples provided are not the only ways to implement such methods, apparatus, systems, and articles of manufacture.
Although certain example methods, apparatus and articles of manufacture have been described herein, the scope of coverage of this patent is not limited thereto. On the contrary, this patent covers all methods, apparatus and articles of manufacture fairly falling within the scope of the claims of this patent.
This patent arises from a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/364,961, filed on Mar. 26, 2019, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/966,195, filed on Apr. 30, 2018, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,284,667, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/409,281, filed on Jan. 18, 2017, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,979,614, which is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/921,962, filed Jun. 19, 2013, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,596,150, which is a continuation of International Patent Application Serial No. PCT/US11/65881, filed Dec. 19, 2011, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/424,952, filed on Dec. 20, 2010, all of which are hereby incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3540003 | Murphy | Nov 1970 | A |
3818458 | Deese | Jun 1974 | A |
3906450 | Prado, Jr. | Sep 1975 | A |
3906454 | Martin | Sep 1975 | A |
T955010 | Ragonese et al. | Feb 1977 | I4 |
4168396 | Best | Sep 1979 | A |
4230990 | Lert, Jr. et al. | Oct 1980 | A |
4232193 | Gerard | Nov 1980 | A |
4306289 | Lumley | Dec 1981 | A |
4319079 | Best | Mar 1982 | A |
4361832 | Cole | Nov 1982 | A |
4367525 | Brown et al. | Jan 1983 | A |
4558413 | Schmidt et al. | Dec 1985 | A |
4588991 | Atalla | May 1986 | A |
4590550 | Eilert et al. | May 1986 | A |
4595940 | Loftberg | Jun 1986 | A |
4658093 | Hellman | Apr 1987 | A |
4672572 | Alsberg | Jun 1987 | A |
4685056 | Barnside, Jr. et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4696034 | Wiedemer | Sep 1987 | A |
4703324 | White | Oct 1987 | A |
4718005 | Feigenbaum et al. | Jan 1988 | A |
4720782 | Kovalcin | Jan 1988 | A |
4734865 | Scullion et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
4740890 | William | Apr 1988 | A |
4747139 | Taaffe | May 1988 | A |
4757533 | Allen et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
4791565 | Dunham et al. | Dec 1988 | A |
4821178 | Levin et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4825354 | Agrawal et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4827508 | Shear | May 1989 | A |
4866769 | Karp | Sep 1989 | A |
4914689 | Quade et al. | Apr 1990 | A |
4926162 | Pickell | May 1990 | A |
4940976 | Gastouniotis et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
4956769 | Smith | Sep 1990 | A |
4959590 | Hatada et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
4977594 | Shear | Dec 1990 | A |
5023907 | Johnson et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5032979 | Hecht et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5086386 | Islam | Feb 1992 | A |
5182770 | Medveczky et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5204897 | Wyman | Apr 1993 | A |
5233642 | Renton | Aug 1993 | A |
5283734 | Von Kohom | Feb 1994 | A |
5287408 | Samson | Feb 1994 | A |
5343239 | Lappington et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5355484 | Record et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5374951 | Welsh | Dec 1994 | A |
5377269 | Heptig et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5388211 | Hornbuckle | Feb 1995 | A |
5406269 | Baran | Apr 1995 | A |
5410598 | Shear | Apr 1995 | A |
5440738 | Bowman et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5444642 | Montgomery et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5450134 | Legate | Sep 1995 | A |
5483658 | Grube et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5497479 | Hornbuckle | Mar 1996 | A |
5499340 | Barritz | Mar 1996 | A |
5584050 | Lyons | Dec 1996 | A |
5594934 | Lu et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5675510 | Coffey et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5793409 | Tetsumura | Aug 1998 | A |
5796352 | Tanaka et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5848396 | Gerace | Dec 1998 | A |
5855008 | Goldhaber et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5948061 | Merriman et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
6052730 | Felciano et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6055573 | Gardenswartz et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6098093 | Bayeh et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6102406 | Miles et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108637 | Blumenau | Aug 2000 | A |
6138155 | Davis et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6144988 | Kappel | Nov 2000 | A |
6164975 | Weingarden et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6223215 | Hunt et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6247050 | Tso et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6339423 | Sampson et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6415323 | McCanne et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6434614 | Blumenau | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6460079 | Blumenau | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6529952 | Blumenau | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6839680 | Liu | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6877007 | Hentzel et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6904408 | McCarthy | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6959420 | Mitchell et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
6993590 | Gauthier et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7039699 | Narin et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7092926 | Cerrato | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7143195 | Vange et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7159023 | Tufts | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7181412 | Fulgoni et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7257546 | Ebrahimi et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7260837 | Abraham et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7343417 | Baum | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7386473 | Blumenau | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7406516 | Davis et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7526538 | Wilson | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7546370 | Acharya et al. | Jun 2009 | B1 |
7590568 | Blumenau | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7600014 | Russell et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7613635 | Blumenau | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7644156 | Blumenau | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7650407 | Blumenau | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7653724 | Blumenau | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7693863 | Martin et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7716326 | Blumenau | May 2010 | B2 |
7720963 | Blumenau | May 2010 | B2 |
7720964 | Blumenau | May 2010 | B2 |
7756974 | Blumenau | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7788216 | Li et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7836009 | Paczkowski et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7882242 | Chen | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7925694 | Harris | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7941525 | Yavilevich | May 2011 | B1 |
7949565 | Eldering et al. | May 2011 | B1 |
7958234 | Thomas et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7962603 | Morimoto | Jun 2011 | B1 |
8032626 | Russell et al. | Oct 2011 | B1 |
8046255 | Bistriccanu et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8060601 | Brown et al. | Nov 2011 | B1 |
8131861 | Butler et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8229780 | Davidow et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8234408 | Jungck | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8266687 | Baldry | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8271886 | Lee et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8302120 | Ramaswamy | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8307006 | Hannan et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8370489 | Mazumdar et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8468271 | Panwar | Jun 2013 | B1 |
8504411 | Subasic et al. | Aug 2013 | B1 |
8543454 | Fleischman et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8595069 | Shkedi et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8626084 | Chan et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8631122 | Kadam et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8713168 | Heffernan et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8751461 | Abraham et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8843626 | Mazumdar et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8898309 | Goldspink et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8909771 | Heath | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8943309 | Schilder et al. | Jan 2015 | B1 |
8954536 | Kalus et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
9055122 | Grecco et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9117217 | Wilson et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9154565 | Monighetti | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9166714 | Barve | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9497090 | Srivastava et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9606454 | Taguchi et al. | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9979614 | Kalus et al. | May 2018 | B2 |
10046239 | Van Datta | Aug 2018 | B2 |
10284667 | Kalus et al. | May 2019 | B2 |
20010034646 | Hoyt et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010054004 | Powers | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020065896 | Burakoff et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020099609 | Nascenzi et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20030037131 | Verma | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030046385 | Vincent | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030065770 | Davis et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030163516 | Perkins et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030177488 | Smith et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030220901 | Carr et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040088212 | Hill | May 2004 | A1 |
20050033657 | Herrington et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050166233 | Beyda et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050204148 | Mayo et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050223093 | Hanson et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050278708 | Zhao et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060056413 | Ikeda et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060178996 | Matsushima et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060271641 | Stavrakos et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060282328 | Gerace | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060294259 | Matefi et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070005606 | Ganesan et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070073833 | Roy et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070106787 | Blumenau | May 2007 | A1 |
20070106792 | Blumenau | May 2007 | A1 |
20070156532 | Nyhan et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070198327 | Yazdani et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20080004958 | Ralph et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080052392 | Webster et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080086523 | Afergan et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080086524 | Afergan et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080126420 | Wright et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080201427 | Chen | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080201472 | Bistriceanu et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080228808 | Kobara | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080235243 | Lee et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080250136 | Izrailevsky et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080276179 | Borenstein et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090019148 | Britton et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090024737 | Goldspink et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090024748 | Goldspink et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090030780 | York et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090055241 | Chen et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090055908 | Rapoport | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090070443 | Vanderhook | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090076899 | Gbodimowo | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090132579 | Kwang | May 2009 | A1 |
20090171762 | Alkove et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090259666 | Tola et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090271478 | Imai | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090293001 | Lu et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090327026 | Bistriceanu et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100004977 | Marci et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100010866 | Bal et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100024005 | Huang et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100070621 | Urdan et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100088152 | Bennett | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100088373 | Pinkham | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100121676 | Jackson | May 2010 | A1 |
20100153544 | Krassner et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100180013 | Shkedi | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100205057 | Hook et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100241745 | Offen et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100257135 | Wolfe et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100262498 | Nolet et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100268540 | Arshi et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100268573 | Jain et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100281178 | Sullivan | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100299604 | Blumenau | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110016482 | Tidwell et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110035256 | Shkedi et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110061000 | Andreasson | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110087519 | Fordyce, III et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110087919 | Deshmukh et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110093327 | Fordyce et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110106620 | Setiawan et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110125593 | Wright et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110137733 | Baird et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110153391 | Tenbrock | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110191664 | Sheleheda et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110191831 | Chan et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110202500 | Warn et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110208860 | Sim et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110231240 | Schoen et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110246297 | Buchalter et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110246641 | Pugh et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110276627 | Blechar et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110288907 | Harvey et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110314114 | Young, III et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120005213 | Hannan et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120011262 | Cheng et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120030037 | Carriero | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120042005 | Papakostas et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120072469 | Perez | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120109709 | Fordyce, III et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120109882 | Bouse et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120110027 | Falcon | May 2012 | A1 |
20120110071 | Zhou et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120143713 | Dittus et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120151322 | Lindsay et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120158954 | Heffernan | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120166520 | Lindsay et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120173701 | Tenbrock | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120192214 | Hunn et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120209920 | Neystadt et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120215621 | Heffernan et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120239407 | Lynch et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120239809 | Mazumdar et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120254466 | Jungck | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120302222 | Williamson et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120303454 | Gupta | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120310729 | Dalto et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120311017 | Sze et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130014144 | Bhatia et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130019262 | Bhatia et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130046651 | Edson | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130097311 | Mazumdar et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130097312 | Mazumdar et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130124628 | Weerasinghe | May 2013 | A1 |
20130138506 | Zhu et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130145022 | Srivastava et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159499 | Besehanic | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130212188 | Duterque et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130246389 | Osann, Jr. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130246609 | Topchy et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130282898 | Kalus et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130297411 | Van Datta et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130332604 | Seth et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140033317 | Barber | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140156761 | Heffernan et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140250223 | Heffernan | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20160021204 | Seth et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20170126518 | Kalus et al. | May 2017 | A1 |
20170154366 | Turgeman | Jun 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
774177 | Jan 2001 | AU |
2011349435 | May 2013 | AU |
2013205736 | May 2013 | AU |
2016259351 | Dec 2016 | AU |
2018201461 | Mar 2018 | AU |
101222348 | Jul 2008 | CN |
101505247 | Aug 2009 | CN |
0325219 | Jul 1989 | EP |
0703683 | Mar 1996 | EP |
0744695 | Nov 1996 | EP |
1379044 | Jan 2004 | EP |
2176639 | Dec 1986 | GB |
H05324352 | Dec 1993 | JP |
H10-124428 | May 1998 | JP |
2000-357141 | Dec 2000 | JP |
2001282982 | Oct 2001 | JP |
2002-56280 | Feb 2002 | JP |
2002163562 | Jun 2002 | JP |
2002373152 | Dec 2002 | JP |
2003067289 | Mar 2003 | JP |
2006127320 | May 2006 | JP |
2006127321 | May 2006 | JP |
2008511057 | Apr 2008 | JP |
2008524749 | Jul 2008 | JP |
2008234641 | Oct 2008 | JP |
2009259119 | Nov 2009 | JP |
2010-257448 | Nov 2010 | JP |
2013544384 | Dec 2013 | JP |
2012093970 | May 2015 | JP |
2016095866 | May 2016 | JP |
20020037980 | May 2002 | KR |
20110023293 | Mar 2011 | KR |
9600950 | Jan 1996 | WO |
9617467 | Jun 1996 | WO |
9628904 | Sep 1996 | WO |
9632815 | Oct 1996 | WO |
9637983 | Nov 1996 | WO |
9641495 | Dec 1996 | WO |
9809447 | Mar 1998 | WO |
0154034 | Jul 2001 | WO |
2005013072 | Feb 2005 | WO |
2006023765 | Mar 2006 | WO |
2006068969 | Jun 2006 | WO |
2009117733 | Sep 2009 | WO |
2011097624 | Aug 2011 | WO |
2012040371 | Mar 2012 | WO |
2012087954 | Jun 2012 | WO |
2012128895 | Sep 2012 | WO |
2013122907 | Aug 2013 | WO |
2013188429 | Dec 2013 | WO |
Entry |
---|
IP Australia, “Examination Report No. 1,” mailed in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2016259351, dated Jun. 15, 2017, 3 pages. |
IP Australia, “Notice of Acceptance for Patent Application,” dated Nov. 24, 2017 in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2016259351, 3 pages. |
IP Australia, “Examination Report No. 1,” dated Aug. 6, 2019 in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2018201461, 3 pages. |
IP Australia, “Examination Report No. 2,” dated Feb. 5, 2020 in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2018201461, 3 pages. |
Canadian Intellectual Property Office, “Office Action,” dated May 2, 2019 in connection with Canadian Patent Application No. 2,977,942, 4 pages. |
Canadian Intellectual Property Office, “Office Action,” dated Apr. 22, 2020 in connection with Canadian Patent Application No. 2,977,942, 4 pages. |
European Patent Office, “Decision to Refuse a European Patent Application,” dated Jul. 24, 2019 in connection with European Patent Application No. 11850570.0, 16 pages. |
European Patent Office, “Summons to Attend Oral Proceedings,” issued Jan. 14, 2019 in connection with European Patent Application No. 11850570.0, 7 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Non-Final Office Action,” dated Sep. 4, 2018 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,195, 8 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Notice of Allowance,” dated Oct. 3, 2019 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 16/364,961, 8 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Non-Final Office Action,” dated Sep. 24, 2020 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 15/933,054, 19 pages. |
IP Australia, “Notice of Allowance,” dated Apr. 17, 2020 in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2018201461, 3 pages. |
Javascript and Ajax Forum, Sep. 28, 2005, [retrieved from Internet at http://www.webmasterworld.com/ forum91/4465.htm on Jun. 29, 2011] 4 pages. |
Vranica, “Nielsen Testing a New Web-Ad Metric,” The Wall Street Journal, Sep. 23, 2010, 2 pages. |
Wikipedia, “Mental Poker,” Jan. 12, 2010, [retrieved from Internet at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_poker on Sep. 21, 2010], 5 pages. |
The Nielsen Company, “Nielsen Unveils New Online Advertising Measurement,” Sep. 27, 2010, [retrieved from Internet at http://nielsen.com/us/en/insights/press-room/2010/nielsen_unveils_newonlineadvertisingmeasurement.html on May 31, 2012], 3 pages. |
Adam et al., “Privacy Preserving Integration of Health Care Data,” AMIA 2007 Symposium Proceedings, 6 pages. |
International Searching Authority, “International Search Report,” issued in connection with PCT application No. PCT/US2011/065881, dated Jul. 9, 2012, 3 pages. |
International Searching Authority, “Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority,” issued in connection with PCT/US2011/065881, dated Jul. 9, 2012, 6 pages. |
Coffey, “Internet Audience Measurement: A Practitioner's View,” Journal of Interactive Advertising, vol. 1, No. 2, Spring 2001, 8 pages. |
State Intellectual Property Office of China, “Search Report,” issued in connection with Chinese Application No. 201180061437.0, dated Feb. 27, 2014, 2 pages. |
State Intellectual Property Office of China, “First Office Action,” issued in connection with Chinese Application No. 201180061437.0, dated Mar. 7, 2014, 4 pages. |
International Bureau, “International Preliminary Report on Patentability,” issued in connection with International Application No. PCT/US2011/065881, dated Jun. 25, 2013, 7 pages. |
Albanesius, “Facebook Issues Fix for Several Tracking Cookies,” internet article, www.pcmag.com, Sep. 28, 2011, 2 pages. |
Protalinski, “Facebook denies cookie tracking allegations,” internet article, www.zdnet.com, Sep. 25, 2011, 2 pages. |
Protalinski, “Facebook fixes cookie behavior after logging out,” internet article, www.zdnet.com, Sep. 27, 2011, 2 pages. |
Protalinski, “US congressmen ask FTC to investigate Facebook cookies,” internet article, www.zdnet.com, Sep. 28, 2011, 2 pages. |
Fliptop, “Fliptop Person API Documentation,” https://developer.fliptop.com/documentation, retrieved May 7, 2013, 6 pages. |
Fliptop, “Get, Keep and Grow Customers with Fliptop's Customer Intelligence Application,” www.fliptop.com/features_social_matching, retrieved May 7, 2013, 3 pages. |
Fliptop, “What is Fliptop?”, www.fliptop.com/about_us, retrieved May 7, 2013, 1 page. |
Launder, “Media Journal: Nielsen to Test Online-TV Viewing Tool,” The Wall Street Journal, Apr. 30, 2013, 2 pages. |
Cubrilovic, “Logging out of Facebook is not enough,” inter-net article, www.nikcub.appspot.com, Sep. 25, 2011, 3 pages. |
Rainier, Maria, “Why Businesses Should Use Google Plus,” The Social Media Guide, thesocialmediaguide.com/ social_media/why-businesses-should-use-google- plus, retrieved on May 7, 2013, 9 pages. |
Rapleaf, “Fast. Simple. Secure,” www.rapleaf.com/why-rapleaf/, retrieved on May 7, 2013, 3 pages. |
Rapleaf, “Frequently Asked Questions,” www.rapleaf.com/about-us/faq/#where, retrieved on May 7, 2013, 3 pages. |
Rapleaf, “The Consumer Data Marketplace,” www.rapleaf.com/under-the-hood/, retrieved on May 7, 2013, 2 pages. |
Sharma, “Nielsen Gets Digital to Track Online TV Viewers,” All Things, Apr. 30, 2013, 1 page. |
Vega, Tanzina, “Nielsen Introduces New Ad Measurement Product,” The New York Times, Sep. 27, 2010, 7 pages. |
European Patent Office, “Extended Search Report,” issued in connection with European Patent Application No. 11850570.0, dated Apr. 25, 2014, 5 pages. |
Japanese Patent Office, “Office Action,” issued in connection with Japanese Patent Application No. 2013-546286, dated Aug. 26, 2014, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Notice of Allowance” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/995,864, dated Oct. 28, 2014, 9 pages. |
IP Australia, “Patent Examination Report No. 1,” issued in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2011349435 dated Nov. 4, 2014, 3 pages. |
Canadian Intellectual Property Office, “Office Action,” issued in connection with Canadian Patent Application No. 2,819,268, dated Nov. 24, 2014, 4 pages. |
State Intellectual Property Office of China, “Second Notification of Office Action,” issued in connection with application No. 201180061437.0 dated Nov. 15, 2014, 6 pages. |
Japanese Patent Office, “Notice of Reasons for Rejection,” issued in connection with Japanese Patent Application No. P2015-078539 dated Jul. 14, 2015, 6 pages. |
Japanese Patent Office, “Notice of Allowance,” issued in connection with Japanese Patent Application No. 2013-546286 dated Mar. 10, 2015, 3 pages. |
State Intellectual Property Office of China, “First Office Action,” issued in connection with Application No. 201310338209.4 dated Dec. 22, 2015, 16 pages. |
IP Australia, “Patent Examination Report No. 2,” issued in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2011349435, dated Mar. 1, 2016, 5 pages. |
IP Australia, “Patent Examination Report No. 3,” issued in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2011349435, dated Jun. 9, 2016, 4 pages. |
Canadian Intellectual Property Office, “Office Action,” issued in connection with Canadian Patent Application No. 2,819,268, dated Mar. 15, 2016, 6 pages. |
IP Australia, “Patent Examination Report No. 4,” issued in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2011349435, dated Aug. 1, 2016, 5 pages. |
Intellectual Property Office of China, “Second Office Action,” issued in connection with Chinese Patent Application No. 201310338209.4, dated Jul. 20, 2016, 4 pages. |
European Patent Office, “Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC,”. issued in connection with European Patent Application No. 11850570.0, dated May 3, 2019, 5 pages. |
Japanese Patent Office, “Notice of Allowance,” issued in connection with Japanese Patent Application No. 2015-256568, dated Jan. 17, 2017, 7 pages, (English language machine translation accompanying entire document.). |
State Intellectual Property Office of China, “Second Office Action,” issued in connection with Chinese Patent Application No. 201310338209.4, dated Jul. 20, 2016, 4 pages. |
Canadian Patent Office, “Notice of Allowance,” issued in connection with Canadian Patent Application No. 2,819,268, dated Mar. 27, 2017, 1 page. |
IP Australia, “Examination Report No. 2,” issued in connection with Australian Patent Application No. 2016259351, dated Aug. 9, 2017, 3 pages. |
Japanese Patent Office, “Notice of Reasons for Rejection,” issued in connection with Japanese Patent Application No. 2017-025262, dated Dec. 12, 2017, 5 pages. |
Pouttu-Clarke, Matt, “J2EE patterns: Cross Domain Cookie Provider,” The Server Side, Jan. 19, 2005, [Retrieved from the Internet at http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread/31258.html], 12 pages. |
Google Answers, “Storing and Retrieving non 3rd Party Cookies Across Multiple Domains,”, Jun. 30, 2006, retrieved from [http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/742376.html], 4 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Non-Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/404,984, dated May 20, 2015, 10 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/404,984, dated Feb. 1, 2016, 17 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Non-Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/404,984, dated Oct. 19, 2016, 36 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Non-Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/404,984, dated May 15, 2017, 36 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/404,984, dated Dec. 27, 2017, 25 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Non-Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 15/409,281, dated May 19, 2017, 8 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Notice of Allowance,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 15/409,281, dated Jan. 4, 2018, 7 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Supplemental Notice of Allowability,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 15/409,281, dated Jan. 24, 2018, 3 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Non-Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/921,962, dated Feb. 25, 2016, 7 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Notice of Allowance,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/921,962, dated Sep. 27, 2016, 9 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Supplemental Notice of Allowability,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/921,962, dated Feb. 2, 2017, 2 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Non-Final Office Action,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,195, dated Sep. 4, 2018, 8 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Notice of Allowance,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,195, dated Dec. 20, 2018, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, “Notice of Allowability,” issued in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,195, dated Mar. 27, 2019, 2 pages. |
Japanese Patent Office, “Notice of Reasons for Rejection,” dated Nov. 4, 2020 in connection with Japanese Patent Application No. 2019-193447, 7 pages (including English translation). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200259910 A1 | Aug 2020 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61424952 | Dec 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13921962 | Jun 2013 | US |
Child | 15409281 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 16364961 | Mar 2019 | US |
Child | 16792766 | US | |
Parent | 15966195 | Apr 2018 | US |
Child | 16364961 | US | |
Parent | 15409281 | Jan 2017 | US |
Child | 15966195 | US | |
Parent | PCT/US2011/065881 | Dec 2011 | US |
Child | 13921962 | US |