Methods for determining contents of media

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6694042
  • Patent Number
    6,694,042
  • Date Filed
    Monday, April 8, 2002
    22 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, February 17, 2004
    20 years ago
Abstract
By printing documents and other objects with machine readable indicia, such as steganographic digital watermarks or barcodes, a great variety of document management functions can be enabled. The indicia can be added as part of the printing process (after document data has been output by an originating application program), such as by printer driver software, by a Postscript engine in a printer, etc. The indicia can encode data about the document, or can encode an identifier that references a database record containing such data. By showing the printed document to a computer device with a suitable optical input device (e.g., a webcam), an electronic version of the document can be recalled for editing, or other responsive action can be taken.
Description




FIELD OF THE INVENTION




The present invention relates to management of physical objects, including paper documents and computer disks.




BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




The parent applications disclose a document management system that is described, in part, by the following example:




An Excel spreadsheet is printed onto paper, and the paper becomes buried in a stack of clutter on an office worker's desk. Months later the spreadsheet again becomes relevant and is dug out of the stack. Changes need to be made to the data, but the file name has long-since been forgotten. A worker simply holds the dug-out page in front of a camera associated with a desktop computer. A moment later, the electronic version of the file appears on the worker's computer display.




When the page was originally printed, tiny droplets of ink or toner were distributed across the paper in a pattern so light as to be essentially un-noticeable, but which steganographically encoded the page with a plural-bit binary number (e.g., 64 bits). A database (e.g., maintained by the operating system, the Excel program, the printer driver, etc.) stored part of this number (e.g., 24 bits, termed a UID) in association with the path and file name at which the electronic version of the file was stored, the page number within the document, and other useful information (e.g., author of the file, creation date, etc.).




The steganographic encoding of the document, and the updating of the database, can be performed by the software application (e.g., Excel). This option can be selected once by the user and applied thereafter to all printed documents (e.g., by a user selection on an “Options ” drop-down menu), or can be presented to the user as part of the Print dialog window and selected (or not) for each print job.




When such a printed page is later presented to the camera, the computer automatically detects the presence of the encoded data on the page, decodes same, consults the database to identify the file name/location/page corresponding to the 24-bit UID data, and opens the identified file to the correct page (e.g., after launching Excel). Voila!




Sometimes there may be several different responses that are possible or appropriate for the encoded object. In the case of a printed office document, for example, one response may be as described above—to present the electronic version of the file on a computer, ready for editing. But other responses may also be desired, such as writing an email message to the author of the printed document, with the author's email address already specified in the message address field, etc. Various ways of selecting between such options are disclosed.




The parent applications note that such systems can be effected not just with steganographic encoding (e.g., digital watermarks), but other encoding as well—e.g., bar codes.




In the discussion that follows, the present specification expands and enhances the concepts introduced in the parent applications.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS





FIG. 1

shows an embodiment of a document management system according to one embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 2

shows a printed document in which embedded hyperlinks are underlined.





FIG. 3

shows portions of a database record associated with the

FIG. 2

document.











DETAILED DESCRIPTION




In accordance with one embodiment of the invention, a steganographic watermark is added to a document at the time of printing. The printing may be done by a standard office printer (e.g., ink-jet, laser, etc.), or a large clustered on-demand document printer. Each document copy thus contains a mark that can be used to uniquely identify the document. Such marks can be registered in a database and used to link to information about the document.




This functionality can be achieved in various ways. For example, the application program that generated the document (e.g., Microsoft Word or Excel, Adobe Photoshop, etc.) can add the necessary markings to the output data provided to a printer driver. Or the printer driver can perform the function—adding the necessary markings to the output data provided from the application program. A microprocessor within the printer can alternatively perform the function—adding the necessary markings to the data output by the printer driver software. Or this functionality can be performed by various combinations of the foregoing. Etc.




An election to add a watermark to the printed output can be made by the user. This election can be made once, e.g., at the time of printer driver installation, and consistently applied thereafter. Or it can be made on a print-job by print-job or page by page basis, e.g., through a print dialog presented by the application program when the user requests printed output. Or the watermark can be added all the time—without any user election or involvement.




Turning to a particular example, consider the arrangement shown in FIG.


1


. An application program


12


, such as Microsoft Word or Excel, Adobe Photoshop, etc., sends print data to a software printer driver


14


. A watermark data payload that is to be associated with the printed page is either generated internally by the printer driver, or received from an external input


16


. In the depicted system this payload is a 32 bit identifier.




(The length of the payload depends on the application. In some cases, a single bit payload will suffice (e.g., it may serve as a flag to convey a single item of status information about a document—such as confidential, do-not-copy, draft, etc.) Or several such flags may be conveyed by a relatively short payload. Certain textual or numeric information may be literally encoded by the payload, such as the date and time the document was printed (e.g., a 24-bit number representing the number of elapsed minutes since Jan. 1, 2000). The foregoing are examples of direct data encoding. Indirect data encoding, such as the 32 bit identifier cited above, uses the payload as an index into another data repository in which large collections of data can be stored. This collection (sometimes called a “record”) may include meta-data associated with the document, such as date, author, size, keywords, file name and storage address, footnotes or other annotations, checksum, etc. In one particular embodiment, identifiers are issued sequentially, with each document thereby assigned a unique identifier.)




By reference to the payload data, the printer driver modifies the print instructions sent to the printer so as to introduce the subtle markings associated with the corresponding steganographic watermark. In some regions of the printed page this entails depositing more ink (or toner); in other regions in may entail depositing less ink. Subtle color variations can also be introduced to effect the encoding.




If the printer driver generates the identifier data itself—rather than receiving the identifier externally—then the identifier will typically need to be stored in a database


18


(or other data structure). Accordingly, the

FIG. 1

arrangement shows the printer driver providing the identifier to the database. This database may be stored at a user computer


20


, at a remote computer, or may be distributed in some fashion. (If the database


18


is remote from the user computer


20


, it would be prudent to encrypt the data transmitted to the database as a security precaution.) Management of the database may be through a dedicated database program (e.g., Microsoft Access), or it can be a simple table data structure or the like maintained by the printer driver itself. (If the identifier data is received externally, this data may be written to the database by the same program that generated or provided the identifier data to the printer driver.)




When, thereafter, the printed document is presented to an optical device, a software program decodes the payload from the steganographic watermark and initiates a corresponding action. If the payload represents status or textual information, the user can be advised of such information (e.g., by a corresponding screen display), or the sensing computer system can take some action based on the information (e.g., refusing to perform a reproduction operation). If the payload represents an identifier, the database


18


is queried for corresponding data, and this data is used in providing a user response. In the case earlier reviewed, the database record contains the file name and storage address of the electronic version of the printed file. The corresponding application program (e.g., Microsoft Word) is then invoked (if it is not already running), and the identified file is accessed from the specified address and opened. The document is thereby presented on the user's screen—ready for editing.




As with Internet hyperlinks, a problem can arise if a document has been moved from the address associated with that document in the database. One way of managing this is by a software program (which may be termed a daemon) that monitors movements of files within a computer's (or network's) file system, and updates any database records referring to such file locations. Another is for a software program to check all document addresses in the database, e.g., as a background process, to confirm that the referenced document is in the expected location. If a file is not found, the program can undertake an automated search for the file in other locations (e.g., checking file identity by checksum data or the like), and automatically updating database references as appropriate. If files that haven't been accessed for a prolonged period are periodically archived in compressed form on online archival storage, the software program may review recent entries to the archive list and identify the archived location of certain moved files in this fashion. Or the program can simply report missing files to the user so that the user can manually identify a new file location to the database. If a missing file cannot be located, the date of its disappearance can be written into the database record so that, if the document is later needed, the date might be available to help investigate the document's disappearance. Yet another approach that obviates the problem of moved files is to make an archival copy of each file, at the time of printing, in database


18


.




In certain applications involving confidential or otherwise secure documents, access to some or all of the stored data may be restricted. In such case, access may be denied unless the user demonstrates suitable authority, e.g., by a password (which may have been earlier entered, such as a network or login password), or by providing some other security token. The token may take the form of biometric identity data, such as voice-print, fingerprint, retinal scan, etc., or may take another form.




In some embodiments, showing the printed document to the optical sensor may cause the computer to present a variety of information, including menu options, to the user. One of the menu options may be to recall the electronic version of the document for editing, as just-described. Other menu options may permit review, or action, based on the associated meta-data.




Increasingly, printed documents include reference to on-line resources—most commonly Internet web pages but sometimes PDF documents, audio or video clips, multi-media presentations, locally-stored files, etc. Microsoft Word and other programs include provision for associating links with text. In Word, this is done by highlighting an excerpt of text, selecting Hyperlink from the Insert menu, and then specifying the path (electronic address) and file (object name) to be associated with that text. Word responds by changing the appearance of the text (e.g., by underlining, and changing color), and embedding the specified link in the electronic version of the document. Such a document is shown in FIG.


2


.




When the document is printed, such links can be sensed and stored in a database record associated with that document, and thereafter shown to the user when the printed document is presented to an optical input device.




In one such embodiment, the printer driver monitors print data, looking for text having formatting that is characteristic of an embedded link (e.g., blue text, underlined). Additionally, the printer driver can look for text conforming to standardized addressing protocols (e.g., text beginning with “http:// . . . ” or “ftp:// . . . ” or “www. . . . ”) When such text is found, the printer driver can store the corresponding link in the database


18


in association with an identifier for that document.




In the case of an explicit address (e.g., “http:// . . . ”), the address text itself is copied into the database. In the case of characteristically-formatted text (signifying an embedded link), the printer driver can query the application program that sent the output for printing, to determine the link address associated with each such excerpt of text. These links are stored in the database, together with the text excerpts to which they correspond. (Again, the printer driver inserts at least one steganographic watermark in the printed output—serving to identify the document.) Database excerpts corresponding to the

FIG. 2

document, are shown in FIG.


3


. (In this example, the document identifier is 186282.)




As in the embodiment detailed earlier, when this printed page is later shown to an optical sensor, decoder software reads a document identifier from the watermark payload and uses the identifier to access one or more database records corresponding to the document. If the record(s) includes one or more links, these can be displayed on the computer screen—available for the user to click and follow. By such arrangement, associated on-line resources are made readily available when reviewing paper documents.




The printer driver's monitoring needn't be limited to on-line resource references. The print data can be monitored for various other types of information, and these other items of information can be stored in the database. One example is document titles, or headings. These can be identified in the printed output by formatting, e.g., set apart from surrounding text by font size, print attribute (bold, underlined, italics), style, or set-apart on a line to themselves—not ending in a period, etc. If such information is captured at print time and stored in the database


18


in association with the document identifier, the database can serve as an index of sorts to the document contents. The database can later be searched for words or phrases of interest, and documents matching the query can thereby be identified. In some cases, every word in a document (except common noise words) can be logged in a corresponding database record, thereby generating—in real time—an index or table of contents to all documents printed by a given printer or printer driver.




In some applications, the watermark with which the printed document is encoded may be fragile. That is, the watermark may be designed (e.g., by low strength) not to survive expected corruption mechanisms (e.g., the scanning and printing associated with photocopying, compression and decompression associated with JPEG electronic document storage, etc.). If such a mark is not found in a later-encountered document, then the document can be inferred to be a reproduction rather than the original.




Such a frail watermark can be in addition to a robust watermark—one designed to withstand expected corruption mechanisms. Only if both watermarks are detected in scan data from an object is the object inferred to be an original. Equipment processing the scanned document data can respond differently depending on whether the document is inferred to be an original or a copy, e.g., permitting or disabling certain operations.




In some embodiments it may be desirable for the user to identify himself or herself to the system—preferably in a non-repudiable way (e.g., password or other security token)—when the document is serialized or otherwise assigned an identifier. The database


18


can then log this person's identity in association with that print-out, in case this fact later becomes an issue. Relatedly, it may be desirable for the person who printed the document to specify the intended recipient(s). This data, too, can be stored in the database in association with the identifier that is watermarked in the printed document. If both measures are employed, then when a document is presented to a camera, the responding system can identify both the user who printed the document, and the intended recipient.




Relatedly, digital signature technology can be employed in conjunction with printed documents. As is familiar to those skilled in the art, digital signatures generally involve applying a hash function or the like to a document file, yielding a signature that is stored for later use. If the document file is thereafter changed, even by a single bit, it will no longer yield the same hashed output, or digital signature.




In the present context, the digital signature generated from an electronic document can be encoded in a printed document as the payload of an embedded watermark, or can be included in a database record identified by the watermark. If the printed document is thereafter shown to a camera, and an electronic version of the document is retrieved from storage, the signature of the retrieved file can be checked against the signature as represented in the watermark or as stored in the database record. If the signatures don't match, the electronic version of the document is known to have been altered.




Checksums derived from the electronic version of a document can be used in similar fashion to digital signatures.




Still another option is to encrypt an electronic version of a file, and encode an encoding key in a watermark in the printed document (or in a database record identified by the watermark). The person who encrypted the document knows the key and can open the electronic file. But third parties cannot open the electronic version of the document, unless they have custody of a printed version of the document. (This is an application where a fragile watermark would be beneficial, so that custody of a photocopy would not be sufficient to gain access to the electronic file.)




Similarly, printed documents may convey (or may point to database records containing) encryption keys permitting electronic access to unrelated documents.




It will be recognized that public key encryption, as well as private key encryption, can be used in certain of the foregoing contexts.




Techniques like those reviewed above in connection with office document can be applied to other objects as well. A “document” can thus be any object with printing, such as packaging.




Consider a catalog for a data storage medium, such as a diskette, disk, tape, CD, or DVD. Files can be copied onto the medium, and an electronic directory listing can be generated (e.g., by using the DIR function of DOS, or the counterpart functions provided in Microsoft Windows and other operating systems). If desired, the directory listing can be annotated by a user, e.g., by adding descriptive information.




This listing is stored in a data structure (e.g., a table, database, etc.) in association with index data. This index data is encoded in a watermark or other machine-readable indicia and printed on a label that is applied to the medium. (Additional data can also be printed on the label in human-intelligible form, such a text giving the date the diskette was labeled, the proprietor of the disk, a descriptive name or summary of disk contents, etc.)




By holding such a labeled disk to a webcam, video camera, optical mouse, or other optical input device, a listing of the disk's contents can rapidly be displayed. (As is now familiar, the optical input device provides image data corresponding to the label to a watermark detector. The watermark payload that is output from the watermark detector is used to index the data structure, permitting access to the corresponding directory listing. This listing is then presented on the computer screen for display.)




The user may be invited to specify certain search parameters, such as author, file date, file name, etc. Only files in the directory listing meeting the specified criteria can then be displayed. If a particular file name is specified, the user can hold diskettes up to the webcam in rapid succession, permitting dozens of diskettes to be surveyed in a minute or so, looking for the desired diskette.




The display presented to the user may include content listings of a collection of disks—not just the disk presented to the webcam. For example, presentation of a 3¼ inch diskette to the webcam may prompt a listing of all 3¼ inch diskette contents contained in the data structure, or all such disks labeled on the same date as the diskette presented by the user to the webcam (in both cases, with the contents of the user-presented diskette listed first). If the file sought is not cataloged as being on the first-listed diskette list, a Search or Find function can be executed on the listing to identify another diskette on which a desired file is stored. (The identification of like-media can be effected by selecting index identifiers from different ranges for different media. Thus 3¼ inch diskettes may have identifiers in one range, CDs may have identifiers in another, etc.)




The data structure may be posted to a shared resource on a network, so that this functionality can be effected on an enterprise-wide basis, encompassing large collections of files stored on diverse media.




The arrangement just detailed can be adapted for use in other contexts, to provide electronic listing of data associated with diverse physical objects




From the foregoing, it will be recognized that embodiments according to the present invention permit data about an object to be accessed simply by showing the object to a webcam or the like.




Having described and illustrated the principles of the invention with reference to illustrative embodiments, it should be recognized that the invention is not so limited.




For example, while the detailed embodiments were described as employing steganographic digital watermarks, the same principles can likewise be utilized in conjunction with other marking techniques, including 1D and 2D bar codes, data glyphs, OCR, magnetic ink, etc.




Essentially any digital watermarking technology can be used in the described embodiments. One particular technology is detailed in the present assignee's patent application Ser. No. 09/503,881, filed Feb. 14, 2000, and in other references cited herein. Those skilled in the watermarking art are familiar with a great number of particular watermarking techniques.




In some cases, printing is not required to effect a digital watermark. For example, the watermarking can be effected by texturing, e.g., as disclosed in the present assignee's patent U.S. Pat. No. 5,822,436.




While the invention was particularly described with reference to an implementation involving a Windows printer driver, other forms of implementation are possible. Consider, for example, Adobe Postscript—a popular page description language implemented in many office printers. Watermarking may be included as an intrinsic feature of a Postscript printer engine (or any page description lanaguage). As part of printing a document, any embedded links could be registered in a suitable database


18


, and the printing commands could be modified to include the appropriate ID with the setup for each page. Addition of a tint to effect watermarking could be provided when the document is converted by the engine from text to ink/toner/dye. A further advantage here is that the printer itself could have certain meta-data associated with it that is conveyed in the watermark or stored in a database record to which the watermark points (e.g., data specifying that the document was printed on a HP LaserJet 8000, with a network name of “XYZ,” having port address of \\Cobra\LGL-HP8000, from a print job originated by user BCONWELL, etc., etc.). And the embedding process may be tuned by the vendor implementing the Postscript engine on their platform for optimal performance.




The illustration of the invention in the context of office documents and diskettes should not be taken as limiting its utility. To name but one other application, blueprints and other construction drawings can be encoded with a watermark. Again, the watermark can directly encode meta data, or can point to a data structure where such further information is stored.




One of many applications of such information is to ensure that a contractor is working from the latest revision of a drawing. A camera-equipped cell phone, or wireless palmtop computer with imaging capability, can be used by the contractor to acquire image data from the drawing, decode the embedded watermark ID, query a remote database for the latest revision number of that drawing, and present the latest revision number to the contractor. The contractor can check the number thus-obtained with the revision number printed in the title block of the drawing. If they match, the contractor is assured that the drawing depicts the latest information. (Blueprints and construction diagrams are forgiving media—the watermark needn't be invisible. The strength of the watermark can thus be increased to the point that a pebbling or grainy effect appears on the background of a drawing without reducing the drawing's functionality for its intended use.)




While the invention was described with reference to certain functionality implemented in software, this is not essential. Hardware, of a combination of hardware and software can be used in other embodiments. Likewise, the form of optical detector is not crucial. 2D sensor arrays, such as CCD and CMOS cameras (still or video) can be employed. So, too, can 1D sensor arrays, such as are conventionally found in scanners. Single photosensor systems, such as laser diodes with photodiodes can also be used.




The foregoing techniques can be employed in conjunction with teachings of various of the present assignee's co-pending applications, including Ser. No. 09/074,034 (filed May 6, 1998), Ser. No. 09/127,502 (filed Jul. 31, 1998), Ser. No. 09/185,380 (filed Nov. 3, 1998), and the parent application cited above. For example, the '034 and '502 applications disclose arrangements for watermarking blank paper stock, the principles of which can be employed to mark printed output.




To provide a comprehensive disclosure without unduly lengthening this specification, applicants incorporate by reference the patents and applications cited above.




In view of the wide variety of embodiments to which the principles and features discussed above can be applied, it should be apparent that the detailed embodiments are illustrative only and should not be taken as limiting the scope of the invention. Rather, we claim as our invention all such modifications as may come within the scope and spirit of the following claims and equivalents thereof.



Claims
  • 1. A method for determining contents of one or more computer data storage media comprising: presenting such media to a camera, and displaying the contents on a computer system, wherein the media includes machine-readable indicia provided at least on a surface of the media, the indicia including an encoded identifier which is generally imperceptible to a human viewer of the indicia, the camera providing scan data of the media surface including the indicia, the scan data being analyzed to determine the identifier, wherein at least the identifier is used to identify a data structure including the contents.
  • 2. The method of claim 1 wherein the contents include user annotations.
  • 3. The method of claim 1 wherein the indicia comprises a digital watermark including the identifier.
  • 4. The method of claim 1 wherein the media surface comprises a printed label or packaging.
  • 5. The method of claim 1 further comprising the step of inviting entry of a search parameter, wherein only information in the contents meeting the search parameter is displayed on the computer system.
  • 6. The method of claim 1 wherein the contents comprises contents for a collection of media.
  • 7. The method of claim 1 wherein the data structure comprises a shared resource on a network.
  • 8. The method of claim 1 wherein the identifier is used to identify a data structure including the contents by presenting the identifier to a data record index and interrogating the index with the identifier to identify the data structure.
  • 9. A method of determining the contents of one or more computer data storage media comprising:presenting the media to an optical sensor, the media having an optically-detectable indicia thereon, said indicia being machine-readable, but not generally intelligible to human viewers thereof, the optical sensor producing scan data; decoding the scan data to produce binary data corresponding to said indicia; accessing a data store using at least a portion of said binary data; obtaining from said data store an address at which the contents are stored; and after accessing the contents at the address, displaying the contents on a computer system.
  • 10. The method of claim 9 wherein the media comprises at least one of a diskette, disk, tape, CD and DVD.
  • 11. The method of claim 9 wherein the indicia comprises a digital watermark.
  • 12. A method of determining contents of physical media, the physical media comprising a surface including machine-readable indicia provided thereon, said method comprising steps of:receiving optical scan data associated with the physical media surface which includes the machine-readable indicia thereon; analyzing the scan data to machine-read the indicia; determining the contents of the physical media based at least on the indicia; and providing at least a portion of the determined contents for display by a computer system.
  • 13. The method of claim 12, wherein the indicia comprises an identifier, and wherein said determining step comprises accessing a data structure including the contents via the identifier.
  • 14. The method of claim 13, wherein the indicia comprises a digital watermark.
  • 15. The method of claim 14, wherein the physical media comprises at least one of a diskette, disk, tape, CD and DVD.
  • 16. The method of claim 12, wherein the indicia comprises a digital watermark.
  • 17. The method of claim 16 wherein the media comprises at least one of a diskette, disk, tape, CD and DVD.
  • 18. The method of claim 12, wherein the indicia comprises a listing of the contents.
  • 19. The method of claim 18, wherein the listing comprises at least one of textual and numeric information.
  • 20. The method of claim 18, wherein the indicia comprises a digital watermark.
  • 21. The method of claim 12, wherein the surface comprises at least one of a printed label and product packaging.
  • 22. The method of claim 21, wherein the indicia comprises a digital watermark, and wherein the printed label or the product packaging includes the digital watermark.
  • 23. The method of claim 12, wherein the indicia comprises an identifier and wherein said determining step comprises accessing via the identifier a data record including a storage address at which the contents are stored, said method further comprising monitoring the address to determine an address change, and updating the data record to reflect the change.
  • 24. The method of claim 23, wherein the indicia comprises a digital watermark.
  • 25. The method of claim 12 further comprising a step of inviting entry of a search parameter, wherein only content information satisfying the search parameter is provided to be displayed on the computer system.
  • 26. The method of claim 25, wherein the indicia comprises a digital watermark.
RELATED APPLICATION DATA

The present application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/629,401, filed Aug. 1, 2000 now U.S. Pat. No. 6,522,770 (Allowed). The Ser. No. 09/629,401 application is a continuation-in-part of copending applications Ser. No. 09/343,104, filed Jun. 29, 1999, and Ser. No. 09/571,422, filed May 15, 2000.

US Referenced Citations (430)
Number Name Date Kind
3414998 Berger Dec 1968 A
3493674 Houghton Feb 1970 A
3569619 Simjian Mar 1971 A
3576369 Wick et al. Apr 1971 A
3585290 Sanford Jun 1971 A
3655162 Yamamoto et al. Apr 1972 A
3703628 Philipson, Jr. Nov 1972 A
3809806 Walker et al. May 1974 A
3838444 Loughlin et al. Sep 1974 A
3845391 Crosby Oct 1974 A
3914877 Hines Oct 1975 A
3922074 Ikegami et al. Nov 1975 A
3971917 Maddox et al. Jul 1976 A
3977785 Harris Aug 1976 A
3982064 Barnaby Sep 1976 A
3984624 Waggener Oct 1976 A
4025851 Haselwood et al. May 1977 A
4184700 Greenaway Jan 1980 A
4225967 Miwa et al. Sep 1980 A
4230990 Lert, Jr. et al. Oct 1980 A
4231113 Blasbalg Oct 1980 A
4238849 Gassmann Dec 1980 A
4252995 Schmidt et al. Feb 1981 A
4262329 Bright et al. Apr 1981 A
4296326 Haslop et al. Oct 1981 A
4297729 Steynor et al. Oct 1981 A
4313197 Maxemchuk Jan 1982 A
4367488 Leventer et al. Jan 1983 A
4379947 Warner Apr 1983 A
4380027 Leventer et al. Apr 1983 A
4389671 Posner et al. Jun 1983 A
4395600 Lundy et al. Jul 1983 A
4416001 Ackerman Nov 1983 A
4423415 Goldman Dec 1983 A
4425642 Moses et al. Jan 1984 A
4476468 Goldman Oct 1984 A
4523508 Ruell et al. Jun 1985 A
4528588 Löfberg Jul 1985 A
4547804 Greenberg Oct 1985 A
4553261 Froessl Nov 1985 A
4590366 Rothfjell May 1986 A
4595950 Lofberg Jun 1986 A
4618257 Bayne et al. Oct 1986 A
4637051 Clark Jan 1987 A
4639779 Greenberg Jan 1987 A
4647974 Butler et al. Mar 1987 A
4654867 Labedz et al. Mar 1987 A
4660221 Dlugos Apr 1987 A
4663518 Borror et al. May 1987 A
4665431 Cooper May 1987 A
4672605 Hustig et al. Jun 1987 A
4675746 Tetrick et al. Jun 1987 A
4677435 Cause D'Agraives et al. Jun 1987 A
4682794 Margolin Jul 1987 A
4703476 Howard Oct 1987 A
4712103 Gotanda Dec 1987 A
4718106 Weinblatt Jan 1988 A
4723149 Harada Feb 1988 A
4739377 Allen Apr 1988 A
4750173 Blüthgen Jun 1988 A
4765656 Becker et al. Aug 1988 A
4775901 Nakano Oct 1988 A
4776013 Kafri et al. Oct 1988 A
4805020 Greenberg Feb 1989 A
4807031 Broughton et al. Feb 1989 A
4811357 Betts et al. Mar 1989 A
4811408 Goldman Mar 1989 A
4820912 Samyn Apr 1989 A
4835517 van der Gracht et al. May 1989 A
4855827 Best Aug 1989 A
4864618 Wright et al. Sep 1989 A
4866771 Bain Sep 1989 A
4874936 Chandler et al. Oct 1989 A
4876617 Best et al. Oct 1989 A
4879747 Leighton et al. Nov 1989 A
4884139 Pommier Nov 1989 A
4885632 Mabey et al. Dec 1989 A
4888798 Earnest Dec 1989 A
4903301 Kondo et al. Feb 1990 A
4908836 Rushforth et al. Mar 1990 A
4908873 Philibert et al. Mar 1990 A
4918484 Ujiie et al. Apr 1990 A
4920503 Cook Apr 1990 A
4921278 Shiang et al. May 1990 A
4939515 Adelson Jul 1990 A
4941150 Iwasaki Jul 1990 A
4943973 Werner Jul 1990 A
4943976 Ishigaki Jul 1990 A
4944036 Hyatt Jul 1990 A
4947028 Gorog Aug 1990 A
4963998 Maufe Oct 1990 A
4965827 McDonald Oct 1990 A
4967273 Greenberg Oct 1990 A
4969041 O'Grady et al. Nov 1990 A
4972471 Gross et al. Nov 1990 A
4972475 Sant'Anselmo Nov 1990 A
4972476 Nathans Nov 1990 A
4977594 Shear Dec 1990 A
4979210 Nagata et al. Dec 1990 A
4996530 Hilton Feb 1991 A
5003590 Lechner et al. Mar 1991 A
5010405 Schreiber et al. Apr 1991 A
5023907 Johnson Jun 1991 A
5027401 Soltesz Jun 1991 A
5034982 Heninger et al. Jul 1991 A
5036513 Greenblatt Jul 1991 A
5040059 Leberl Aug 1991 A
5053956 Viyella et al. Oct 1991 A
5062666 Mowry et al. Nov 1991 A
5063446 Gibson Nov 1991 A
5073899 Collier et al. Dec 1991 A
5073925 Nagata et al. Dec 1991 A
5075773 Pullen et al. Dec 1991 A
5077608 Dubner Dec 1991 A
5077795 Rourke et al. Dec 1991 A
5079648 Maufe Jan 1992 A
5091966 Bloomberg et al. Feb 1992 A
5095196 Miyata Mar 1992 A
5103459 Gilhousen et al. Apr 1992 A
5113437 Best May 1992 A
5113445 Wang May 1992 A
5113518 Durst May 1992 A
5128525 Stearns et al. Jul 1992 A
5138712 Corbin Aug 1992 A
5144660 Rose Sep 1992 A
5146457 Veldhuis et al. Sep 1992 A
5148498 Resnikoff et al. Sep 1992 A
5150409 Elsner Sep 1992 A
5161210 Druyvesteyn et al. Nov 1992 A
5166676 Milheiser Nov 1992 A
5168146 Bloomberg et al. Dec 1992 A
5181786 Hujink Jan 1993 A
5185736 Tyrrell et al. Feb 1993 A
5199081 Saito et al. Mar 1993 A
5200822 Bronfin et al. Apr 1993 A
5212551 Conanan May 1993 A
5213337 Sherman May 1993 A
5216724 Suzuki et al. Jun 1993 A
5228056 Schilling Jul 1993 A
5243411 Shirochi et al. Sep 1993 A
5243423 DeJean et al. Sep 1993 A
5245165 Zhang Sep 1993 A
5245329 Gokcebay Sep 1993 A
5247364 Banker et al. Sep 1993 A
5253078 Balkanski et al. Oct 1993 A
5257119 Funada et al. Oct 1993 A
5259025 Monroe Nov 1993 A
5262860 Fitzpatrick Nov 1993 A
5267334 Normille et al. Nov 1993 A
5280537 Sugiyama et al. Jan 1994 A
5288976 Citron Feb 1994 A
5291243 Heckman et al. Mar 1994 A
5293399 Hefti Mar 1994 A
5295203 Krause et al. Mar 1994 A
5299019 Pack et al. Mar 1994 A
5305400 Butera Apr 1994 A
5315098 Tow May 1994 A
5319453 Copriviza et al. Jun 1994 A
5319724 Blonstein et al. Jun 1994 A
5319735 Preuss et al. Jun 1994 A
5321470 Hasuo et al. Jun 1994 A
5325167 Melen Jun 1994 A
5327237 Gerdes et al. Jul 1994 A
5337362 Gormish et al. Aug 1994 A
5349655 Mann Sep 1994 A
5351302 Leighton et al. Sep 1994 A
5371792 Asai et al. Dec 1994 A
5374976 Spannenburg Dec 1994 A
5379345 Greenberg Jan 1995 A
5385371 Izawa Jan 1995 A
5387941 Montgomery et al. Feb 1995 A
5394274 Kahn Feb 1995 A
5396559 McGrew Mar 1995 A
5398283 Virga Mar 1995 A
5404160 Schober et al. Apr 1995 A
5404377 Moses Apr 1995 A
5408542 Callahan Apr 1995 A
5416307 Danek et al. May 1995 A
5418853 Kanota et al. May 1995 A
5422963 Chen et al. Jun 1995 A
5422995 Aoki et al. Jun 1995 A
5425100 Thomas et al. Jun 1995 A
5428606 Moskowitz Jun 1995 A
5428607 Hiller et al. Jun 1995 A
5428731 Powers Jun 1995 A
5432542 Thibadeau et al. Jul 1995 A
5432870 Schwartz Jul 1995 A
5444779 Daniele Aug 1995 A
5446488 Leslie Aug 1995 A
5450122 Keene Sep 1995 A
5450490 Jensen et al. Sep 1995 A
5461426 Limberg et al. Oct 1995 A
5463209 Figh Oct 1995 A
5469222 Sprague Nov 1995 A
5469506 Berson et al. Nov 1995 A
5473631 Moses Dec 1995 A
5479168 Johnson et al. Dec 1995 A
5481294 Thomas et al. Jan 1996 A
5488664 Shamir Jan 1996 A
5493677 Balogh Feb 1996 A
5495411 Ananda Feb 1996 A
5495581 Tsai Feb 1996 A
5496071 Walsh Mar 1996 A
5499294 Friedman Mar 1996 A
5502576 Ramsay et al. Mar 1996 A
5502727 Catanzaro et al. Mar 1996 A
5515081 Vasilik May 1996 A
5517663 Kahn May 1996 A
5521722 Colvill et al. May 1996 A
5524933 Kunt et al. Jun 1996 A
5530751 Morris Jun 1996 A
5530759 Braudaway et al. Jun 1996 A
5530852 Meske Jun 1996 A
5532920 Hartrick et al. Jul 1996 A
5537223 Curry Jul 1996 A
5539471 Myhrvold et al. Jul 1996 A
5539735 Moskowitz Jul 1996 A
5541662 Adams et al. Jul 1996 A
5544255 Smithies et al. Aug 1996 A
5548645 Ananda Aug 1996 A
5548646 Aziz et al. Aug 1996 A
5553143 Ross Sep 1996 A
5557333 Jungo et al. Sep 1996 A
5559559 Jungo et al. Sep 1996 A
5568179 Diehl et al. Oct 1996 A
5568550 Ur Oct 1996 A
5568570 Rabbani Oct 1996 A
5572010 Petrie Nov 1996 A
5572247 Montgomery Nov 1996 A
5576532 Hecht Nov 1996 A
5579124 Aijala et al. Nov 1996 A
5579479 Plum Nov 1996 A
5582103 Tanaka et al. Dec 1996 A
5587743 Montgomery et al. Dec 1996 A
5590197 Chen et al. Dec 1996 A
5594226 Steger Jan 1997 A
5598526 Daniel et al. Jan 1997 A
5602920 Bestler et al. Feb 1997 A
5606609 Houser et al. Feb 1997 A
5611575 Petrie Mar 1997 A
5613004 Cooperman Mar 1997 A
5613012 Hoffman et al. Mar 1997 A
5614940 Cobbley et al. Mar 1997 A
5617119 Briggs et al. Apr 1997 A
5617148 Montgomery Apr 1997 A
5629770 Brassil May 1997 A
5629980 Stefik May 1997 A
5634012 Stefik May 1997 A
5636276 Brugger Jun 1997 A
5636292 Rhoads Jun 1997 A
5638443 Stefik Jun 1997 A
5638446 Rubin Jun 1997 A
5640193 Wellner Jun 1997 A
5640467 Yamashita et al. Jun 1997 A
5646997 Barton Jul 1997 A
5646999 Saito Jul 1997 A
5652626 Kawakami et al. Jul 1997 A
5652714 Peterson Jul 1997 A
5657462 Brouwer Aug 1997 A
5659164 Schmid Aug 1997 A
5661574 Kawana Aug 1997 A
5663766 Sizer, II Sep 1997 A
5664018 Leighton Sep 1997 A
5665951 Newman et al. Sep 1997 A
5666487 Goodman et al. Sep 1997 A
5668636 Beach et al. Sep 1997 A
5671277 Ikenoue et al. Sep 1997 A
5671282 Wolff et al. Sep 1997 A
5673316 Auerbach et al. Sep 1997 A
5680223 Cooper et al. Oct 1997 A
5687236 Moskowitz et al. Nov 1997 A
5692073 Cass Nov 1997 A
5710636 Curry Jan 1998 A
5715403 Stefik Feb 1998 A
5717940 Peairs et al. Feb 1998 A
5719939 Tel Feb 1998 A
5719948 Liang Feb 1998 A
5721788 Powell et al. Feb 1998 A
5727092 Sandford, II et al. Mar 1998 A
5729741 Liaguno et al. Mar 1998 A
5734119 France Mar 1998 A
5735547 Morelle et al. Apr 1998 A
5740244 Indeck et al. Apr 1998 A
5742845 Wagner Apr 1998 A
5745604 Rhoads Apr 1998 A
5761686 Bloomberg Jun 1998 A
5765152 Erickson Jun 1998 A
5765176 Bloomberg Jun 1998 A
5768426 Rhoads Jun 1998 A
5772250 Gasper Jun 1998 A
5774452 Wolosewicz Jun 1998 A
5778102 Sandford, II et al. Jul 1998 A
5790693 Graves et al. Aug 1998 A
5790697 Munro et al. Aug 1998 A
5801687 Peterson Sep 1998 A
5804803 Cragun et al. Sep 1998 A
5809160 Powell et al. Sep 1998 A
5809317 Kogan Sep 1998 A
5817205 Kaule Oct 1998 A
5818441 Throckmorton Oct 1998 A
5819289 Sanford, II et al. Oct 1998 A
5822436 Rhoads Oct 1998 A
5825871 Mark Oct 1998 A
5825892 Braudaway et al. Oct 1998 A
5828325 Wolosewicz et al. Oct 1998 A
5838458 Tsai Nov 1998 A
5841978 Rhoads Nov 1998 A
5845281 Benson Dec 1998 A
5848144 Ahrens Dec 1998 A
5848413 Wolff Dec 1998 A
5848424 Scheinkman Dec 1998 A
5852673 Young Dec 1998 A
5857038 Owada et al. Jan 1999 A
5862218 Steinberg Jan 1999 A
5862260 Rhoads Jan 1999 A
5869819 Knowles et al. Feb 1999 A
5871615 Harris Feb 1999 A
5872589 Morales Feb 1999 A
5875249 Mintzer et al. Feb 1999 A
5892900 Ginter et al. Apr 1999 A
5893101 Balogh et al. Apr 1999 A
5893908 Cullen et al. Apr 1999 A
5893910 Martineau Apr 1999 A
5898779 Squilla et al. Apr 1999 A
5900608 Iida May 1999 A
5902353 Reber et al. May 1999 A
5903729 Reber et al. May 1999 A
5905248 Russell et al. May 1999 A
5905251 Knowles May 1999 A
5905810 Jones et al. May 1999 A
5910987 Ginter et al. Jun 1999 A
5913210 Call Jun 1999 A
5915027 Cox et al. Jun 1999 A
5919730 Gasper et al. Jul 1999 A
5920861 Hall Jul 1999 A
5920878 DeMont Jul 1999 A
5926822 Garman Jul 1999 A
5930767 Reber et al. Jul 1999 A
5932863 Rathus Aug 1999 A
5933798 Linnartz Aug 1999 A
5933829 Durst et al. Aug 1999 A
5938726 Reber et al. Aug 1999 A
5938727 Ikeda Aug 1999 A
5939695 Nelson Aug 1999 A
5940595 Reber et al. Aug 1999 A
5943422 Van Wie et al. Aug 1999 A
5949055 Fleet et al. Sep 1999 A
5949885 Leighton Sep 1999 A
5950173 Perkowski Sep 1999 A
5963916 Kaplan Oct 1999 A
5971277 Cragun et al. Oct 1999 A
5974141 Saito Oct 1999 A
5974548 Adams Oct 1999 A
5978477 Hull et al. Nov 1999 A
5978773 Hudetz et al. Nov 1999 A
5979757 Tracy et al. Nov 1999 A
5983218 Syeda-Mahmood Nov 1999 A
5991426 Cox et al. Nov 1999 A
5991876 Johnson et al. Nov 1999 A
5995105 Reber et al. Nov 1999 A
5995978 Cullen et al. Nov 1999 A
6005501 Wolosewicz Dec 1999 A
6006226 Cullen et al. Dec 1999 A
6024287 Takai et al. Feb 2000 A
6035177 Moses et al. Mar 2000 A
6052486 Knowlton et al. Apr 2000 A
6061686 Gauvin et al. May 2000 A
6064764 Bhaskaran et al. May 2000 A
6081827 Reber et al. Jun 2000 A
6084528 Beach et al. Jul 2000 A
6085205 Peairs et al. Jul 2000 A
6108656 Durst et al. Aug 2000 A
6112181 Shear et al. Aug 2000 A
6122403 Rhoads Sep 2000 A
6138151 Reber et al. Oct 2000 A
6164534 Rathus et al. Dec 2000 A
6166750 Negishi Dec 2000 A
6182090 Peairs Jan 2001 B1
6185683 Ginter et al. Feb 2001 B1
6188787 Ohmae et al. Feb 2001 B1
6199048 Hudetz et al. Mar 2001 B1
6199073 Peairs et al. Mar 2001 B1
6209092 Linnartz Mar 2001 B1
6243480 Zhao et al. Jun 2001 B1
6266430 Rhoads et al. Jul 2001 B1
6286036 Rhoads Sep 2001 B1
6292569 Shear et al. Sep 2001 B1
6301360 Bocionek et al. Oct 2001 B1
6311214 Rhoads Oct 2001 B1
6314457 Schena et al. Nov 2001 B1
6321648 Berson et al. Nov 2001 B1
6321981 Ray et al. Nov 2001 B1
6324573 Rhoads Nov 2001 B1
6324574 Rhoads Nov 2001 B1
6325420 Zhang et al. Dec 2001 B1
6334721 Horigane Jan 2002 B1
6343204 Yang Jan 2002 B1
6351815 Adams Feb 2002 B1
6354630 Zhang et al. Mar 2002 B1
6359985 Koch et al. Mar 2002 B1
6384744 Philyaw et al. May 2002 B1
6389151 Carr et al. May 2002 B1
6427140 Ginter et al. Jul 2002 B1
6434561 Durst et al. Aug 2002 B1
6526449 Philyaw et al. Feb 2003 B1
6542933 Durst et al. Apr 2003 B1
20010001854 Schena et al. May 2001 A1
20010003176 Schena et al. Jun 2001 A1
20010006585 Horigane Jul 2001 A1
20010016852 Peairs et al. Aug 2001 A1
20010017709 Murakami et al. Aug 2001 A1
20010023421 Numao et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010024510 Iwamura Sep 2001 A1
20010026377 Ikegami Oct 2001 A1
20010026629 Oki Oct 2001 A1
20010030759 Hayashi et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010032251 Rhoads et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010043362 Hull et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010053299 Matsunoshita et al. Dec 2001 A1
20020001095 Kawakami et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020003891 Hoshino Jan 2002 A1
20020009208 Alattar et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020018228 Torigoe Feb 2002 A1
20020023148 Ritz et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020049614 Rice et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020051237 Ohara May 2002 A1
20020075298 Schena et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020080396 Silverbrook et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020085759 Davies et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020102966 Lev et al. Aug 2002 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (57)
Number Date Country
2235002 Dec 1998 CA
2946436 May 1981 DE
3806411 Sep 1989 DE
19521969 Feb 1997 DE
366381 Oct 1989 EP
372 601 Jun 1990 EP
411 232 Feb 1991 EP
418 964 Mar 1991 EP
441 702 Aug 1991 EP
493 091 Jul 1992 EP
058 482 Aug 1992 EP
551 016 Jul 1993 EP
581 317 Feb 1994 EP
605 208 Jul 1994 EP
649 074 Apr 1995 EP
705 025 Apr 1996 EP
711061 May 1996 EP
0789480 Aug 1997 EP
872995 Oct 1998 EP
0642060 Apr 1999 EP
1122939 Aug 2001 EP
2063018 May 1981 GB
2067871 Jul 1981 GB
2196167 Apr 1988 GB
2204984 Nov 1988 GB
4-248771 Feb 1992 JP
5242217 Sep 1993 JP
8-30759 Feb 1996 JP
08-50598 Feb 1996 JP
WO 8908915 Sep 1989 WO
WO 9325038 Dec 1993 WO
WO9427228 Nov 1994 WO
WO9504665 Feb 1995 WO
WO9510813 Apr 1995 WO
WO 9510835 Apr 1995 WO
WO 9514289 May 1995 WO
WO9514289 May 1995 WO
WO9520291 Jul 1995 WO
WO 9520291 Jul 1995 WO
WO 9626494 Aug 1996 WO
WO9627259 Sep 1996 WO
WO 9627259 Sep 1996 WO
WO9636163 Nov 1996 WO
WO9743736 Nov 1997 WO
WO9814887 Apr 1998 WO
WO9820642 May 1998 WO
WO9824050 Jun 1998 WO
WO9840823 Sep 1998 WO
WO9849813 Nov 1998 WO
WO9934277 Jul 1999 WO
WO9936876 Jul 1999 WO
WO0044131 Jul 2000 WO
WO 0108405 Feb 2001 WO
WO 0180169 Oct 2001 WO
1143723 Oct 2001 WO
WO0227618 Apr 2002 WO
1209897 May 2002 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (192)
Entry
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/074,034, Rhoads, filed May 6, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/127,502, Rhoads, filed Jul. 31, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/185,380, Davis et al., filed Nov. 3, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/314,648, Rodriguez et al., filed May 19, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/342,688, Rodriguez et al., filed Jun. 29, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/343,104, Rodriguez et al., filed Jun. 29, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/452,021, Davis et al., filed Nov. 30, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/503,881, Rhoads et al., filed Feb. 14, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/571,422, Rhoads et al., filed May 15, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/790,322, Lofgren et al., filed Feb. 21, 2001.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 60/000,442, Hudetz, filed Jun. 20, 1995.
Bloomberg, “Embedding Digital Data on Paper in Iconic Text” SPIE vol. 3027, Document Recognition IV, pp. 67-80 (1997).
Bruckstein, A.M.; Richardson, T.J., “A holographic transform domain image watermarking method,” Circuits, Systems, and Signal Processing vol. 17, No. 3 p. 361-89, 1998. This paper includes an appendix containing an internal memo of Bell Labs, which according to the authors of the paper, was dated Sep. 1994.
“Copyright Protection for Digital Images, Digital Fingerprinting from FBI,” Highwater FBI brochure, 1995, 4 pages.
Dautzenberg, “Watermarking Images,” Department of Microelectronics and Electrical Engineering, Trinity College Dublin, 47 pages, Oct. 1994.
“High Water FBI Limited Presentation Image Copyright Protection Software,” FBI Ltd brochure, Jul., 1995, 17 pages.
Johnson, et al., “Bridging the Paper and Electronic Worlds: The Paper User Interface”, Interchi '93, pp. 507-512, Apr. 1993.
Kurak et al., “A Cautionary Note On Image Downgrading,” 1992 IEEE, pp. 153-159.
Mintzer et al., “Safeguarding Digital library Contents and Users,” Digital Watermarking, D-Lib Magazine, Dec. 1997: ISSN 1082-9873.
Newman, William, et al. “A Desk Supporting Computer-Based Interaction with paper Documents,” ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '92) May 3-7, 1992, pp. 587-592.
Peairs, “Iconic Paper,” Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR '95), pp. 1174-1179, 1995.
Rao, et al. “Protofoil: Storing and Finding the Information Worker's Paper Documents in an Electronic File Cabinet,” Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '94), pp. 180-186, Boston MA, Apr. 1994.
Szepanski, “Additive Binary Data Transmission for Video Signals,” Papers Presented at Conf. Of Comm. Engineering Soc. Sep. 30-Oct. 3, 1980, Technical Reports vol. 74, pp. 342-352.
Szepanski, “A Signal Theoretic Method for Creating Forgery-Proof Documents for Automatic Verification,” Proceedings 1979 Carnahan Conference on Crime Countermeasures, May 16, 1979, pp. 101-109.
Tirkel et al, “Electronic Water Mark,” DICTA-93, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia, Dec., 1993, pp. 666-673.
Whittaker, et al., “Back to the Future: Pen and Paper Technology Supports Complex Group Coordination,” CHI '95, Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Denver, Colorado (May 7-11, 1995) (text copy obtained from ACM).
Zhao, et al. “WWW Service to Embed and Prove Digital Copyright Watermarks,” Fraunhofer Institute for Computer Graphics, Proc. of EU Conf. On Multimedia Applications, Services and Techniques, May 1996.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 60/082,228, Rhoads, filed Apr. 16, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 60/141,763, Davis, filed Jun. 30, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 60/158,015, Davis et al., filed Oct. 6, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/342,688, Rodriguez et al., filed Jun. 29, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/342,971, Rodriguez et al., filed Jun. 29, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/679,261, Davis et al., filed Oct. 4, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/562,517, Davis et al., filed May 1, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/547,664, Rhoads et al., filed Apr. 12, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/571,442, Rhoads et al., filed May 15, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/858,189, Rhoads et al., May 14, 2001.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/631,409, Brundage et al., filed Aug. 3, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/452,021, Davis et al., filed Nov. 30, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/629,401, Seder et al., filed Aug. 1, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/473,396, Evans et al., filed Dec. 28, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/563,664, Levy et al., filed May 2, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/670,115, Rhoads et al., filed Sep. 26, 2000.
Brassil et al., Electronic Marking and Identification Techniques to Discourage Document Copying, Proceedings of INFOCOM '94 Conference on Computer, IEEE Commun. Soc Conference, Jun. 12-16, 1994, 1278-1287.
Bruckstein, A.M.; Richardson, T.J., A holographic transform domain image watermarking method, Circuits, Systems, and Signal Processing vol. 17, No. 3 p. 361-89, 1998. This paper includes an appendix containing an internal memo of Bell Labs, which according to the authors of the paper, was dated Sep. 1994.
“High Water FBI Limited Presentation Image Copyright Protection Software,” FBI Ltd brochure, Jul., 1995, 17 pages.
Koch et al., “Copyright Protection for Multimedia Data,” Fraunhofer Institute for Computer Graphics, Dec. 16, 1994, 15 pages.
Koch et al., “Towards Robust and Hidden Image Copyright Labeling,” Proc. of 1995 IEEE Workshop on Nonlinear Signal and Image Processing, Jun. 20-22, 1995, 4 pages.
Kurak et al., “A Cautionary Note On Image Downgrading,” 1992 IEEE, pp. 153-159.
Mintzer et al., “Safeguarding Digital library Contents and Users” Digital Watermarking, D-Lib Magazine, Dec. 1997: ISSN 1082-9873
Rindfrey, “Towards an Equitable System for Access Control and Copyright Protection in Broadcast Image Services: The Equicrypt Approach,” Intellectual Property Rights and New Technologies, Proc. of the Conference, R. Oldenbourg Verlag Wien Munchen 1995, 12 pages.
Schreiber et al., “A Compatible High-Definition Television System Using the Noise-Margin Method of Hiding Enhancement Information,” SMPTE Journal, Dec. 1989, pp. 873-879.
SDMI Example Use Scenarios (Non-Exhaustive), Version 1.2, Jun. 16, 1999.
Szepanski, “A Signal Theoretic Method for Creating Forgery-Proof Documents for Automatic Verification,” Proceedings 1979 Carnahan Conference on Crime Countermeasures, May 16, 1979, pp. 101-109.
Szepanski, “Additive Binary Data Transmission for Video Signals,” Papers Presented at Conf. Of Comm. Engineering Soc. Sep. 30-Oct. 3, 980, Technical Reports vol. 74, pp. 342-352.
Tanaka et al., “A Visual Retrieval System with Private Information for Image Database,” Proceeding International Conference on DSP Applications and Technology, Oct. 1991, pp. 415-421.
Tanaka et al., “New Integrated Coding Schemes for Computer-Aided Facsimile,” Proc. IEEE Int'l Conf. on Sys. Integration, Apr. 1990, pp. 275-281.
Tirkel et al, “Electronic Water Mark,” DICTA-93, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia, Dec., 1993, pp. 666-673.
Weber et al., “Correlative Image Registration,” Seminars in Nuclear Medicine, vol. XXIV, No. 4; Oct., 1994, pp. 311-323.
Szepanski, “A Signal Theoretic Method for Creating Forgery-Proof Documents for Automatic Verification,” Proceedings 1979 Carnahan Conference on Crime Countermeasures, May 16, 1979, pp. 101-109.
Dautzenberg, “Watermarking Images,” Department of Microelectronics and Electrical Engineering, Trinity College Dublin, 47 pages, Oct. 1994.
Szepanski, “Additive Binary Data Transmission for Video Signals,” Conference of the Communications Engineering Society, 1980, NTG Technical Reports, vol. 74, pp. 343-351. (German text and English translation enclosed).
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 60/071,983, Levy, filed Jan. 20, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/404,291, Levy, filed Sep. 23, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 60/114,725, Levy, filed Dec. 31, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/234,780, Rhoads et al., filed Jan. 20, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 60/116,641, Cookson, filed Jan. 21, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/478,713, Cookson, filed Jan. 6, 2000.
Cookson, Chris, General Principles of Music Uses on Portable Devices, presented to SDMI, Mar. 5, 1999.
Winograd, J.M., “Audio Watermarking Architecture for Secure Digital Music Distribution,” a Proposal to the SDMI Portable Devices Working Group, by Aris Technologies, Inc., Mar. 26, 1999.
Mintzer et al., “Safeguarding Digital Library Contents and Users: Digital Watermarking,” D-Lib Magazine, Dec. 1997, 12 pages.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/765,102, Shaw, filed Jan. 17, 2001.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/761,349, Rhoads, filed Jan. 16, 2001.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/761,280, Rhoads, Jan. 16, 2001.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/645,779, Tian et al., filed Aug. 24, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/689,226, Brunk, filed Oct. 11, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/689,250, Ahmed, filed Oct. 11, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/689,293, Tian et al., filed Oct. 11,2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/625,577, Carr et al., filed Jul. 25, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/574,726, Rhoads et al., filed May 18, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/562,524, Carr et al., filed May 1, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/498,223, Rhoads et al., filed Feb. 3, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/465,418, Rhoads et al., filed Dec. 16, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/431,990, Rhoads, filed Nov. 3, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/428,359, Davis et al., filed Oct. 28, 2000.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/342,972, Rhoads, filed Jun. 29, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/293,602, Rhoads, filed Apr. 15, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/293,601, Rhoads, filed Apr. 15, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/287,940, Rhoads, filed Apr. 7, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/185,380, Davis et al., filed Nov. 3, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/074,034, Rhoads, filed May 6, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/127,502, Rhoads, filed Jul. 31, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 60/082,228, Rhoads, filed Apr. 16, 1998.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 60/198,138, Alattar, filed Apr. 17, 2000.
Audio Watermarking Architectures for Secure Digital Music Distribution, A Proposal to the SDMI Portable Devices Working Group by ARIS Technologies, Inc, Mar. 26, 1999, pp. 1-11.
Audio Watermarking Architectures for Persistent Protection, Presentation to SDMI PDWG, Mar. 29, 1999, J. Winograd, Aris Techologies, pp 1-16.
Audio Watermarking System to Screen Digital Audio Content for LCM Acceptance, A Proposal Submitted in Response to PDWG99050504-Transition CƒP by ARIS Technologies, Inc., May 23, 1999, Document Version 1.0, 15 pages.
Boland et al., “Watermarking Digital Images for Copyright Protection”, Fifth Int'l Conference on Image Processing and it's Application, Jul. 1995, pp. 326-330.
Levy, “AIPL's Proposal for SDMI: An Underlying Security System” (slide presentation), Mar. 29, 1999, 23 slides.
Microsoft Response to CƒP for Technology Solutions to Screen Digital Audio Content for LCM Acceptance, SDMI, PDWG Tokyo, May 23, 1999, 9 pages.
Response to CƒP for Technology Solutions to Screen Digital Audio Content for LCM Acceptance, NTT Waveless Radio Consotium, May 23, 1999, 9 pages.
Sandford II et al., “The Data Embedding Method”, Proceedings of the SPIE vol. 2615, pp. 226-259, 1996.
Thomas, Keith, Screening Technology for Content from Compact Discs, May 24, 1999, 11 pages.
Tirkel et al., “Electronic Water Mark,” Dicta-93, Marquarie University, Sydney, Australia, Dec., 1993, pp. 666-672.
Vidal et al., “Non-Noticeable Information Embedding in Color Images: Marking and Detection”, IEEE 1999, pp. 293-297.
Wolfgang et al., “A Watermark for Digital Images,” Computer Vision and Image Processing Laboratory, Purdue University, Sep. 1996, pp. 219-222.
“Access Control and COpyright Protection for Images, WorkPackage 8: Watermarking,” Jun. 30, 1995, 46 pages.
“Access Control and Copyright Protection for Images, WorkPackage 3: Evaluation of Existing Systems,” Apr. 19, 1995, 68 pages.
“Access Control and COpyright Protection for Images, WorkPackage 1: Access Control and Copyright Protection for Images Need Evaluation,” Jun., 1995, 21 pages.
“Access Control and COpyright Protection for Images, Conditional Access and Copyright Protection Based on the Used of Trusted Third Parties,” 1995, 43 pages.
Arachelian, “White Noise Storm,” Apr. 11, 1994, Intenet reference, 13 pages.
Arazi, et al., “Intuition, Perception, and Secure Communication,” IEEE Transactionson Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, vol. 19, No. 5, Sep./Oct. 1989, pp. 1016-1020.
Arthur, “Digital Fingerprints Protect Artwork,” New Scientist, Nov. 12, 1994, p. 24.
Aura, “Invisible Communication,” Helskinki University of Technology, Digital Systems Laboratory, Nov. 5, 1995, 13 pages.
Bender et al, “Techniques for Data Hiding,” Draft Preprint, Private Correspondence, dated Oct. 30, 1995.
Bender et al., “Techniques for Data Hiding,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Media Laboratory, Jan. 1995, 10 pages.
Boneh, “Collusion-Secure Fingerprinting for Digital Data,” Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, 1995, 31 pages.
Boney et al., “Digital Watermarks for Audio Signals,” Proceedings of Multimedia '96 , 1996 IEEE, pp. 473-480.
Boucqueau et al., Equitable Conditional Access and Copyright Protection for Image Based on Trusted Third Parties, Teleservices & Multimedia Communications, 2nd Int. Cost 237 Workshop, Second International Cost 237 Workshop, Nov., 1995; published 1996, pp. 229-243.
Brassil et al., “Hiding Information in Document Images,” Nov., 1995, 7 pages.
Brown, “S-Tools for Windows, Version 1.00, .COPYRGT. 1994 Andy Brown, What is Steganography,” Internet reference, Mar. 6, 1994, 6 pages.
Bruyndonckx et al., Neural Network Post-Processing of Coded Images Using Perceptual Masking, 1994, 3 pages.
Bruyndonckx et al., “Spatial Method for Copyright Labeling of Digital Images,” 1994, 6 pages.
Burgett et al., “A Novel Method for Copyright Labeling Digtized Image Data,” requested by e-mail from author (unavailable/password protected on IGD WWW site); received Sep. 18, 1995, 12 pages.
Caronni, “Assuring Ownership Rights for Digital Images,” Published in the Proceedings of ‘Reliable IT Systems,’ VIS '95, HH. Bruggemann and W. Gerhardt-Hackl (Ed.), Vieweg Publishing Company, Germany, 1995, Jun. 14, 1994, 10 pages.
Caruso, “Digital Commerce, 2 plans for watermarks, which can bind proof of authorship to electronic works.” New York Times, Aug. 7, 1995, one page.
Castro et al., “Registration of Translation and Rotated Images Using Finite Fourier Transforms,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. PAMI-9, No. 5, Sep. 1987, pp. 700-703.
Choudhury, et al., “Copyright Protection for Electronic Publishing over Computer Networks,” IEEE Network Magazine, Jun. 1994, 18 pages.
Clarke, “Invisible Code Tags Electronic Images,” Electronic Engineering Times, Jun. 12, 1995, n. 852, p. 42.
“Copyright Protection for Digital Images, Digital Fingerprinting from FBI,” Highwater FBI brochure, 1995 4 pages.
“The Copyright Can of Worms Opened Up By The New Electronic Media,” Computergram Intenations, pCGN07170006, Jul. 17, 1995 and “The Copyright Can of Worms Opened Up By the New Electronic Media—2,” Computergram Internations, pCGN07210008, Jul. 21, 1995, 3 pages total.
Cox et al., “Secure Spread Spectrum Watermarking for Multimedia,” NEC Research Institute Technical Report, Dec. 5, 1995, 33 pages.
Cox et al., “A Secure, Imperceptable Yet Perceptually Salient, Spread Spectrum Watermark for Multimedia,” IEEE, Southcon/96, Conference Record, pp. 192-197, 1996.
“Cyphertech Systems: Introduces Digital Encoding Device to Prevent TV Piracy,” Hollywood Reporter, Oct. 20, 1993, p. 23.
Delaigle et al., “Digital Watermarking,” Proc. SPIE—Int. Soc. Opt. Eng., vol. 2659, pp. 99-110, 1996.
Delaigle et al., “A Psychovisual Approach for Digital Picture Watermarking,” 1995, 20 pages.
DICE Digital Watermark System, Q&A, Dec., 1995, 12 pages.
Digimarc presentation at RSA Conference, approximately Jan. 17, 1996, 4 pages.
Fimmerstad, “The Virtual Art Museum,” Ericsson Connexion, Dec., 1995, pp. 29-31.
Fitzgerald, “Invisible Digital Copyright ID,” Editor & Publisher, Jun. 25, 1994, p. 62.
“Foiling Card Forgers With Magnetic ‘Noise,’” Wall Street Journal, Feb. 8, 1994.
Frequently Asked Questions About Digimarc Signature Technology, Aug. 1, 1995, http://www.digimarc.com, 9 pages.
Friedman, “The Trustworthy Digital Camera: Restoring Credibility to the Photographic Image,” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, vol. 39, No. 4, Nov., 1993, pp. 905-910.
Gabor, et al., “Theory of Communication,” J. Inst. Elect. Eng. 93, 1946, pp. 429-441.
Hartung et al., Digital Watermarking of Raw and Compressed Video, Proc. SPIE 2952, Digital Compression Technologies and Systems for Video Communications, Oct., 1996, pp 205-213.
Hecht, “Embedded Data Graph Glyph Technology for Hardcopy Digital Documents,” SPIE vol. 2171, Feb. 1994, pp. 341-352.
“Holographic signatures for digital images,” The Seybold Report on Desktop Publishing, Aug. 1995, one page.
Humphrey, “Stamping Out Crime,” Hollywood Reporter, Jan. 26, 1994, p. S48.
Jain, “Image Coding Via a Nearest Neighbors Image Model,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. COM-23, No. 3, Mar. 1975, pp. 318-331.
Johnson, “Steganography,” Dec. 10, 1995, 32 pages.
JPEG Group's JPEG Software (release 4), FTP.CSUA.Berekeley.edu/Pub/Cypherpunks/Applications/JSTEG/JPEG.Announcement.GZ.
Kassam, Signal Detection in Non-Gaussian Noise, Dowden & Culver, 1988, pp. 1-96.
Koch et al., “Digital Copyright Labeling: Providing Evidence of Misuse and Tracking Unauthorized Distribution of Copyrighted Materials,” Oasis Magazine, Dec. 1995, 3 pages.
Luc, “Analysis of Spread Spectrum System Parameters for Design of Hidden Transmission,” Radioengineering, vol. 4, No. 2, Jun. 1995, pp. 26-29.
Machado, “Announcing Stego 1.0a2, The First Steganography Tool for the Macintosh,” Internet reference, Nov. 28, 1993, 3 pages.
Macq, “Cryptology for Digital TV Broadcasting,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 83, No. 6, Jun. 1995, pp. 944-957.
Matthews, “When Seeing is Not Believing,” New Scientist, Oct. 16, 1993, pp. 13-15.
Matsui et al., “Video-Steganography: How to Secretly Embed a Signature in a Picture,” IMA Intellectual Property Project Proceedings, Jan. 1994, vol. 1, Issue 1, pp. 187-205.
Mintzer et al., “Toward on-line, Worldwide Access to Vatican Library Materials,” IBM J. Res. Develop. vol. 40 No. 2, Mar., 1996, pp. 139-162.
Moller, et al., “Rechnergestutzte Steganographie: Wie sie Funktioniert und warum folglich jede Reglementierung von Verschlusselung unsinnig ist,” DuD, Datenschutz und Datensicherung, Jun. 18, 1994 318-326.
“NAB—Cyphertech Starts Anti-Piracy Broadcast Tests,” Newsbytes, NEW03230023, Mar. 23, 1994.
Nakamura et al., “A Unified Coding Method of Image and Text Data Using Discrete Orthogonal Transform,” Systems and Computers in Japan, vol. 21, No. 3, 1990, pp. 87-92.
Nakamura et al., “A Unified Coding Method of Dithered Image and Text Data Using Micropatterns,” Electronics and Communications in Japan, Part 1, vol. 72, No. 4, 1989, pp. 50-56.
New Product Information, “FBI at AppleExpo” (Olympia, London), Nov., 1995, 2 pages.
Ohnishi et al., Embedding a Seal into a Picture Under Orthogonal Wavelet Transform, Proceedings of Multimedia '96, 1996, IEEE, pp. 514-421.
ORuanaidh et al., “Watermarking Digital Images for Copyright Protection,” http://www.kalman.mee.tcd.ie/people/jjr/eva.sub.—pap.html, Feb. 2, 1996, 8 pages. (Also published Aug., 1996, IEE Proceedings-Vision, Image and Signal Processing, vol. 143, No. 4, pp. 250-256.).
Pennebaker et al., JPEG Still Image Data Compression Standard, Chapter 3,“Aspects of the Human Visual System,” pp. 23-27, 1993, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Pickholtz et al., “Theory of Spread-Spectrum Communications—A Tutorial,” Transactions on Communications, vol. COM-30, No. 5, May, 1982, pp. 855-884.
Pitas et al., “Applying Signatures on Digital Images,” IEEE Workshop on Nonlinear Image and Signal Processing, Neos Marmaras, Greece, pp. 460-463, Jun., 1995.
Port, “Halting Highway Robbery on the Internet,” Business Week, Oct. 17, 1994, p. 212.
Roberts, “Picture Coding Using Pseudorandom Noise,” IRE Trans. on Information Theory, vol. 8, No. 2, Feb., 1962, pp. 145-154.
Sapwater et al., “Electronic Copyright Protection,” Photo>Electronic Imaging, vol. 37, No. 6, 1994, pp. 16-21. Schneier, “Digital Signatures, Cryptographic Algorithms Can Create Nonforgeable Signatures for Electronic Documents, Making Them Valid Legal Instruments” BYTE, Nov. 1993, pp. 309-312.
Shaggy@phantom.com, “Hide and Seek v. 4.0,” Internet reference, Apr. 10, 1994, 3 pages.
Short, “Steps Toward Unmasking Secure Communications,” International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, vol. 4, No. 4, 1994, pp. 959-977.
Simmons, “Subliminal Channels; Past and Present,” ETT, vol. 5, No. 4, Jul.-Aug. 1994, pp. 45-59.
Sheng et al., “Experiments on Pattern Recognition Using Invariant Fourier-Mellin Descriptors,” Journal of Optical Society of America, vol. 3, No. 6, Jun., 1986, pp. 771-776.
Sklar, “A Structured Overview of Digital Communications—a Tutorial Review—Part I,” IEEE Communications Magazine, Aug., 1983, pp. 1-17.
Sklar, “A Structured Overview of Digital Communications—a Tutorial Review—Part II,” IEEE Communications Magazine, Oct., 1983, pp. 6-21.
“Steganography,” Intellectual Property and the National Information Infrastructure The Report of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights, Sep. 1995, pp. 212-213.
Tanaka et al., “Embedding Secret Information Into a Dithered Multi-Level Image,” Proc. IEEE Military Comm. Conf., Sep. 1990, pp. 216-220.
Tanaka, “Embedding the Attribute Information Into a Dithered Image,” Systems and Computers in Japan, vol. 21, No. 7, 1990, pp. 43-50.
Tirkel et al., “A Two-Dimensional Digital Watermark,” 1995, 6 pages.
Toga et al., “Registration Revisited,” Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 48 (1993), pp. 1-13.
van Schyndel et al., “Towards a Robust Digital Watermark,” ACCV '95, vol. 2, Dec., 1995, pp. 504-508.
Wagner, “Fingerprinting,” 1983 IEEE, pp. 18-22.
Walton, “Image Authentication for a Slippery New Age,” Dr. Dobb's Journal, Apr. 1995, pp. 18-26, 82-87.
“Watermarking & Digital Signature: Protect Your Work!” Published on Internet 1996, http://Itswww.epfl.ch/.about.jordan/watermarking.html.
Wise, “The History of Copyright, Photographers' Right Span Three Centuries,” Photo>Electronic Imaging, vol. 37, No. 6, 1994.
van Schyndel et al., “A Digital Watermark,” IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, Nov. 13-16, 1994, pp. 86-90.
Zhao et al., “Embedding Robust Labels Into Images for Copyright Protection,” Proc. of the International Congress on Intellectual Property Rights for Specialized Information, Knowledge and New Technologies (Vienna, Austria) Aug. 21-25, 1995, 10 pages.
Bender, “Applications for Data Hiding,” IBM Systems Journal, vol. 39, No. 3-4, pp. 547-568, 2000.
Gruhl et al., “Information Hiding to Foil the Casual Counterfeiter,” Proc. 2d Information Hiding Workshop, LNCS vol. 1525, pp. 1-15 (Apr. 15, 1998).
Continuation in Parts (2)
Number Date Country
Parent 09/343104 Jun 1999 US
Child 09/629401 US
Parent 09/571422 May 2000 US
Child 09/343104 US