Multiple transform utilization and application for secure digital watermarking

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 8542831
  • Patent Number
    8,542,831
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, May 4, 2010
    14 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, September 24, 2013
    10 years ago
  • Inventors
  • Examiners
    • Schwartz; Darren B
    • King; John B
    Agents
    • Neifeld IP Law, PC
Abstract
Multiple transform utilization and applications for secure digital watermarking. In one embodiment of the present invention, digital blocks in digital information to be protected are transformed into the frequency domain using a fast Fourier transform. A plurality of frequencies and associated amplitudes are identified for each of the transformed digital blocks and a subset of the identified amplitudes is selected for each of the digital blocks using a primary mask from a key. Message information is selected from a message using a transformation table generated with a convolution mask. The chosen message information is encoded into each of the transformed digital blocks by altering the selected amplitudes based on the selected message information.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates to the protection of digital information. More particularly, the invention relates to multiple transform utilization and applications for secure digital watermarking.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Increasingly, commercially valuable information is being created and stored in “digital” form. For example, music, photographs and video can all be stored and transmitted as a series of numbers, such as 1's and 0's. Digital techniques let the original information be recreated in a very accurate manner. Unfortunately, digital techniques also let the information be easily copied without the owner's permission.


Digital watermarks exist at a convergence point where creators and publishers of digitized multimedia content demand local, secure identification and authentication of content. Because piracy discourages the distribution of valuable digital information, establishing responsibility for copies and derivative copies of such works is important. The goal of a digital watermark system is to insert a given information signal or signals in such a manner as to leave little or no artifacts, with one standard being perceptibility, in the underlying content signal, while maximizing its encoding level and “location sensitivity” in the signal to force damage to the content signal when removal is attempted. In considering the various forms of multimedia content, whether “master,” stereo, National Television Standards Committee (NTSC) video, audio tape or compact disc, tolerance of quality will vary with individuals and affect the underlying commercial and aesthetic value of the content. It is desirable to tie copyrights, ownership rights, purchaser information or some combination of these and related data into the content in such a manner that the content undergoes damage, and therefore reduction of its value, with subsequent unauthorized distribution, commercial or otherwise. Digital watermarks address many of these concerns and research in the field has provided a rich basis for extremely robust and secure implementations.


Of particular concern is the balance between the value of a digitized “piece” of content and the cost of providing worthwhile “protection” of that content. In a parallel to real world economic behavior, the perceived security of a commercial bank does not cause people to immediately deposit cash because of the expense and time required to perform a bank deposit. For most individuals, possession of a US$100 bill does not require any protection beyond putting it into a wallet. The existence of the World Wide Web, or “Web,” does not implicitly indicate that value has been created for media which can be digitized, such as audio, still images and other media. The Web is simply a medium for information exchange, not a determinant for the commercial value of content. The Web's use to exchange media does, however, provide information that helps determine this value, which is why responsibility over digitized content is desirable. Note that digital watermarks are a tool in this process, but they no not replace other mechanisms for establishing more public issues of ownership, such as copyrights. Digital watermarks, for example, do not replace the “historical average” approach to value content. That is, a market of individuals willing to make a purchase based solely on the perceived value of the content. By way of example, a picture distributed over the Internet, or any other electronic exchange, does not necessarily increase the underlying value of the picture, but the opportunity to reach a greater audience by this form of “broadcast” may be a desirable mechanism to create “potentially” greater market-based valuations. That decision rests solely with the rights holder in question.


Indeed, in many cases, depending on the time value of the content, value may actually be reduced if access is not properly controlled. With a magazine sold on a monthly basis, it is difficult to assess the value of pictures in the magazine beyond the time the magazine is sold. Compact disc valuations similarly have time-based variables, as well as tangible variables such as packaging versus the package-less electronic exchange of the digitized audio signals. The Internet only provides a means to more quickly reach consumers and does not replace the otherwise “market-based” value. Digital watermarks, properly implemented, add a necessary layer of ownership determination which will greatly assist in determining and assessing value when they are “provably secure.” The present invention improves digital watermarking technology while offering a means to properly “tamper proof” digitized content in a manner analogous to methods for establishing authenticity of real world goods.


A general weakness in digital watermark technology relates directly to the way watermarks are implemented. Too many approaches leave detection and decode control with the implementing party of the digital watermark, not the creator of the work to be protected. This fundamental aspect of various watermark technologies removes proper economic incentives for improvement of the technology when third parties successfully exploit the implementation. One specific form of exploitation obscures subsequent watermark detection. Others regard successful over encoding using the same watermarking process at a subsequent time.


A set of secure digital watermark implementations address this fundamental control issue, forming the basis of “key-based” approaches. These are covered by the following patents and pending applications, the entire disclosures of which are hereby incorporated by reference: U.S. Pat. No. 5,613,004 entitled “Steganographic Method and Device” and its derivative U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/775,216 (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,687,236 on Nov. 11, 1997), U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/587,944 entitled “Human Assisted Random Key Generation and Application for Digital Watermark System,” (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,822,432 on Oct. 13, 1998);


U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/587,943 entitled “Method for Stega-Cipher Protection of Computer Code,” (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,745,569 on Apr. 28, 1997); U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/677,435 entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digitized Data,” (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,889,868 on Mar. 30, 1999). and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/772,222 entitled “Z-Transform Implementation of Digital Watermarks,” (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 6,078,664). Public key crypto-systems are described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,200,770, 4,218,582, 4,405,829 and 4,424,414, the entire disclosures of which are also hereby incorporated by reference.


By way of improving these digital watermark security methods, utilization of multiple transforms, manipulation of signal characteristics and the requisite relationship to the mask set or “key” used for encoding and decoding operations are envisioned, as are optimized combinations of these methods. While encoding a watermark may ultimately differ only slightly in terms of the transforms used in the encoding algorithm, the greater issues of an open, distributed architecture requires more robust approaches to survive attempts at erasure, or even means for making detection of the watermark impossible. These “attacks,” when computationally compared, may be diametrically related. For instance, cropping and scaling differ in signal processing orientation, and can result in the weakening of a particular watermarking approach but not all watermarking approaches.


Currently available approaches that encode using either a block-based or entire data set transform necessarily encode data in either the spatial or frequency domains, but never both domains. A simultaneous crop and scale affects the spatial and frequency domains enough to obscure most available watermark systems. The ability to survive multiple manipulations is an obvious benefit to those seeking to ensure the security of their watermarked media. The present invention seeks to improve on key-based approaches to watermarking previously disclosed, while offering greater control of the subsequently watermarked content to rights owners and content creators.


Many currently available still image watermarking applications are fundamentally different from the key-based implementations. Such products include products offered by Digimarc and Signum, which seek to provide a robust watermark by encoding watermark messages that rely entirely on comparisons with the original image for decode operations. The subsequent result of the transform, a discrete cosine transform performed in blocks, is digital signed. The embedded watermarks lack any relationship to the perceptual qualities of the image, making inverse application of the publicly available decoders a very good first line of attack. Similarly, the encoding process may be applied by third parties, as demonstrated by some robustness tests, using one process to encode over the result of an image watermarked with another process. Nonrepudiation of the watermark is not possible, because Digimarc and Signum act as the repository of all registrations of the image's ownership.


Another line of attack is a low pass filter that removes some of the high frequency noise that has been added, making error-free detection difficult or impossible. Finally, many tests of a simple JPEG transform indicate the watermarks may not survive as JPEG is based on the same transforms as the encoding transforms used by the watermarking process. Other notable implementations, such as that offered by Signafy (developed by NEC researchers), appear to encode watermark messages by performing a transform of the entire image. The goal of this process is to more consistently identify “candidate” watermark bits or regions of the image to encode in perceptually significant regions of the signal. Even so, Signafy relies on the original unwatermarked image to accomplish decoding.


All of these methods still rely on the original unwatermarked image to ensure relatively error-free detection of the watermarks. The steganographic method seeks to provide watermark security without an original unwatermarked copy of the media for decode operations, as well as providing users cryptographic security with ciphered symmetric keys. That is, the same key is used for encode and decode operations. Public key pairs, where each user has a public/private key pair to perform asymmetric encode and decode operations, can also be used. Discussions of public key encryption and the benefits related to encryption are well documented. The growing availability of a public key infrastructure also indicates recognition of provable security. With such key-based implementations of watermarking, security can be off-loaded to the key, providing for a layered approach to security and authentication of the watermark message as well as the watermarked content.


It is known that attacks on the survivability of other implementations are readily available. Interesting network-based attacks on the watermark message are also known which fool the central registration server into assuming an image is owned by someone other than the registered owner. This also substantiates the concern that centralized watermarking technologies are not robust enough to provide proper assurances as to the ownership of a given digitized copy of an multimedia work.


Because the computational requirements of performing multiple transforms may not be prohibitive for certain media types, such as still images and audio, the present invention seeks to provide a means to securely watermark media without the need for an original unwatermarked copy to perform decoding. These transforms may be performed in a manner not plainly evident to observers or the owner of the content, who may assume the watermark is still detectable. Additionally, where a particular media type is commonly compressed (JPEG, MPEG, etc.), multiple transforms may be used to properly set the mask sets, prior to the watermarking process, to alert a user to survivability prior to the release of a watermarked, and thus perceived, “safe” copy to unknown parties. The result of the present invention is a more realistic approach to watermarking taking the media type, as well as the provable security of the keys into consideration. A more trusted model for electronic commerce is therefore possible.


The creation of an optimized “envelope” for insertion of watermarks to establish secured responsibility for digitally-sampled content provides the basis of much watermark security but is also a complementary goal of the present invention. The predetermined or random key that is generated is not only an essential map to access the hidden information signal, but is also the a subset of the original signal making direct comparisons with the original signal unnecessary. This increases the overall security of the digital watermark.


Survival of simultaneous cropping and scaling is a difficult task with image and audio watermarking, where such transformations are common with the inadvertent use of images and audio, and with intentional attacks on the watermark. The corresponding effects in audio are far more obvious, although watermarks which are strictly “frequency-based,” such as variations of spread spectrum, suffer from alignment issues in audio samples which have been “cropped,” or clipped from the original length of the piece. Scaling is far more noticeable to the human auditory system, though slight changes may affect frequency-only-type watermarks while not being apparent to a consumer. The far greater threat to available audio watermark applications, most of which are variations of frequency-based embedded signaling, are generally time-based transformations, including time-based compression and expansion of the audio signal. Signafy is an example of spread spectrum-based watermarking, as are applications by Solana Technology, CRL, BBN, MIT, etc. “Spatial domain” approaches are more appropriate designations for the technologies deployed by Digimarc, Signum, ARIS, Arbitron, etc. Interestingly, a time-based approached when considered for images is basically a “spatial-based” approach. The pixels are “convolutional.” The difference being that the “spread spectrum-ed” area of the frequencies is “too” well-defined and thus susceptible to over-encoding of random noise at the same sub-bands as that of the embedded signal.


Giovanni uses a block-based approach for the actual watermark. However, it is accompanied by image-recognition capable of restoring a scaled image to its original scale. This “de-scaling” is applied before the image is decoded. Other systems used a “differencing” of the original image with the watermarked image to “de-scale.” It is clear that de-scaling is inherently important to the survival of any image, audio or video watermark. What is not clear is that the differencing operation is acceptable from a security standpoint. Moreover, differencing that must be carried out by the watermarking “authority,” instead of the user or creator of the image, causes the rights owner to lose control over the original unwatermarked content. Aside from utilizing the mask set within the encoding/decoding key/key pair, the original signal must be used. The original is necessary to perform detection and decoding, although with the attacks described above it is not possible to clearly establish ownership over the watermarked content.


In view of the foregoing, it can be appreciated that a substantial need exists for multiple transform utilization and applications for secure digital watermarking that solve the problems discussed above.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The disadvantages of the art are alleviated to a great extent by multiple transform utilization and applications for secure digital watermarking. In one embodiment of the present invention, digital blocks in digital information to be protected are transformed into the frequency domain using a fast Fourier transform. A plurality of frequencies and associated amplitudes are identified for each of the transformed digital blocks and a subset of the identified amplitudes is selected for each of the digital blocks using a primary mask from a key. Message information is selected from a message using a transformation table generated with a convolution mask. The chosen message information is encoded into each of the transformed digital blocks by altering the selected amplitudes based on the selected message information.


With these and other advantages and features of the invention that will become hereinafter apparent, the nature of the invention may be more clearly understood by reference to the following detailed description of the invention, the appended claims and to the several drawings attached herein.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a block flow diagram of a method for encoding digital information according to an embodiment of the present invention.



FIG. 2 is a block flow diagram of a method for descaling digital information according to an embodiment of the present invention.



FIG. 3 is a block flow diagram of a method for decoding digital information according to an embodiment of the present invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In accordance with an embodiment of the present invention, multiple transforms are used with respect to secure digital watermarking. There are two approaches to watermarking using frequency-domain or spatial domain transformations: using small blocks or using the entire data-set. For time-based media, such as audio or video, it is only practical to work in small pieces, since the entire file can be many megabytes in size. For still images, however, the files are usually much smaller and can be transformed in a single operation. The two approaches each have their own strengths. Block-based methods are resistant to cropping. Cropping is the cutting out or removal of portions of the signal. Since the data is stored in small pieces, a crop merely means the loss of a few pieces. As long as enough blocks remain to decode a single, complete watermark, the crop does not remove the mark. Block-based systems, however, are susceptible to scaling. Scaling, such as affine scaling or “shrinking,” leads to a loss of the high frequencies of the signal. If the block size is 32 samples and the data is scaled by 200%, the relevant data now covers 64 samples. However, the decoder still thinks that the data is in 32 samples, and therefore only uses half the space necessary to properly read the watermark. Whole-set approaches have the opposite behavior. They are very good at surviving scaling, since they approach the data as a whole, and generally scale the data to a particular size before encoding. Even a small crop, however, can throw off the alignment of the transform and obscure the watermark.


With the present invention, and by incorporation of previously disclosed material, it is now possible to authenticate an image or song or video with the encoding key/key pair, eliminating false positive matches with cryptography and providing for the communication of a copyright through registration with third party authorities, instead of the original unwatermarked copy.


The present invention provides an obvious improvement over the prior art while improving on previous disclosures by offsetting coordinate values of the original signal onto the key, which are then subsequently used to perform decode or detection operations by the user or authorized “key-holder.” This offsetting is necessary with content which may have a watermark “payload,” the amount of data that may successfully be encoded, based on Shannon's noisy channel coding theorem, that prevents enough invisible “saturation” of the signal with watermark messages to afford the owner the ability to detect a single message. An example, it is entirely possible that some images may only have enough of a payload to carry a single 100 bit message, or 12 ASCII characters. In audio implementations tested by the present inventor, 1000 bits per second are inaudibly encoded in a 16 bit 44.1 kHz audio signal. Most electronically available images do not have enough data to afford similar “payload” rates. Thus the premise that simultaneous cropping and scaling survival is more difficult for images than a comparable commercially available audio or video track. The added security benefit is that the more limited randomizer of a watermarking system based on spread spectrum or frequency-only applications, the random value of the watermark data “hopping” over a limited signaling band, is that the key is also an independent source of ciphered or random data used to more effectively encode in a random manner. The key may actually have random values larger than the watermark message itself, measured in bits. The watermark decoder is assured that the image is in its original scale, and can decide whether it has been cropped based on its “de-scaled” dimensions.


The benefits of a system requiring keys for watermarking content and validating the distribution of said content is obvious. Different keys may be used to encode different information while secure one way hash functions, digital signatures, or even one-time pads may be incorporated in the key to secure the embedded signal and afford nonrepudiation and validation of the watermarked image and “its” key/key pair. Subsequently, these same keys may be used to later validate the embedded digital signature only, or fully decode the digital watermark message. Publishers can easily stipulate that content not only be digitally watermarked, but that distributors must check the validity of the watermarks by performing digital signature checks with keys that lack any other functionality.


Some discussion of secure digital watermarking has begun to appear. Leighton describes a means to prevent collusion attacks in digital watermarks in U.S. Pat. No. 5,664,018. Leighton, however, may not actually provide the security described. For example, in particularly instances where the watermarking technique is linear, the “insertion envelope” or “watermarking space” is well-defined and thus susceptible to attacks less sophisticated than collusion by unauthorized parties. Over encoding at the watermarking encoding level is but one simple attack in such linear implementations. Another consideration ignored by Leighton is that commercially-valuable content in many cases may already exist in a unwatermarked form somewhere, easily accessible to potential pirates, gutting the need for any type of collusive activity. Such examples as compact disc or digitally broadcast video abound. Digitally signing the embedded signal with preprocessing of watermark data is more likely to prevent successful collusion. Depending on the media to be watermarked, highly granular watermarking algorithms are far more likely to successfully encode at a level below anything observable given quantization artifacts, common in all digitally-sampled media, than expectations that a baseline watermark has any functionality.


Furthermore, a “baseline” watermark as disclosed is quite subjective. It is simply described elsewhere in the art as the “perceptually significant” regions of a signal: so making a watermarking function less linear or inverting the insertion of watermarks would seem to provide the same benefit without the additional work required to create a “baseline” watermark. Indeed, watermarking algorithms should already be capable of defining a target insertion envelope or region without additional steps. Further, earlier disclosed applications by the present invention's inventor describe watermarking techniques that can be set to encode fewer bits than the available watermarking region's “bit-space” or encoding unrelated random noise in addition to watermark data to confuse possible collusive or other attempts at erasure. The region of “candidate bits” can be defined by any number of compression schemes or transformations, and the need to encode all of the bits is simply unnecessary. What is evident is that Leighton does not allow for initial prevention of attacks on an embedded watermark as the content is visibly or audibly unchanged. Moreover, encoding all of the bits may actually act as a security weakness to those who can replicate the regions with a knowledge of the encoding scheme. Again, security must also be offset outside of the actual watermark message to provide a truly robust and secure watermark implementation.


In contrast, the present invention may be implemented with a variety of cryptographic protocols to increase both confidence and security in the underlying system. A predetermined key is described as a set of masks. These masks may include primary, convolution and message delimiters but may extend into additional domains such as digital signatures of the message. In previous disclosures, the functionality of these masks is defined solely for mapping. Public and private keys may be used as key pairs to further increase the unlikeliness that a key maybe compromised. Prior to encoding, the masks described above are generated by a cryptographically secure random generation process. A block cipher, such as DES, in combination with a sufficiently random seed value emulates a cryptographically secure random bit generator. These keys will be saved along with information matching them to the sample stream in question in a database for use in descrambling and subsequent detection or decode operation.


These same cryptographic protocols can be combined with embodiments of the present invention in administering streamed content that requires authorized keys to correctly display or play said streamed content in an unscrambled manner. As with digital watermarking, symmetric or asymmetric public key pairs may be used in a variety of implementations. Additionally, the need for certification authorities to maintain authentic key-pairs becomes a consideration for greater security beyond symmetric key implementations, where transmission security is a concern.


The following describes a sample embodiment of a system that protects digital information according to the present invention. Referring now in detail to the drawings wherein like parts are designated by like reference numerals throughout, there is illustrated in FIG. 1 a block flow diagram of a method for encoding digital information according to an embodiment of the present invention. An image is processed by “blocks,” each block being, for example, a 32.times.32 pixel region in a single color channel. At step 110, each block is transformed into the frequency domain using a spectral transform or a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT). The largest 32 amplitudes are identified and a subset of these 32 are selected using the primary mask from the key at steps 120 and 130. One message bit is then encoded into each block at steps 140 and 150. The bit is chosen from the message using a transformation table generated using the convolution mask. If the bit is true, the selected amplitudes are reduced by a user defined strength fraction. If the bit is false, the amplitudes are unchanged.


Each of the selected amplitudes and frequencies are stored in the key. After all of the image has been processed, a diagonal stripe of pixels is saved in the key. This stripe can, for example, start in the upper left corner and proceed at a 45 degree angle through the image. The original dimensions of the image are also stored in the key.



FIG. 2 is a block flow diagram of a method for descaling digital information according to an embodiment of the present invention. When an image is chosen to be decoded, it first is checked to determine if it has been cropped and/or scaled. If so, the image is scaled to the original dimensions at step 210. The resulting “stripe,” or diagonal line of pixels, is fit against the stripe stored in the key at step 220. If the fit is better than the previous best fit, the scale is saved at steps 230 and 240. If desired, the image can be padded with, for example, a single row or column of zero pixels at step 260 and the process can be repeated to see if the fit improves.


If a perfect fit is found at step 250, the process concludes. If no perfect fit is found, the process continues up to a crop “radius” set by the user. For example, if the crop radius is 4 the image can be padded up to 4 rows and/or 4 columns. The best fit is chosen and the image is restored to its original dimension, with any cropped area replaced by zeroes.


Once the information has been descaled, it can be decoded according to an embodiment of the present invention shown in FIG. 3. Decoding is the inverse process of encoding. The decoded amplitudes are compared with the ones stored in the key in order to determine the position of the encoded bit at steps 310 and 320. The message is assembled using the reverse transformation table at step 330. At step 340, the message is then hashed and the hash is compared with the hash of the original message. The original hash had been stored in the key during encoding. If the hashes match, the message is declared valid and presented to the user at step 350.


Although various embodiments are specifically illustrated and described herein, it will be appreciated that modifications and variations of the present invention are covered by the above teachings and within the purview of the appended claims without departing from the spirit and intended scope of the invention. Moreover, similar operations have been applied to audio and video content for time-based manipulations of the signal as well as amplitude and pitch operations. The ability to descale or otherwise quickly determine differencing without use of the unwatermarked original is inherently important for secure digital watermarking. It is also necessary to ensure nonrepudiation and third part authentication as digitized content is exchanged over networks.

Claims
  • 1. A method for protecting a digital signal, comprising: obtaining a digital signal comprising a plurality of digital blocks;transforming, using a processor, each of the digital blocks into the frequency domain using a spectral transform;identifying a plurality of frequencies and associated amplitudes for each set of the transformed digital blocks;selecting a subset of the identified amplitudes based on the survivability of message information against signal manipulation;choosing said subset of the identified amplitudes for each of the digital blocks using a primary mask from a key;choosing message information using a transformation table generated with a convolution mask; and,encoding, using a processor, the chosen message information into said transformed digital blocks by altering the selected amplitudes based on the chosen message information.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the survivability of the message information against signal manipulation is determined prior to encoding.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein said encoding results in an encoded digital signal, further comprising: obtaining a copy of the encoded digital signal; obtaining a key; analyzing the encoded digital signal with one or more of the following: a) analysis of manipulations of the encoded digital signal b) spectral transform analysis of the encoded digital signal c) spectral transform analysis of a portion of the encoded digital signal or d) combinations thereof; and determining the message information based on said analysis.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of choosing comprises choosing from members selected in the selecting step.
  • 5. The method of claim 1 further comprising: creating a predetermined key comprised of output of an operation performed on a transfer function-based mask set and offset coordinate values of said digital signal; andwherein said encoding comprises using the predetermined key.
  • 6. The method of claim 5, wherein said digital signal represents a continuous analog waveform.
  • 7. The method of claim 5, wherein the predetermined key comprises a plurality of mask sets.
  • 8. The method of claim 5, wherein the mask set is ciphered by a key pair comprising a public key and a private key.
  • 9. The method of claim 5, further: using a digital watermarking technique to encode information that identifies ownership, use, or other information about said digital signal, into said digital signal.
  • 10. The method of claim 5, wherein said digital signal represents a still image, audio or video.
  • 11. The method of claim 5, further comprising: selecting the mask set, including one or more masks having random or pseudo-random series of bits; and validating the mask set at the start of the transfer function-based mask set.
  • 12. The method of claim 11, wherein said step of validating comprises: comparing a hash value computed at the start of the transfer function-based mask set with a determined transfer function of the hash value.
  • 13. The method of claim 11, wherein said step of validating comprises the step of: comparing a digital signature at the start of the transfer function-based mask set with a determined transfer function of the digital signature.
  • 14. The method of claim 5, further comprising: computing a secure one way hash function of carrier signal data in said digital signal, wherein the hash function is insensitive to changes introduced into the carrier signal for the purpose of carrying the transfer function-based mask set.
  • 15. The method of claim 5 wherein said creating said predetermined key comprises using said processor.
  • 16. The method of claim 1 further comprising: creating a predetermined key comprised of output of an operation performed on a transfer function-based mask set and offset coordinate values of the digital signal;authenticating, using a processor, the predetermined key containing the correct transfer function-based mask set during playback of data; andmetering the playback of the data to monitor content.
  • 17. The method of claim 16 wherein said creating said predetermined key comprises using said processor.
  • 18. The method of claim 1 further comprising: creating a key comprised of: a) a map to encode at least one message and b) a reference subset of said digital signal, wherein said reference subset is a subset of a transform of a subset of said digital signal; andwherein said encoding comprises encoding said message information into said transformed digital blocks according to said map, thereby creating an encoded digital signal.
  • 19. The method of claim 18, further comprising: using the key to access at least one message that has been encoded into the encoded digital signal without having to compare the encoded digital signal to said digital signal.
  • 20. The method of claim 18, wherein the reference subset of said initial digital signal includes one or more of the following group: a) amplitude b) frequency c) time d) pitch or e) dimensions of said digital signal or f) combinations thereof.
  • 21. The method of claim 18, wherein the message information includes one or more of the following group: a) authentication information b) tamper proofing information c) non-repudiation information d) ownership information e) information for authorizing use f) unrelated random noise or g) information regarding relationships between the message and the key or h) combinations thereof.
  • 22. The method of claim 18, further comprising: using the key to enable a) play b) display c) transmission d) authorization e) validation or f) use of the encoded digital signal or g) combinations thereof.
  • 23. The method of claim 18, further comprising: using the key to enable authentication of either 1) the message 2) the encoded digital signal or 3) both the message and the encoded digital signal.
  • 24. The method of claim 18 wherein said creating said key comprises using said processor.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/587,943, filed Jan. 17, 1996, entitled “Method for Stega-Cipher Protection of Computer Code,” (issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,745,569 on Apr. 28, 1998); the entire disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference. This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/358,874, filed Feb. 21, 2006, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,738,659, issued Jun. 15, 2010, which is a division of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/644,098, filed Aug. 23, 2000, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,035,409, issued Apr. 25, 2006, which is a division of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/053,628, filed Apr. 2, 1998, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,205,249issued on Mar. 20, 2001. The previously identified patents and/or patent applications are hereby incorporated by reference, in their entireties as if fully stated herein.

US Referenced Citations (386)
Number Name Date Kind
3947825 Cassada Mar 1976 A
3984624 Waggener Oct 1976 A
3986624 Cates, Jr. et al. Oct 1976 A
4038596 Lee Jul 1977 A
4200770 Hellman et al. Apr 1980 A
4218582 Hellman et al. Aug 1980 A
4339134 Macheel Jul 1982 A
4390898 Bond et al. Jun 1983 A
4405829 Rivest et al. Sep 1983 A
4424414 Hellman et al. Jan 1984 A
4528588 Lofberg Jul 1985 A
4672605 Hustig et al. Jun 1987 A
4748668 Shamir et al. May 1988 A
4789928 Fujisaki Dec 1988 A
4827508 Shear May 1989 A
4876617 Best et al. Oct 1989 A
4896275 Jackson Jan 1990 A
4908873 Philibert et al. Mar 1990 A
4939515 Adelson Jul 1990 A
4969204 Jones et al. Nov 1990 A
4972471 Gross et al. Nov 1990 A
4977594 Shear Dec 1990 A
4979210 Nagata et al. Dec 1990 A
4980782 Ginkel Dec 1990 A
5050213 Shear Sep 1991 A
5073925 Nagata et al. Dec 1991 A
5077665 Silverman et al. Dec 1991 A
5113437 Best et al. May 1992 A
5136581 Muehrcke Aug 1992 A
5136646 Haber et al. Aug 1992 A
5136647 Haber et al. Aug 1992 A
5142576 Nadan Aug 1992 A
5161210 Druyvesteyn et al. Nov 1992 A
5210820 Kenyon May 1993 A
5243423 DeJean et al. Sep 1993 A
5243515 Lee Sep 1993 A
5287407 Holmes Feb 1994 A
5319735 Preuss et al. Jun 1994 A
5341429 Stringer et al. Aug 1994 A
5341477 Pitkin et al. Aug 1994 A
5363448 Koopman et al. Nov 1994 A
5365586 Indeck et al. Nov 1994 A
5369707 Follendore, III Nov 1994 A
5379345 Greenberg Jan 1995 A
5394324 Clearwater Feb 1995 A
5398285 Borgelt et al. Mar 1995 A
5406627 Thompson et al. Apr 1995 A
5408505 Indeck et al. Apr 1995 A
5410598 Shear Apr 1995 A
5412718 Narasimhalv et al. May 1995 A
5418713 Allen May 1995 A
5428606 Moskowitz Jun 1995 A
5450490 Jensen et al. Sep 1995 A
5469536 Blank Nov 1995 A
5471533 Wang et al. Nov 1995 A
5478990 Montanari et al. Dec 1995 A
5479210 Cawley et al. Dec 1995 A
5487168 Geiner et al. Jan 1996 A
5493677 Balogh et al. Feb 1996 A
5497419 Hill Mar 1996 A
5506795 Yamakawa Apr 1996 A
5513126 Harkins et al. Apr 1996 A
5513261 Maher Apr 1996 A
5530739 Okada Jun 1996 A
5530751 Morris Jun 1996 A
5530759 Braudaway et al. Jun 1996 A
5539735 Moskowitz Jul 1996 A
5548579 Lebrun et al. Aug 1996 A
5568570 Rabbani Oct 1996 A
5579124 Aijala et al. Nov 1996 A
5581703 Baugher et al. Dec 1996 A
5583488 Sala et al. Dec 1996 A
5598470 Cooper et al. Jan 1997 A
5606609 Houser et al. Feb 1997 A
5613004 Cooperman et al. Mar 1997 A
5617119 Briggs et al. Apr 1997 A
5625690 Michel et al. Apr 1997 A
5629980 Stefik et al. May 1997 A
5633932 Davis et al. May 1997 A
5634040 Her et al. May 1997 A
5636276 Brugger Jun 1997 A
5636292 Rhoads Jun 1997 A
5640569 Miller et al. Jun 1997 A
5646997 Barton Jul 1997 A
5657461 Harkins et al. Aug 1997 A
5659726 Sandford, II et al. Aug 1997 A
5664018 Leighton Sep 1997 A
5673316 Auerbach et al. Sep 1997 A
5677952 Blakley et al. Oct 1997 A
5680462 Miller et al. Oct 1997 A
5687236 Moskowitz et al. Nov 1997 A
5689587 Bender et al. Nov 1997 A
5696828 Koopman, Jr. Dec 1997 A
5719937 Warren et al. Feb 1998 A
5721788 Powell et al. Feb 1998 A
5734752 Knox Mar 1998 A
5737416 Cooper et al. Apr 1998 A
5737733 Eller Apr 1998 A
5740244 Indeck et al. Apr 1998 A
5745569 Moskowitz et al. Apr 1998 A
5748783 Rhoads May 1998 A
5751811 Magnotti et al. May 1998 A
5754697 Fu et al. May 1998 A
5757923 Koopman, Jr. May 1998 A
5765152 Erickson Jun 1998 A
5768396 Sone Jun 1998 A
5774452 Wolosewicz Jun 1998 A
5790677 Fox et al. Aug 1998 A
5799083 Brothers et al. Aug 1998 A
5809139 Grirod et al. Sep 1998 A
5809160 Powell et al. Sep 1998 A
5818818 Soumiya Oct 1998 A
5822432 Moskowitz et al. Oct 1998 A
5828325 Wolosewicz et al. Oct 1998 A
5832119 Rhoads Nov 1998 A
5842213 Odom Nov 1998 A
5848155 Cox Dec 1998 A
5850481 Rhoads Dec 1998 A
5859920 Daly et al. Jan 1999 A
5860099 Milios et al. Jan 1999 A
5862260 Rhoads Jan 1999 A
5870474 Wasilewski et al. Feb 1999 A
5884033 Duvall et al. Mar 1999 A
5889868 Moskowitz et al. Mar 1999 A
5893067 Bender et al. Apr 1999 A
5894521 Conley Apr 1999 A
5903721 Sixtus May 1999 A
5905800 Moskowitz et al. May 1999 A
5905975 Ausubel May 1999 A
5912972 Barton Jun 1999 A
5915027 Cox et al. Jun 1999 A
5917915 Hirose Jun 1999 A
5918223 Blum Jun 1999 A
5920900 Poole et al. Jul 1999 A
5923763 Walker et al. Jul 1999 A
5930369 Cox et al. Jul 1999 A
5930377 Powell et al. Jul 1999 A
5940134 Wirtz Aug 1999 A
5943422 Van Wie et al. Aug 1999 A
5949055 Fleet Sep 1999 A
5963909 Warren et al. Oct 1999 A
5973731 Schwab Oct 1999 A
5974141 Saito Oct 1999 A
5991426 Cox et al. Nov 1999 A
5999217 Berners-Lee Dec 1999 A
6009176 Gennaro et al. Dec 1999 A
6029126 Malvar Feb 2000 A
6041316 Allen Mar 2000 A
6044471 Colvin Mar 2000 A
6049838 Miller et al. Apr 2000 A
6051029 Paterson et al. Apr 2000 A
6061793 Tewfik et al. May 2000 A
6067622 Moore May 2000 A
6069914 Cox May 2000 A
6078664 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2000 A
6081251 Sakai et al. Jun 2000 A
6081587 Reyes et al. Jun 2000 A
6081597 Hoffstein Jun 2000 A
6088455 Logan et al. Jul 2000 A
6131162 Yoshiura et al. Oct 2000 A
6141753 Zhao et al. Oct 2000 A
6141754 Choy Oct 2000 A
6148333 Guedalia Nov 2000 A
6154571 Cox et al. Nov 2000 A
6192138 Yamadaji Feb 2001 B1
6199058 Wong et al. Mar 2001 B1
6205249 Moskowitz Mar 2001 B1
6208745 Florenio et al. Mar 2001 B1
6226618 Downs May 2001 B1
6230268 Miwa et al. May 2001 B1
6233347 Chen et al. May 2001 B1
6233684 Stefik et al. May 2001 B1
6240121 Senoh May 2001 B1
6263313 Milstead et al. Jul 2001 B1
6272634 Tewfik et al. Aug 2001 B1
6275988 Nagashima et al. Aug 2001 B1
6278780 Shimada Aug 2001 B1
6278791 Honsinger et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282300 Bloom et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282650 Davis Aug 2001 B1
6285775 Wu et al. Sep 2001 B1
6301663 Kato et al. Oct 2001 B1
6310962 Chung et al. Oct 2001 B1
6330335 Rhoads Dec 2001 B1
6330672 Shur Dec 2001 B1
6345100 Levine Feb 2002 B1
6351765 Pietropaolo et al. Feb 2002 B1
6363483 Keshav Mar 2002 B1
6373892 Ichien et al. Apr 2002 B1
6373960 Conover et al. Apr 2002 B1
6374036 Ryan et al. Apr 2002 B1
6377625 Kim Apr 2002 B1
6381618 Jones et al. Apr 2002 B1
6381747 Wonfor et al. Apr 2002 B1
6385324 Koppen May 2002 B1
6385329 Sharma et al. May 2002 B1
6385596 Wiser May 2002 B1
6389538 Gruse et al. May 2002 B1
6405203 Collart Jun 2002 B1
6415041 Oami et al. Jul 2002 B1
6418421 Hurtado Jul 2002 B1
6425081 Iwamura Jul 2002 B1
6430301 Petrovic Aug 2002 B1
6430302 Rhoads Aug 2002 B2
6442283 Tewfik et al. Aug 2002 B1
6446211 Colvin Sep 2002 B1
6453252 Laroche Sep 2002 B1
6457058 Ullum et al. Sep 2002 B1
6463468 Buch et al. Oct 2002 B1
6484264 Colvin Nov 2002 B1
6493457 Quackenbush Dec 2002 B1
6502195 Colvin Dec 2002 B1
6522767 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2003 B1
6522769 Rhoads et al. Feb 2003 B1
6523113 Wehrenberg Feb 2003 B1
6530021 Epstein et al. Mar 2003 B1
6532284 Walker et al. Mar 2003 B2
6539475 Cox et al. Mar 2003 B1
6557103 Boncelet, Jr. et al. Apr 2003 B1
6584125 Katto Jun 2003 B1
6587837 Spagna et al. Jul 2003 B1
6590996 Reed Jul 2003 B1
6598162 Moskowitz Jul 2003 B1
6606393 Xie et al. Aug 2003 B1
6611599 Natarajan Aug 2003 B2
6647424 Pearson et al. Nov 2003 B1
6658010 Enns et al. Dec 2003 B1
6665489 Collart Dec 2003 B2
6668246 Yeung et al. Dec 2003 B1
6668325 Collberg et al. Dec 2003 B1
6674858 Kimura Jan 2004 B1
6687683 Harada et al. Feb 2004 B1
6725372 Lewis et al. Apr 2004 B1
6754822 Zhao Jun 2004 B1
6775772 Binding et al. Aug 2004 B1
6784354 Lu et al. Aug 2004 B1
6785815 Serret-Avila et al. Aug 2004 B1
6785825 Colvin Aug 2004 B2
6792548 Colvin Sep 2004 B2
6792549 Colvin Sep 2004 B2
6795925 Colvin Sep 2004 B2
6799277 Colvin Sep 2004 B2
6813717 Colvin Nov 2004 B2
6813718 Colvin Nov 2004 B2
6823455 Macy et al. Nov 2004 B1
6834308 Ikezoye et al. Dec 2004 B1
6842862 Chow et al. Jan 2005 B2
6853726 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2005 B1
6857078 Colvin Feb 2005 B2
6865747 Mercier Mar 2005 B1
6931534 Jandel et al. Aug 2005 B1
6957330 Hughes Oct 2005 B1
6966002 Torrubia-Saez Nov 2005 B1
6968337 Wold Nov 2005 B2
6977894 Achilles et al. Dec 2005 B1
6978370 Kocher Dec 2005 B1
6986063 Colvin Jan 2006 B2
6990453 Wang Jan 2006 B2
7007166 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2006 B1
7020285 Kirovski et al. Mar 2006 B1
7035049 Yamamoto Apr 2006 B2
7035409 Moskowitz Apr 2006 B1
7043050 Yuval May 2006 B2
7046808 Metois et al. May 2006 B1
7050396 Cohen et al. May 2006 B1
7051208 Venkatesan et al. May 2006 B2
7058570 Yu et al. Jun 2006 B1
7093295 Saito Aug 2006 B1
7095874 Moskowitz et al. Aug 2006 B2
7103184 Jian Sep 2006 B2
7107451 Moskowitz Sep 2006 B2
7123718 Moskowitz et al. Oct 2006 B1
7127615 Moskowitz Oct 2006 B2
7150003 Naumovich et al. Dec 2006 B2
7152162 Moskowitz et al. Dec 2006 B2
7159116 Moskowitz Jan 2007 B2
7162642 Schumann et al. Jan 2007 B2
7177429 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2007 B2
7177430 Kim Feb 2007 B2
7206649 Kirovski et al. Apr 2007 B2
7231524 Burns Jun 2007 B2
7233669 Candelore Jun 2007 B2
7240210 Michak et al. Jul 2007 B2
7266697 Kirovski et al. Sep 2007 B2
7286451 Wirtz Oct 2007 B2
7287275 Moskowitz Oct 2007 B2
7289643 Brunk et al. Oct 2007 B2
7343492 Moskowitz et al. Mar 2008 B2
7346472 Moskowitz et al. Mar 2008 B1
7362775 Moskowitz Apr 2008 B1
7363278 Schmelzer et al. Apr 2008 B2
7409073 Moskowitz et al. Aug 2008 B2
7457962 Moskowitz Nov 2008 B2
7460994 Herre et al. Dec 2008 B2
7475246 Moskowitz Jan 2009 B1
7530102 Moskowitz May 2009 B2
7532725 Moskowitz et al. May 2009 B2
7568100 Moskowitz et al. Jul 2009 B1
7647502 Moskowitz Jan 2010 B2
7647503 Moskowitz Jan 2010 B2
7664263 Moskowitz Feb 2010 B2
7743001 Vermeulen Jun 2010 B1
7761712 Moskowitz Jul 2010 B2
7779261 Moskowitz Aug 2010 B2
20010010078 Moskowitz Jul 2001 A1
20010029580 Moskowitz Oct 2001 A1
20010043594 Ogawa et al. Nov 2001 A1
20020009208 Alattar Jan 2002 A1
20020010684 Moskowitz Jan 2002 A1
20020026343 Duenke Feb 2002 A1
20020056041 Moskowitz May 2002 A1
20020071556 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020073043 Herman et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020097873 Petrovic Jul 2002 A1
20020103883 Haverstock et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020161741 Wang et al. Oct 2002 A1
20030002862 Rodriguez Jan 2003 A1
20030126445 Wehrenberg Jul 2003 A1
20030133702 Collart Jul 2003 A1
20030200439 Moskowitz Oct 2003 A1
20030219143 Moskowitz et al. Nov 2003 A1
20040028222 Sewell et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040037449 Davis et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040049695 Choi et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040059918 Xu Mar 2004 A1
20040083369 Erlingsson et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040086119 Moskowitz May 2004 A1
20040093521 Hamadeh et al. May 2004 A1
20040117628 Colvin Jun 2004 A1
20040117664 Colvin Jun 2004 A1
20040125983 Reed et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040128514 Rhoads Jul 2004 A1
20040225894 Colvin Nov 2004 A1
20040243540 Moskowitz et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050135615 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050160271 Brundage et al. Jul 2005 A9
20050177727 Moskowitz et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050246554 Batson Nov 2005 A1
20060005029 Petrovic et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060013395 Brundage et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060013451 Haitsma Jan 2006 A1
20060041753 Haitsma Feb 2006 A1
20060101269 Moskowitz et al. May 2006 A1
20060140403 Moskowitz Jun 2006 A1
20060251291 Rhoads Nov 2006 A1
20060285722 Moskowitz et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070011458 Moskowitz Jan 2007 A1
20070028113 Moskowitz Feb 2007 A1
20070064940 Moskowitz et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070079131 Moskowitz et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070083467 Lindahl et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070110240 Moskowitz et al. May 2007 A1
20070113094 Moskowitz et al. May 2007 A1
20070127717 Herre et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070226506 Moskowitz Sep 2007 A1
20070253594 Lu et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070294536 Moskowitz et al. Dec 2007 A1
20070300072 Moskowitz Dec 2007 A1
20070300073 Moskowitz Dec 2007 A1
20080005571 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080005572 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080016365 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080022113 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080022114 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080028222 Moskowitz Jan 2008 A1
20080046742 Moskowitz Feb 2008 A1
20080075277 Moskowitz et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080109417 Moskowitz May 2008 A1
20080133927 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080151934 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2008 A1
20090037740 Moskowitz Feb 2009 A1
20090089427 Moskowitz et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090190754 Moskowitz et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090210711 Moskowitz Aug 2009 A1
20090220074 Moskowitz et al. Sep 2009 A1
20100002904 Moskowitz Jan 2010 A1
20100005308 Moskowitz Jan 2010 A1
20100064140 Moskowitz Mar 2010 A1
20100077219 Moskowitz Mar 2010 A1
20100077220 Moskowitz Mar 2010 A1
20100098251 Moskowitz Apr 2010 A1
20100106736 Moskowitz Apr 2010 A1
20100153734 Moskowitz Jun 2010 A1
20100182570 Matsumoto et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100202607 Moskowitz Aug 2010 A1
20100220861 Moskowitz Sep 2010 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (29)
Number Date Country
0372601 Jun 1990 EP
0565947 Oct 1993 EP
0581317 Feb 1994 EP
0581317 Feb 1994 EP
0649261 Apr 1995 EP
0651554 May 1995 EP
0872073 Jul 1996 EP
1547337 Mar 2006 EP
1354276 Dec 2007 EP
1005523 Sep 1998 NL
WO 9514289 May 1995 WO
WO9701892 Jun 1995 WO
WO 9629795 Sep 1996 WO
WO 9642151 Dec 1996 WO
WO9726733 Jan 1997 WO
WO 9724833 Jul 1997 WO
WO9726732 Jul 1997 WO
WO9802864 Jul 1997 WO
WO 9744736 Nov 1997 WO
WO9802864 Jan 1998 WO
WO9837513 Aug 1998 WO
WO 9952271 Oct 1999 WO
WO 9962044 Dec 1999 WO
WO 9963443 Dec 1999 WO
WO 0057643 Sep 2000 WO
WO0118628 Mar 2001 WO
WO0143026 Jun 2001 WO
WO0203385 Jan 2002 WO
WO0203385 Oct 2002 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (193)
Entry
US. Appl. No. 08/999,766, filed Jul. 23, 1997, entitled “Steganographic Method and Device”, published as 7568100 Jul. 28, 2009.
EPO Application No. 96919405.9, entitled “Steganographic Method and Device”; published as EP0872073 (A2), Oct. 21, 1998.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/050,779, filed Feb. 7, 2005, entitled “Steganographic Method and Device”, published as 20050177727 A1 Aug. 11, 2005.
U.S. Appl. No. 08/674,726, filed Jul. 2, 1996, entitled “Exchange Mechanisms for Digital Information Packages with Bandwidth Securitization, Multichannel Digital Watermarks, and Key Management”, published as 7362775 Apr. 22, 2008.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/545,589, filed Apr. 7, 2000, entitled “Method and System for Digital Watermarking”, published as 7007166 Feb. 28, 2006.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/244,213, filed Oct. 5, 2005, entitled “Method and System for Digital Watermarking”, published as 2006-0101269 A1 May 11, 2006.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/649,026, filed Jan. 3, 2007, entitled “Method and System for Digital Watermarking”, published as 2007-0113094 A1 May 17, 2007.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/046,627, filed Mar. 24, 1998, entitled “Method for Combining Transfer Function with Predetermined Key Creation”, published as 6,598,162 Jul. 22, 2003.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/602,777, filed Jun. 25, 2003, entitled “Method for Combining Transfer Function with Predetermined Key Creation”, published as 2004-0086119 A1 May 6, 2004.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/053,628, filed Apr. 2, 1998, entitled “Multiple Transform Utilization and Application for Secure Digital Watermarking”, 6,205,249 Mar. 20, 2001.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/644,098, filed Aug. 23, 2000, entitled “Multiple Transform Utilization and Application for Secure Digital Watermarking”, published as 7,035,409 Apr. 25, 2006.
Jap. App. No. 2000-542907, entitled “Multiple Transform Utilization and Application for Secure Digital Watermarking”; which is a JP national stage of PCT/US1999/007262, published as WO/1999/052271, Oct. 14, 1999.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/767,733, filed Jan. 24, 2001 entitled “Multiple Transform Utilization and Application for Secure Digital Watermarking”, published as 2001-0010078 A1 Jul. 26, 2001.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/358,874, filed Feb. 21, 2006, entitled “Multiple Transform Utilization and Application for Secure Digital Watermarking”, published as 2006-0140403 A1 Jun. 29, 2006.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/417,231, filed Apr. 17, 2003, entitled “Methods, Systems and Devices for Packet Watermarking and Efficient Provisioning of Bandwidth”, published as 2003-0200439 A1 Oct. 23, 2003.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/789,711, filed Feb. 22, 2001, entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digital Data”, published as 2001-0029580 A1 Oct. 11, 2001.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/497,822, filed Aug. 2, 2006, entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digital Data”, published as 2007-0011458 A1 Jan. 11, 2007.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/599,964, filed Nov. 15, 2006, entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digital Data”, published as 2008-0046742 A1 Feb. 21, 2008.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/599,838, filed Nov. 15, 2006, entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digital Data”, published as 2007-0226506 A1 Sep. 27, 2007.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/369,344, filed Feb. 18, 2003, entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digitized Data”, published as 2003-0219143 A1 Nov. 27, 2003.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/482,654, filed Jul. 7, 2006, entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digitized Data”, published as 2006-0285722 A1 Dec. 21, 2006.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/594,719, filed Jun. 16, 2000, entitled “Utilizing Data Reduction in Steganographic and Cryptographic Systems”, published as 7,123,718 Oct. 17, 2006.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/519,467, filed Sep. 12, 2006, entitled “Utilizing Data Reduction in Steganographic and Cryptographic Systems”, published as 2007-0064940 A1 Mar. 22, 2007.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/731,040, filed Dec. 7, 2000, entitled “Systems, Methods and Devices for Trusted Transactions”, 2002-0010684 A1 Jan. 24, 2002.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/512,701, filed Aug. 29, 2006, entitled “Systems, Methods and Devices for Trusted Transactions”, published as 2007-0028113 A1 Feb. 1, 2007.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/049,101, filed Feb. 8, 2002, entitled “A Secure Personal Content Server”, published as 7,475,246 Jan. 6, 2009.
PCT Application No. PCT/US00/21189, filed Aug. 4, 2000, entitled, “A Secure Personal Content Server”, Pub. No. WO/2001/018628 ; Publication Date: Mar. 15, 2001.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/657,181, filed Sep. 7, 2000, entitled “Method and Device for Monitoring and Analyzing Signals”, published as 7,346,472 Mar. 18, 2008.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/805,484, filed Mar. 22, 2004, entitled “Method and Device for Monitoring and Analyzing Signals”, published as 2004-0243540 A1 Dec. 2, 2004.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/956,262, filed Sep. 20, 2001, entitled “Improved Security Based on Subliminal and Supraliminal Channels for Data Objects”, published as 2002-0056041 A1 May 9, 2002.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/518,806, filed Sep. 11, 2006, entitled “Improved Security Based on Subliminal and Supraliminal Channels for Data Objects”, 2008-0028222 A1 Jan. 31, 2008.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/026,234, filed Dec. 30, 2004, entitled “Z-Transform Implementation of Digital Watermarks” , published as 2005-0135615 A1 Jun. 23, 2005.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/592,079, filed Nov. 2, 2006, entitled “Linear Predictive Coding Implementation of Digital Watermarks”, published as 2007-0079131 A1 Apr. 5, 2007.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/731,039, filed Dec. 7, 2000, entitled “System and Methods for Permitting Open Access to Data Objects and for Securing Data within the Data Objects”, published as 2002-0071556 A1 Jun. 13, 2002.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/647,861, filed Dec. 29, 2006, entitled “System and Methods for Permitting Open Access to Data Objects and for Securing Data within the Data Objects”, published as 2007-0110240 A1 May 17, 2007.
Schneier, Bruce, Applied Cryptography, 2nd Ed., John Wiley & Sons, pp. 9-10, 1996.
Menezes, Alfred J., Handbook of Applied Cryptography, CRC Press, p. 46, 1997.
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 10th Ed., Merriam Webster, Inc., p. 207.
Brealy, et al., Principles of Corporate Finance, “Appendix A—Using Option Valuation Models”, 1984, pp. 448-449.
Copeland, et al., Real Options: A Practitioner's Guide, 2001 pp. 106-107, 201-202, 204-208.
Sarkar, M. “An Assessment of Pricing Mechanisms for the Internet-A Regulatory Imperative”, presented MIT Workshop on Internet Economics, Mar. 1995 http://www.press.vmich.edu/iep/works/SarkAsses.html on.
Crawford, D.W. “Pricing Network Usage: A Market for Bandwidth of Market Communication?” presented MIT Workshop on Internet Economics, Mar. 1995 http://www.press.vmich.edu/iep/works/CrawMarket.html on Mar.
Low, S.H., “Equilibrium Allocation and Pricing of Variable Resources Among User-Suppliers”, 1988. http://www.citesear.nj.nec.com/366503.html.
Caronni, Germano, “Assuring Ownership Rights for Digital Images”, published proceeds of reliable IT systems, v15 '95, H.H. Bruggemann and W. Gerhardt-Hackel (Ed) Viewing Publishing Company Germany 1995.
Zhao, Jian. “A WWW Service to Embed and Prove Digital Copyright Watermarks”, Proc. of the European conf. on Multimedia Applications, Services & Techniques Louvain-La-Nevve Belgium May 1996.
Gruhl, Daniel et al., Echo Hiding. In Proceeding of the Workshop on Information Hiding. No. 1174 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Cambridge, England (May/Jun. 1996).
Oomen, A.W.J. et al., A Variable Bit Rate Buried Data Channel for Compact Disc, J.AudioEng. Sc., vol. 43, No. 1/2, pp. 23-28 (1995).
Ten Kate, W. et al., A New Surround-Stereo-Surround Coding Techniques, J. Audio Eng.Soc., vol. 40,No. 5,pp. 376-383 (1992).
Gerzon, Michael et al., A High Rate Buried Data Channel for Audio CD, presentation notes, Audio Engineering Soc. 94th Convention (1993).
Sklar, Bernard, Digital Communications, pp. 601-603 (1988).
Jayant, N.S. et al., Digital Coding of Waveforms, Prentice Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 486-509 (1984).
Bender, Walter R. et al., Techniques for Data Hiding, SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng., vol. 2420, pp. 164-173, 1995.
Zhao, Jian et al., Embedding Robust Labels into Images for Copyright Protection, (xp 000571976), pp. 242-251, 1995.
Menezes, Alfred J., Handbook of Applied Cryptography, CRC Press, p. 175, 1997.
Schneier, Bruce, Applied Cryptography, 1st Ed., pp. 67-68, 1994.
Ten Kate, W. et al., “Digital Audio Carrying Extra Information”, IEEE, CH 2847-2/90/0000-1097, (1990).
Van Schyndel, et al., “A digital Watermark,” IEEE Int'l Computer Processing Conference, Austin,TX, Nov. 13-16, 1994, pp. 86-90.
Smith, et al. “Modulation and Information Hiding in Images”, Springer Verlag, 1st Int'l Workshop, Cambridge, UK, May 30-Jun. 1, 1996, pp. 207-227.
Kutter, Martin et al., “Digital Signature of Color Images Using Amplitude Modulation”, SPIE-E197, vol. 3022, pp. 518-527.
Puate, Joan et al., “Using Fractal Compression Scheme to Embed a Digital Signature into an Image”, SPIE-96 Proceedings, vol. 2915, Mar. 1997, pp. 108-118.
Swanson, Mitchell D.,et al., “Transparent Robust Image Watermarking”, Proc. of the 1996 IEEE Int'l Conf. on Image Processing, vol. 111, 1996 , pp. 211-214.
Swanson, Mitchell D., et al. “Robust Data Hiding for Images”, 7th IEEE Digital Signal Processing Workshop, Leon, Norway. Sep. 1-4, 1996, pp. 37-40.
Zhao, Jian et al., “Embedding Robust Labels into Images for Copyright Protection”, Proceeding of the Know Right '95 Conference, pp. 242-251.
Koch, E., et al., “Towards Robust and Hidden Image Copyright Labeling”, 1995 IEEE Workshop on Nonlinear Signal and Image Processing, Jun. 1995 Neos Marmaras pp. 4.
Van Schyandel, et al., “Towards a Robust Digital Watermark”, Second Asain Image Processing Conference, Dec. 6-8, 1995, Singapore, vol. 2, pp. 504-508.
Tirkel,A.Z., “A Two-Dimensional Digital Watermark”, DICTA '95, Univ. of Queensland, Brisbane, Dec. 5-8, 1995, pp. 7.
Tirkel,A.Z., “Image Watermarking—A Spread Spectrum Application”, ISSSTA '96, Sep. 1996, Mainz, German, pp. 6.
O'Ruanaidh, et al. “Watermarking Digital Images for Copyright Protection”, IEEE Proceedings, vol. 143, No. 4, Aug. 1996, pp. 250-256.
Cox, et al., Secure Spread Spectrum Watermarking for Multimedia, NEC Research Institude, Techinal Report 95-10, pp. 33.
Kahn, D., “The Code Breakers”, The MacMillan Company, 1969, pp. xIII, 81-83, 513, 515, 522-526, 863.
Boney, et al., Digital Watermarks for Audio Signals, EVSIPCO, 96, pp. 473-480 (Mar. 14, 1997).
Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Del Ft University of Technology, Del ft The Netherlands, Cr.C. Langelaar et al.,“Copy Protection for Multimedia Data based on Labeling Techniques”, Jul. 1996 9 pp.
F. Hartung, et al., “Digital Watermarking of Raw and Compressed Video”, SPIE vol. 2952, pp. 205-213.
Craver, et al., “Can Invisible Watermarks Resolve Rightful Ownerships?”, IBM Research Report, RC 20509 (Jul. 25, 1996) 21 pp.
Press, et al., “Numerical Recipes in C”, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1988, pp. 398-417.
Pohlmann, Ken C., “Principles of Digital Audio”, 3rd Ed., 1995, pp. 32-37, 40-48:138, 147-149, 332, 333, 364, 499-501, 508-509, 564-571.
Pohlmann, Ken C., “Principles of Digital Audio”, 2nd Ed., 1991, pp. 1-9, 19-25, 30-33, 41-48, 54-57, 86-107, 375-387.
Schneier, Bruce, Applied Cryptography, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1994, pp. 68, 69, 387-392, 1-57, 273-275, 321-324.
Boney, et al., Digital Watermarks for Audio Signals, Proceedings of the International Conf. on Multimedia Computing and Systems, Jun. 17-23, 1996 Hiroshima, Japan, 0-8186-7436-9196, pp. 473-480.
Johnson, et al., “Transform Permuted Watermarking for Copyright Protection of Digital Video”, IEEE Globecom 1998, Nov. 8-12, 1998, New York New York vol. 2 1998 pp. 684-689 (ISBN 0-7803-4985-7).
Rivest, et al., “Pay Word and Micromint: Two Simple Micropayment Schemes,” MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, Cambridge, MA, May 7, 1996 pp. 1-18.
Bender, et al., “Techniques for Data Hiding”, IBM Systems Journal, (1996) vol. 35, Nos. 3 & 4,1996, pp. 313-336.
Moskowitz, “Bandwith as Currency”, IEEE Multimedia, Jan.-Mar. 2003, pp. 14-21.
Moskowitz, Multimedia Security Technologies for Digital Rights Management, 2006, Academic Press, “Introduction—Digital Rights Management” pp. 3-22.
Rivest, et al., “PayWord and Micromint: Two Simple Micropayment Schemes,” MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, Cambridge, MA, Apr. 27, 2001, pp. 1-18.
Tomsich, et al., “Towards a secure and de-centralized digital watermarking infrastructure for the protection of Intellectual Property”, in Electronic Commerce and Web Technologies, Proceedings (ECWEB)(2000).
Moskowitz, “What is Acceptable Quality in the Application of Digital Watermarking: Trade-offs of Security; Robustness and Quality”, IEEE Computer Society Proceedings of ITCC 2002 Apr. 10, 2002 pp. 80-84.
Lemma, et al. “Secure Watermark Embedding through Partial Encryption”, International Workshop on Digital Watermarking (“IWDW” 2006). Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2006 (to appear) 13.
Kocher, et al., “Self Protecting Digital Content”, Technical Report from the CRI Content Security Research Initiative, Cryptography Research, Inc. 2002-2003 14 pages.
Sirbu, M. et al., “Net Bill: An Internet Commerce System Optimized for Network Delivered Services”, Digest of Papers of the Computer Society Computer Conference (Spring) Mar. 5, 1995 pp. 20-25 vol. CONF40.
Schunter, M. et al., “A Status Report on the SEMPER framework for Secure Electronic Commerce”, Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, Sep. 30, 1998, pp. 1501-1510 vol. 30 No. 16-18 NL North Holland.
Konrad, K. et al., “Trust and Electronic Commerce—more than a technical problem,” Proceedings of the 18th IEEE Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems Oct. 19-22, 1999, pp. 360-365 Lausanne.
Kini, et al., “Trust in Electronic Commerce: Definition and Theoretical Considerations”, Proceedings of the 31st Hawaii Int'l Conf on System Sciences (Cat. No. 98TB100216). Jan. 6-9, 1998. pp. 51-61. Los.
Steinauer D. D., et al., “Trust and Traceability in Electronic Commerce”, Standard View, Sep. 1997, pp. 118-124, vol. 5 No. 3, ACM, USA.
Hartung, et al. “Multimedia Watermarking Techniques”, Proceedings of the IEEE, Special Issue, Identification & Protection of Multimedia Information, pp. 1079-1107 Jul. 1999 vol. 87 No. 7 IEEE.
European Search Report & European Search Opinion in EP07112420.
STAIND (The Singles 1996-2006), Warner Music—Atlantic, Pre-Release CD image, 2006, 1 page.
Duplicate of L-97, Deleted by Nov. 16, 2010 by RAN.
Radiohead (“Hail to the Thief”), EMI Music Group—Capitol, Pre-Release CD image, 2003, 1 page.
Duplicate of L-4, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 18, 2010. RAN.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/169,274, filed Dec. 7, 1999, entitled “Systems, Methods and Devices for Trusted Transactions”.
Duplicate of L-22, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-27, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/234,199, filed Sep. 20, 2000, “Improved Security Based on Subliminal and Supraliminal Channels for Data Objects”.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/671,739, filed Sep. 29, 2000, entitled “Method and Device for Monitoring and Analyzing Signals”.
Duplicate of L-34, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-24, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-57, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-58, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-59, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-61, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-62, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-63, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-65, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Tirkel, A.Z., “A Two-Dimensional Digital Watermark”, Scientific Technology, 686, 14, date unknown. (citation revised upon review on Nov. 16, 2010 by RAN.) .
Duplicate of L-68, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-69, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-70, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-71, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-72, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-73, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-74, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-75, Deleted by RN Upon Review on Nov. 16, 2010. RAN.
Duplicate of L-076, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-77, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-78, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-79, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
EP0581317A2, Moved to Foreign Patent Pubs as F-028.
Duplicate of L-52, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-36, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-38, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-37, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-63, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-54, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-55, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
Duplicate of L-80, Removed. RN. Nov. 16, 2010.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US95/08159.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US96/10257.
Supplementary European Search Report in EP 96919405.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US97/00651.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US97/00652.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US97/11455.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US99/07262.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US00/06522.
Supplementary European Search Report in EP00919398.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US00/18411.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US00/33126.
PCT International Search Report in PCT/US00/21189.
Delaigle, J.-F., et al. “Digital Watermarking,” Proceedings of the SPIE, vol. 2659, Feb. 1, 1996, pp. 99-110.
Schneider, M., et al. “A Robust Content Based Digital Signature for Image Authentication,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Image Processing (IC. Lausanne) Sep. 16-19, 1996, pp. 227-230, IEEE ISBN.
Cox, I. J., et al. “Secure Spread Spectrum Watermarking for Multimedia,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 6 No. 12, Dec. 1, 1997, pp. 1673-1686.
Wong, Ping Wah. “A Public Key Watermark for Image Verification and Authentication,” IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, vol. 1 Oct. 4-7, 1998, pp. 455-459.
Fabien A.P. Petitcolas, Ross J. Anderson and Markkus G. Kuhn, “Attacks on Copyright Marking Systems,” LNCS, vol. 1525, Apr. 14-17, 1998, pp. 218-238 ISBN: 3-540-65386-4.
Ross Anderson, “Stretching the Limits of Steganography,” LNCS, vol. 1174, May/Jun. 1996, 10 pages, ISBN: 3-540-61996-8.
Joseph J.K. O'Ruanaidh and Thierry Pun, “Rotation, Scale and Translation Invariant Digital Image Watermarking”, pre-publication, Summer 1997 4 pages.
Joseph J.K. O'Ruanaidh and Thierry Pun, “Rotation, Scale and Translation Invariant Digital Image Watermarking”, Submitted to Signal Processing Aug. 21, 1997, 19 pages.
OASIS (Dig Out Your Soul), Big Brother Recordings Ltd, Promotional CD image, 2008, 1 page.
Rivest, R. “Chaffing and Winnowing: Confidentiality without Encryption”, MIT Lab for Computer Science, http://people.csail.mit.edu/rivest/Chaffing.txt Apr. 24, 1998, 9 pp.
PortalPlayer, PP502 digital media management system-on-chip, May 1, 2003, 4 pp.
VeriDisc, “The Search for a Rational Solution to Digital Rights Management (DRM)”, http://64.244.235.240/news/whitepaper,/docs/veridisc.sub.--white.sub.--paper.pdf, 2001, 15 pp.
Cayre, et al., “Kerckhoffs-Based Embedding Security Classes for WOA Data Hiding”, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, vol. 3 No. 1, Mar. 2008, 15 pp.
Wayback Machine, dated Jan. 17, 1999, http://web.archive.org/web/19990117020420/http://www.netzero.com/, accessed on Feb. 19, 2008.
Namgoong, H., “An Integrated Approach to Legacy Data for Multimedia Applications”, Proceedings of the 23rd EUROMICRO Conference, vol., Issue 1-4, Sep. 1997, pp. 387-391.
Wayback Machine, dated Aug. 26, 2007, http://web.archive,org/web/20070826151732/http://www.screenplaysmag.com/t-abid/96/articleType/ArticleVew/articleId/495/Default.aspx/.
“YouTube Copyright Policy: Video Identification tool—YouTube Help”, accessed Jun. 4, 2009, http://www.google.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.py?h1=en&answer=83766, 3 pp.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/665,002, filed Dec. 22, 2009, entitled “Method for Combining Transfer Function with Predetermined Key Creation”, published as 20100182570 A1 Jul. 22, 2010, p. 76.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/592,331, filed Nov. 23, 2009, entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digital Data”, published as 20100077220 A1 Mar. 25, 2010, p. 77.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/590,553, filed Nov. 10, 2009, entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digital Data”, published as 20100077219 A1 Mar. 25, 2010, p. 78.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/590,681, filed Nov. 12, 2009, entitled “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection, and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digital Data”, published as 20100064140 A1 Mar. 11, 2010, p. 79.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/655,036, filed Dec. 22, 2009, entitled “Utilizing Data Reduction in Steganographic and Cryptographic Systems”, published as 20100153734 A1 Jun. 17, 2010, p. 80.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/655,357, filed Dec. 22, 2009, entitled “Method and Device for Monitoring and Analyzing Signals”, published as 20100106736 A1 Apr. 29, 2010, p. 81.
PCT Application No. PCT/US95/08159, filed Jun. 26, 1995, entitled, “Digital Information Commodities Exchange with Virtual Menuing”, published as WO/1997/001892; Publication Date: Jan. 16, 1997, F24.
PCT Application No. PCT/US96/10257, filed Jun. 7, 1996, entitled “Steganographic Method and Device”—corresponding to—EPO Application No. 96919405.9, entitled “Steganographic Method and Device”, published as WO/1996/042151; Publication Date: Dec. 27, 1996; F19.
PCT Application No. PCT/US97/00651, filed Jan. 16, 1997, entitled, “Method for Stega-Cipher Protection of Computer Code”, published as WO/1997/026732; Publication Date: Jul. 24, 1997.
PCT Application No. PCT/US97/00652, filed Jan. 17, 1997, entitled, “Method for an Encrypted Digital Watermark”, published as WO/1997/026733; Publication Date: Jul. 24, 1997.
PCT Application No. PCT/US97/11455, filed Jul. 2, 1997, entitled, “Optimization Methods for the Insertion, Protection and Detection of Digital Watermarks in Digitized Data”, published as WO/1998/002864; Publication Date: Jan. 22, 1998.
PCT Application No. PCT/US99/07262, filed Apr. 2, 1999, entitled, “Multiple Transform Utilization and Applications for Secure Digital Watermarking”, published as WO/1999/052271; Publication Date: Oct. 14, 1999.
PCT Application No. PCT/US00/06522, filed Mar. 14, 2000, entitled, “Utilizing Data Reduction in Steganographic and Cryptographic Systems”, published as WO/2000/057643; Publication Date: Sep. 28, 2000.
PCT Application No. PCT/US00/18411, filed Jul. 5, 2000, entitled, “Copy Protection of Digital Data Combining Steganographic and Cryptographic Techniques”.
PCT Application No. PCT/US00/33126, filed Dec. 7, 2000, entitled “Systems, Methods and Devices for Trusted Transactions”, published as WO/2001/043026; Publication Date: Jun. 14, 2001.
EPO Divisional Patent Application No. 07112420.0, entitled “Steganographic Method and Device” corresponding to PCT Application No. PCT/US96/10257, published as WO/1996/042151, Dec. 27, 1996.
Provisional U.S. Appl. No. 60/222,023, filed Jul. 31, 2007 entitled “Method and apparatus for recognizing sound and signals in high noise and distortion”.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/458,639, filed Jul. 19, 2006 entitled “Methods and Systems for Inserting Watermarks in Digital Signals”, published as 20060251291 A1 Nov. 9, 2006, p. 82.
“Techniques for Data Hiding in Audio Files,” by Morimoto, 1995.
Howe, Dennis Jul. 13, 1998 http://foldoc..org//steganography.
CSG, Computer Support Group and CSGNetwork.com 1973 http://www.csgnetwork.com/glossarys.html.
QuinStreet Inc. 2010 What is steganography?—A word definition from the Webopedia Computer Dictionary http://www.webopedia.com/terms/steganography.html.
Graham, Robert Aug. 21, 2000 “Hacking Lexicon” http://robertgraham.com/pubs/hacking-dict.html.
Farkex, Inc 2010 “Steganography definition of steganography in the Free Online Encyclopedia” http://encyclopedia2.Thefreedictionary.com/steganography.
Horowitz, et al., The Art of Eletronics. 2nd Ed., 1989, pp. 7.
Jimmy eat world (“futures”), Interscope Records, Pre-Release CD image, 2004, 1 page.
Aerosmith (“Just Push Play”), Pre-Release CD image, 2001, 1 page.
Phil Collins(Testify) Atlantic, Pre-Release CD image, 2002, 1 page.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20100220861 A1 Sep 2010 US
Divisions (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 09053628 Apr 1998 US
Child 09644098 US
Continuations (2)
Number Date Country
Parent 11358874 Feb 2006 US
Child 12799894 US
Parent 09644098 Aug 2000 US
Child 11358874 US