This invention relates to tracking electronic content, for example, content included with or attached to an electronic mail message.
Electronic mail (e-mail) enables computer users to conveniently share information. Frequently, however, network packets carrying e-mail are dropped due to network traffic or physical transmission problems. Even when successfully delivered, recipients sometimes delete or otherwise fail to read received e-mail. Thus, a user sending e-mail often cannot not be sure the intended recipient ever read or received the e-mail.
Some e-mail software packages, such as cc:Mail™ available from Lotus™ Corporation of Cambridge, Mass., provide a “return receipt” option when sending e-mail. E-mail software that receives e-mail specifying “return receipt” can automatically send back a receipt message indicating that the intended recipient received the e-mail. Some software packages permit an administrator or user to disable “return receipt” functions and, thus, prevent transmission of receipts back to e-mail senders.
E-mail contents can include text messages entered in an e-mail editor and/or attachment files (attachments). Recent surveys indicate that more than 50% of information transmitted via e-mail is transmitted in the form of attachments. Many e-mail software packages enable a user receiving an e-mail attachment to easily forward received attachments to other recipients. Thus, an attachment may be quickly disseminated to a large number of individuals unknown to the user originally sending the attachment.
In general, in one aspect, a method of tracking electronic content includes producing a file that includes electronic content and executable instructions. The executable instructions collect notification information and attempt to transmit the notification information to an address when triggered by an event. The executable instructions deny access to the electronic content until the notification information is transmitted successfully.
Embodiments may include one or more of the following. The executable instructions may deny access until an access granting message is received in response to the successful transmission of notification information. The trigger event may include an attempt to access (e.g., view, use, or list) the electronic content, for example, from a computer or user that has not previously accessed the electronic content.
The executable instructions may collect notification information by querying a computer and/or interactively collecting information from a user. Such information may include demographic information (e.g., a name, an e-mail address, and an organization identifier) or system information (e.g., a network address).
The electronic content may be encrypted. Encrypted content may be accompanied by instructions decrypt the content. The electronic content may be compressed. Compressed content may be accompanied by instructions that decompress the content. The electronic content may include at least one file of data, text, graphics, audio, video, or an executable instructions. The file may be transmitted via e-mail (e.g., as an e-mail attachment).
The method may further include determining an address to receive the notification information. Such determining may performed by interactively receiving an address from a user. Such determining also may be determined by automatically identifying the address as the address of the user creating the file.
The executable instructions that transmit notification information may dynamically determine how to transmit the notification information via an intermediate device (e.g., a proxy server and a firewall).
In general, in another aspect, a method of tracking access to electronic content includes encrypting electronic content, determining an address for receipt of notification information, and producing a file that includes the encrypted electronic content, and executable instructions. The executable instructions collect notification information and attempt to transmit the notification information to the determined address in response to an attempt to access the electronic content on a computer that has not previously accessed the electronic content. The notification instructions decrypt the encrypted electronic content after transmitting notification information successfully.
In general, in another aspect, a method for tracking access to electronic content includes receiving notification information from a recipient of a file including electronic content, the notification information being transmitted in response to an attempt to access the electronic content. The notification information includes an identifier that identifies a user or computer system. The method also includes determining an address for receipt of the notification information and transmitting the notification information to the determined address.
Embodiments may include one or more of the following. An access granting message may be transmitted. The identifier that identifies a user or computer system included in the notification information may be used to verify that an authorized user produced the file. The identifier may also be used to update information (e.g., a usage charge) corresponding to the identifier.
In general, in another aspect, a computer-implemented method of regulating access to electronic content includes collecting notification information in response to an attempt to access the electronic content, attempting to transmit the collected notification information to an address, and selectively granting access to the electronic content based on a result of the attempted transmission of the notification information.
In general, in another aspect, a method of tracking access to electronic content includes creating a file that includes electronic content and causes access to the electronic content to be denied until notification information has been successfully transmitted. The method also includes transmitting the file to a set of addresses that includes at least one address and receiving notification information.
In general, in another aspect, a computer-implemented method of regulating access to e-mail includes detecting an attempt by a message recipient to access received e-mail, attempting to collect notification information from the recipient, and selectively granting access to the e-mail based on a result of the attempt to collect notification information.
In general, in another aspect, a computer program, disposed on a computer readable medium, tracks electronic content. The computer program including computer program instructions for causing a computer to produce a file that includes electronic content and executable instructions that collect notification information and attempt to transmit the notification information to an address when triggered by an event. The executable instructions deny access to the electronic content until the notification information is transmitted successfully.
In general, in another aspect, a computer program, disposed on a computer readable medium, regulates access to electronic content. The computer program includes instructions for causing a processor to collect notification information in response to an attempt to access the electronic content, attempt to transmit the collected notification information to an address, and selectively grant access to the electronic content based on a result of the attempted transmission of the notification information.
Advantages include one or more of the following.
Transmitting electronic content in envelopes permits access to electronic content to be tracked in perpetuity. That is, regardless of how an envelope is passed on by different recipients, the envelope creator, or a user designated by the envelope creator, receives notification information describing each recipient who attempts to access the electronic content in the envelope.
By including its own set of executable instructions the envelope can be used by existing e-mail software packages without modification. Additionally, the executable instructions, for example, those that dynamically determine how to reach a network through intermediate devices (e.g., a firewall), make the task of preventing transmission of notification information extremely difficult without completely severing a network connection.
The notification information provided by an envelope can include any information that can be acquired by querying a computer system or user. The information collected can provide valuable marketing data describing the attributes of users accessing the electronic content.
Receipt of notification information not only communicates receipt of a file but also of attempted access or other attempted functions (e.g., printing, saving, and deleting).
The use of a notification server enables envelopes to control access to electronic content, for example, by limiting the number of times a particular user can access electronic content.
Other advantages of the invention will become apparent in view of the following description, including the figures, and the claims.
Referring to
The executable notification instructions 110 included in an envelope 100 may include computer platform-specific instructions. For example, an envelope 100 may include binary instructions 110 that program any PC-compatible computer. The executable instructions, however, need not be targeted to a particular computer platform. For example, the instructions 110 may be Java commands. The executable instructions are placed in the envelope 100 such that an attempt to execute the envelope file 100 (e.g., “C:\ envelope.exe”) causes execution of the executable instructions.
Referring to
Including an envelope 100 as an e-mail attachment 115a offers an envelope creator 120 a “certified receipt” functionality that transmits notification information 130a indicating that not only has a recipient received the envelope 100, but that the recipient has also accessed (or attempt to access) the envelope contents 105. The notification instructions 110 included in the envelope 100 can be configured during creation to report events other than attempted access to envelope contents 105 such as an attempt to save contents 105 to a file, an attempt to delete envelope contents 105, and/or an attempt to print envelope contents 105. For example, the notification instructions 110 may monitor viewing of electronic content 105 and transmit notification information 130a that summarizes the viewing (e.g., which pages of a document were read) when viewing ends.
An envelope 100 can be included as an e-mail attachment 115a using any e-mail software package that supports attachments (e.g., Lotus™ cc:Mail™, Microsoft™ Exchange, and Eudora). Because the envelope 100 includes its own independently executable notification instructions 110 that control electronic content 105 access and transmission of notification information 130a, 130b, the envelope 100 provides a notification mechanism independent of the capabilities of any particular e-mail software package. This independence offers a number of benefits. For example, because the functionality provided by an envelope 100 is independent of the e-mail package used to transmit or receive e-mail, users can continue to use an e-mail package of their choice without modification and still receive notification information 130 from an envelope 100. Additionally, because the envelope 100 need not rely on functions provided by any e-mail software package, defeating the notification scheme implemented by an envelope 100 becomes much more difficult than re-configuring an e-mail software package (e.g., an administrator clicking on a check-box control that prevents transmission of return receipt messages).
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
The notification server 134 may include a table 136 that enables the server 134 to track use of envelopes and/or envelope production software. The table 136 can include information describing users of the envelope production software. For example, the table 136 can store identifiers corresponding to authorized envelope creators. The table 136 can also store information describing particular envelopes by storing envelope IDs as they are received.
To facilitate use of a notification server 134, each envelope 100 may include an identifier indicating the user or computer system 120 that created the envelope 100, the address of the notification server 134, and the address specified during envelope creation that ultimately receives the notification information. The notification server 134 can match the identifier included in the notification information 130a with an identifier in its table 136 to verify legitimate envelope production or compute usage charges. The notification server 134 can then re-transmit the notification information 130a to the address designated by an envelope creator during envelope creation.
Referring to
After receiving identification (150) of electronic content 105 for inclusion in an envelope 100, the procedure 140 may compress (155) the electronic content 105 to minimize the size (e.g., number of bytes) of the envelope 100 and, thus, speed transmission of the envelope 100 across network lines. The procedure 140 may use any one of a variety of compression algorithms such as PKZip compression. The procedure 140 also may encrypt (160) the electronic content 105 to provide security both during transmission over public network lines and to prevent attempts to bypass the notification instructions 110 and access an envelope's content 105 before successfully transmitting notification information 130a, 130b. The password designated by an envelope creator may act as the encryption key, providing extra protection against unauthorized access. The procedure 140 may use any of a variety of encryption algorithms such as Blowfish, DES (Data Encryption Standard), or PKZip encryption. The terms compression and encryption are not mutually exclusive. That is compressing data (i.e., making the size of an envelope smaller) may also serve to encrypt the data.
The procedure 140 may determine (165) a network address that will receive the notification information 130a, 130b. By default, the procedure 140 may assume that the user executing the envelope producing procedure 140 should receive the notification information 130a, 130b. For example, the procedure 140 may query a system configuration file (e.g., a Windows™ registry) to determine the e-mail address of the envelope creator. However, an envelope creator may expressly designate a different address at the time the envelope is created.
The procedure 140 may receive other envelope configuring (167) information from an envelope creator. For example, the creator may specify than the envelope 100 need not successfully transmit notification information 130a, 130b before granting access to the envelope's electronic content 105. The creator may even specify that no notification information 130a, 130b should ever be transmitted by the envelope 100.
The procedure 140 then builds (170) the envelope 100 to include data corresponding to the identified electronic content 105 and notification instructions 110. The notification instructions 110 included in the envelope 100 may vary depending on the envelope's 100 specified configuration. For example, an envelope 100 including compressed and encrypted data corresponding to the electronic content 105 may include notification instructions 110 that decompress and decrypt the data 105 when granting access to the content 105.
Other implementations of procedure 140 perform the actions shown in different orders. Further, some implementations omit actions shown. Additionally, other implementations may include different configuration capabilities. For example, an envelope 100 creator may configure the envelope 100 to collect different notification information 130a, 130b.
Referring to
When executed, notification instructions 110 can determine (175) whether a previous attempt to access the electronic content 105 resulted in success (e.g., success transmission of notification information 130a, 130b or receipt of an access granting message 136). If so, the notification instructions 110 may grant access (195) to the electronic content 105 without re-collecting and/or re-transmitting notification information 130a, 130b. If, however, a previous attempt to access the electronic content 105 did not result in success, the notification instructions 110 attempt to collect (215) and transmit (220) the notification information 130a, 130b.
Many different techniques exist for determining (175) whether a previous access attempt resulted in successful. For example, each envelope 100 may include an envelope ID. The envelope ID may be produced during envelope creation by combining a timestamp produced during envelope production with a machine identification code of the computer used to produce the envelope (e.g., a network address). The notification instructions can store (230) the envelope ID on a computer system (e.g., in the registry) after successful transmission of notification information 140. By examining a computer system for prior storage of an envelope's envelope ID, the instructions 110 can determine (175) whether a previous access attempt succeeded. The determination (175) may be a computer system-based or a user-based inquiry. For example, by storing a user identification code along with the envelope ID, the notification instructions 110 can distinguish between different users of the same computer system. Thus, the notification instructions 110 do not repeatedly require re-transmission of notification information 130a, 130b by users who already have successfully transmitted notification information 140.
If the instructions 110 determine (175) that no previous access attempt succeeded, the instructions 110 collect (215) notification information 130a, 130b. The notification instructions 130 may interactively collect notification information 140 from a recipient through a GUI dialog (see
After collecting (215) the notification information 130a, 130b, the notification instructions 110 attempt (220) to transmit the collected notification information 130a, 130b to the address specified during an envelope's creation (165
The notification instructions 130 may prompt (180) a recipient for entry of the password, if any, designated during envelope 100 creation (145
Different implementations of the instructions 110 may not perform the same actions or perform actions in the same order as shown. For example, prompting for a password (180) may occur prior to a determination (175) of whether notification information 130a, 130b was successfully transmitted.
Referring to
The instructions 220 transmit notification information 130a, 130b by determining how a recipient's computer connects to a network (502). For example, the instructions 220 can check a computer system's registry to see if proxy service is enabled or disabled. If disabled, the instructions 220 can try to transmit notification information via communication ports customarily used for network use (e.g., port 1080 which is typically reserved for Internet communication) (510). If such efforts fail, the instructions may try other commonly used ports or notify the user that transmission was unsuccessful (504).
If proxy service is enabled, notification information 130a, 130b must be sent to the network via an intermediate device. Thus, the instructions 220 attempt to determine the address of the intermediate device (504). For example, the instructions 220 may examine the registry to determine how different network services access the Internet from the computer system. For example, instructions 220 may examine the address stored in a Hkey_Classes_Root/Internet/Netscape/ProxyServer registry entry to see how a Netscape™ browser accesses the Internet through the intermediate device. After determining the address of the intermediate device, the instructions 220 attempt to transmit the notification information 110 (506) via the determined address. If the transmission fails (508), the instructions 220 may make another attempt using a different registry entry corresponding to a different network service (e.g., Microsoft™ Explorer). Alternatively, the instructions 220 may query the user for the address of the intermediate device.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Selecting the “Mail” button 280 launches a linked e-mail client (e.g., cc:Mail™) and causes it to create a new message having the envelope 100 as an attachment. Then, the user can optionally enter text and/or add other attachments before sending the e-mail message and attachments according to the particular protocol of the e-mail client. Alternatively, as shown in
As shown in
As shown in
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
The computer platform 120 also may include a monitor 360 for displaying the graphical user interface screens 365 and electronic content 105. The user may interact with the graphical user interface 365 via a keyboard 375 and/or a pointing device such as a mouse 370. The computer platform 120 also includes a network connection 380 that permits transmission of the executable file to other computers.
Other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims. For example, rather than implementing the instructions that construct an envelope as a stand-alone application, different implementations may integrate the instructions directly into an e-mail software package. Such a e-mail software package expands traditional e-mail packages capabilities beyond receiving a “return receipt” message. For example, these packages can provide mechanisms that regulate access to e-mail content and track access to the e-mail content via notification information received from recipients accessing the content.
In one embodiment, an e-mail system could provide a “certified receipt” feature as a native function. Upon generating an email message, a user could designate (e.g., by using pull-down menu functions or by clicking appropriate check-boxes) that the text of the email message itself, and/or the content of one or more attachments to the email, require “certified receipt” before the recipient could view or otherwise access the content. The message sender optionally could designate the nature and type of notification information to be collected from the recipient, as well as the identity or address of one or more parties that are to receive the notification information.
This is a continuation application of U.S. patent Ser. No. 10/812,099, filed Mar. 30, 2004, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/199,150, filed on Nov. 24, 1998, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670, the disclosures of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4471163 | Donald et al. | Sep 1984 | A |
4528643 | Freeny | Jul 1985 | A |
4558176 | Arnold et al. | Dec 1985 | A |
4658093 | Hellman | Apr 1987 | A |
4683553 | Mollier | Jul 1987 | A |
4796220 | Wolfe | Jan 1989 | A |
4888798 | Earnest et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
4999806 | Chernow et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5023907 | Johnson et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5033084 | Beecher | Jul 1991 | A |
5057935 | Williams | Oct 1991 | A |
5103476 | Waite et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5113518 | Durst, Jr. et al. | May 1992 | A |
5191611 | Lang | Mar 1993 | A |
5204897 | Wyman | Apr 1993 | A |
5319705 | Halter et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5337357 | Chou et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5351293 | Michener et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5390297 | Barber et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5457746 | Dolphin | Oct 1995 | A |
5490216 | Richardson, III | Feb 1996 | A |
5509070 | Schull | Apr 1996 | A |
5615264 | Kazmierczak et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5629980 | Stefik et al. | May 1997 | A |
5654746 | McMullan, Jr. et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5666411 | McCarty | Sep 1997 | A |
5671276 | Eyer et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5671279 | Elgamal | Sep 1997 | A |
5673316 | Auerbach et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5677953 | Dolphin | Oct 1997 | A |
5703279 | Igura et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5703951 | Dolphin | Dec 1997 | A |
5708709 | Rose | Jan 1998 | A |
5708780 | Levergood et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5715314 | Payne et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5724424 | Gifford | Mar 1998 | A |
5734822 | Houha et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5757907 | Cooper et al. | May 1998 | A |
5765152 | Erickson | Jun 1998 | A |
5778173 | Apte | Jul 1998 | A |
5778367 | Wesinger, Jr. et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5784460 | Blumenthal et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5790664 | Coley et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5790790 | Smith et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5794207 | Walker et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796952 | Davis et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5809145 | Slik et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5845281 | Benson et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5862325 | Reed et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5889860 | Eller et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5889943 | Ji et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5892825 | Mages et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5892900 | Ginter et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5898777 | Tycksen et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5905860 | Olsen et al. | May 1999 | A |
5920861 | Hall et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5926624 | Katz et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5940504 | Griswold | Aug 1999 | A |
5949875 | Walker et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956505 | Manduley | Sep 1999 | A |
5958005 | Thorne et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5958051 | Renaud et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5959945 | Kleiman | Sep 1999 | A |
5963915 | Kirsch | Oct 1999 | A |
5982889 | DeMont | Nov 1999 | A |
6014688 | Venkatraman et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6021491 | Renaud | Feb 2000 | A |
6035329 | Mages et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6041411 | Wyatt | Mar 2000 | A |
6055570 | Nielsen | Apr 2000 | A |
6067526 | Powell | May 2000 | A |
6067531 | Hoyt et al. | May 2000 | A |
6067622 | Moore | May 2000 | A |
6073124 | Krishnan et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6073256 | Sesma | Jun 2000 | A |
6075862 | Yoshida et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6085324 | Ogram | Jul 2000 | A |
6098056 | Rusnak et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108637 | Blumenau | Aug 2000 | A |
6112181 | Shear et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6134592 | Montulli | Oct 2000 | A |
6135646 | Kahn et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6138149 | Ohmura | Oct 2000 | A |
6144942 | Ruckdashel | Nov 2000 | A |
6178442 | Yamazaki | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6192396 | Kohler | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6205485 | Kikinis | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6226618 | Downs et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6236971 | Stefik et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6240396 | Walker et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6243468 | Pearce et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6253193 | Ginter et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6256664 | Donoho et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6256672 | Redpath | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266692 | Greenstein | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6286103 | Maillard et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6288738 | Dureau et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6289461 | Dixon | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6301660 | Benson | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6304897 | Venkatraman et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314454 | Wang et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6327610 | Uchida et al. | Dec 2001 | B2 |
6332156 | Cho et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6385596 | Wiser et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6389541 | Patterson | May 2002 | B1 |
6393468 | McGee | May 2002 | B1 |
6449719 | Baker | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6463418 | Todd | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6484156 | Gupta et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6487663 | Jaisimha et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6526456 | Allan et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6567793 | Hicks et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6684248 | Janacek et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6751670 | Patterson | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6807534 | Erickson | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6868403 | Wiser et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6941459 | Hind et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6965993 | Baker | Nov 2005 | B2 |
7010808 | Leung et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7035407 | Hasegawa | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7036011 | Grimes et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7127515 | Patterson | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7206941 | Raley et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7233948 | Shamoon et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7246246 | Kupka et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7251832 | Venters et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7272858 | Parks et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7386473 | Blumenau | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7395436 | Nemovicher | Jul 2008 | B1 |
7395438 | Parks et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7421741 | Phillips et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7480382 | Dunbar et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7484103 | Woo et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7496610 | Boris et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7562150 | Patterson | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7673059 | Patterson | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7752466 | Ginter et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7904568 | Rudd | Mar 2011 | B2 |
20020107850 | Sugimoto et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020161709 | Floyd et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020194485 | Ram et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030046238 | Nonaka et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030046274 | Erickson et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030079133 | Breiter et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030120928 | Cato et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030163431 | Ginter et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030236906 | Klemets et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040054584 | Boon | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040117500 | Lindholm et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040125957 | Rauber et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040153451 | Phillips et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20050004978 | Reed et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050021477 | Krishnan et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050021633 | Venkatraman et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050049002 | White et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20060129847 | Pitsos | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060179489 | Mas Ribes | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060195400 | Patterson | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20070299956 | Odaka et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20090100268 | Garcia et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2 220 457 | May 1998 | CA |
0 717 338 | Jun 1996 | EP |
1085443 | Mar 2001 | EP |
9-044353 | Feb 1997 | JP |
10-232918 | Sep 1998 | JP |
11-161663 | Jun 1999 | JP |
11-328848 | Nov 1999 | JP |
2000-137649 | May 2000 | JP |
2002-111613 | Apr 2001 | JP |
2001-160003 | Jun 2001 | JP |
2001-175606 | Jun 2001 | JP |
2001-197055 | Jul 2001 | JP |
2001-209309 | Aug 2001 | JP |
2001-332019 | Nov 2001 | JP |
2001-357008 | Dec 2001 | JP |
2002-163571 | Jun 2002 | JP |
2002-251348 | Sep 2002 | JP |
2002-334033 | Nov 2002 | JP |
2002-334062 | Nov 2002 | JP |
2004-054930 | Feb 2004 | JP |
WO 9627155 | Sep 1996 | WO |
WO 9830964 | Jul 1998 | WO |
WO 9858306 | Dec 1998 | WO |
9913398 | Mar 1999 | WO |
0201330 | Jan 2002 | WO |
0201335 | Jan 2002 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Supplementary European Search Report dated Jan. 17, 2006. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/400,394, filed Apr. 10, 2006. |
Mark A Kaplan “IBM Cryptolopes, SuperDistribution and Digital Rights Management” Dec. 30, 1996, pp. 1-9. |
“Ziplock White Paper” Jan. 27, 1997, pp. 1-12. |
Information Sciences Institute, University of Southern California “Transmission Control Protocol DARPA Internet Program Protocol Specification” Sep. 1981, preface to p. 85. |
Butler Lampson “Anti-Piracy” Oct. 26, 1997, pp. 1-9. |
Steve R. White and Liam Comerford “ABYSS: An Architecture for Software Protection” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. vol. 16 No. 6 Jun. 1990, pp. 619-629. |
TragoeS FAQ—“Right Market Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)” Jun. 30, 1997, pp. 1-5. |
TragoeS—Digital Intellectual Property Management “Applications” pp. 1-3. |
TragoeS—“Product (How does it work?)” p. 1. |
PR Newswire “Silver Bullet for Digital Publishing Arrives TragoeS Announces General Availability of RightsMarket (TM)” Dec. 2, 1997, pp. 1-4. |
Stuffit Deluxe 5.0, Award-winning, industry compression by Aladdin Systems, Sep. 1998. |
Stuffit Deluxe 5.0; The Complete Compression Solution; modified Jan. 7, 1999, pp. 1-3; http://www.Aladdinsys.com/deluxe/benefits.html. |
WinZip Home Page Do you have Questions about WinZip? Check our FAQ Page; Apr. 26, 1999; http://www.winzip.com/. |
Setting Up a Web Store: A White Paper for Software Developers and Publishers; 1997 Release Software Corp.; pp. 1-18; http://www.releasesoftware.com/whitep/isvwhitepaper.rtf. |
Netdox Brochure, “Certified Verified Anytime” (12 pages)—1997. |
Netdox Brochure 1997—Doxit Service Overview (5 pages). |
Tumbleweed Software, “Posta”; http://www.posta.com/posta/posta overview.html (3 pages)—Sep. 1998. |
InterTrust Technology “MetalTrust Overview”; http://www.intertrust.com/technology/tech.html (8 pages)—1998. |
InterTrust Technologies Corporation: Overview: InterTrust Powers The New Digital Economy, A Piece of the Tick—Verison 2.0, Oct. 9, 1998 (38 pages). |
Sibert et al., DigiBox: A Self-Protecting Container for Information Commerce, Proceedings of the First USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce, New Yotk, Jul. 1995 (14 pages). |
Vbox White Paper, http://www.previewsystems.com/products/vbox/whitepaper/white—paperhtml (13 pages)—1998. |
Overview of Release Software's Services (3 pages). |
Setting Up a Web Store: A White Paper for Software Resellers; 1997 Release Software Corp.; pp. 1-17; http://www.releasesoftware.com/whitep/resellerwhitepaper.rtf—1997. |
Japanese Office Action from Japanese Application 2006-507079, mailed Jan. 26, 2010. |
“Semantic Web, Recent Trends of technologies and applications in the Semantic Web”, Makoto Imamuma, et al. Jan. 31, 2003. |
“Open Digital Rights Language (ODRL)”, Version 1.1, Renato Iannella, Aug. 8, 2002. |
U.S. Appl. No. 60/058,623, Sep. 11, 1997, Peterson. |
Adobe Systems Incorporated, “Adobe and eBooks,” pp. 1-4 (Sep. 1999). |
Adobe Systems Incorporated, “Adobe and Digital Content for eCommerce,” pp. 1-8 (Sep. 1999). |
Adobe Systems Incorporated, “Working with Adobe PDF Merchant,” pp. 1-24 (2000). |
Brad Cox, Superdistribution: Objects as Property on the Electronic Frontier (Addison- Wesley Publishing Company 1996). |
IBM Corp., “Chapter 1. The Cryptolope Live! Product,” IBM Cryptolope Live!, General Information Guide, Version 1, Release 1, pp. 1-36 (1997). |
The Electronic Book Exchange System (EBX), Version 0.8 (Book Industry Study Group, Inc., Jul. 2000 Draft). |
FLEXlm End User Manual, http://www.vcpc.univie.ac.at/information/software/pgi/flexuser/TOC.htm (Jun. 1996). |
Ulrich Kohl et al., “Safeguarding Digital Library Contents and Users,” D-Lib Magazine, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september97/ibm/09lotspiech.html (Sep. 1997). |
Jean-Henry Morin et al., “Commercialization of Electronic Information,” IEEE International Conference on Multimedia Computing and Systems, vol. 2, pp. 524-529 (Jun. 7-11, 1999). |
Portland Software Introduces ZipLock ESD Commerce System for Microsoft Site Server 3.0, Commerce Edition, Press Release, http://www.fillipdesign.com/portfolio/www/portsoft/info/press/pr012698.htm (Jan. 26, 1998). |
ZipLock Server Delivers the flexibility to do ESD business your way, http://www.fillipdesign.com/portfolio/www/ziplock/system3/components/compsrvr.html (1997). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,457,746 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,490,216 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,509,070 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,629,980 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,703,951 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,765,152 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,892,825 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 5.892.900 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,956,505 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,014,688 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,108,637 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,135,646 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,236,971 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,526,456 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,807,534 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 7,246,246 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 7,386,473 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Pat. No. 7,752,466 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Published Patent Application No. 2005/0004978 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by U.S. Appl. No. 60/058,623 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by PCT Publication No. WO 1999/13398 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by Cryptolope Live as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by FLEXlm End User Manual as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by ZipLock Press Release as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by ZipLock Server as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,670 by ZipLock White Paper as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,457,746 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,490,216 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,509,070 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,629,980 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,703,951 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,765,152 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,892,900 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 5,956,505 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,014,688 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,108,637 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,135,646 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,236,971 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,526,456 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 6,807,534 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 7,246,246 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 7,386,473 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Pat. No. 7,752,466 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Published Patent Application No. 2005/0004978 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by U.S. Appl. No. 60/058,623 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by PCT Publication No. WO 1999/13398 as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by Cryptolope Live as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by FLEXlm End User Manual as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by ZipLock Press Release as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by ZipLock Server as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Invalidity chart for U.S. Pat. No. 7,673,059 by ZipLock White Paper as submitted in Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00305- LED, In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Feb. 2012). |
Gary N. Griswold, “A Method for Protecting Copyright on Networks,” Proceedings, Technological Strategies for Protecting Intellectual Property in the Networked Multimedia Environment, Jan. 1994, pp. 169-179, vol. 1, Issue 1. |
Expert Report of Dr. Stephen S. Wicker Regarding Invalidity of U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,389,541, 6,751,670, 7,127,515, 7,272,655, 7,562,150, 7,421,741, and 7,673,059; Case No. 12-CV-01971 CW; United States District Court Northern District of California Oakland Division; 2013. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100115263 A1 | May 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10812099 | Mar 2004 | US |
Child | 12683271 | US | |
Parent | 09199150 | Nov 1998 | US |
Child | 10812099 | US |