Watermark extractor enhancements based on payload ranking

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9251549
  • Patent Number
    9,251,549
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, July 23, 2013
    12 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, February 2, 2016
    10 years ago
Abstract
Methods, devices, systems and computer program products improve the detection of watermarks that are embedded in a host content by providing information indicative of a ranking of watermark payloads to watermark extractors. A watermark extractor device obtains information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values, where such information designates each watermark payload value within a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated rank value. Based at least in-part on the information indicative of the ranking, the watermark extractor device is configured to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset. The watermark extractor then extracts a payload value, designated as belonging to the first subset, from one or more watermarks embedded in the host content.
Description
FIELD OF INVENTION

The present application generally relates to the field of content management. More particularly, the disclosed embodiments relate to improving extraction of watermarks that are embedded in host contents.


BACKGROUND

This section is intended to provide a background or context to the disclosed embodiments that are recited in the claims. The description herein may include concepts that could be pursued, but are not necessarily ones that have been previously conceived or pursued. Therefore, unless otherwise indicated herein, what is described in this section is not prior art to the description and claims in this application and is not admitted to be prior art by inclusion in this section.


Watermarks are substantially imperceptible signals embedded into a host content. The host content may be any one of audio, still image, video or any other content that may be stored on a physical medium or transmitted or broadcast from one point to another. Watermarks are designed to carry auxiliary information without substantially affecting fidelity of the host content, or without interfering with normal usage of the host content. For this reason, watermarks are sometimes used to carry out covert communications, where the emphasis is on hiding the very presence of the hidden signals. Other widespread applications of watermarks include prevention of unauthorized usage (e.g., duplication, playing and dissemination) of copyrighted multi-media content, automatic content recognition (ACR), proof of ownership, authentication, tampering detection, content integrity verification, broadcast monitoring, transaction tracking, audience measurement, triggering of secondary activities such as interacting with software programs or hardware components, communicating auxiliary information about the content such as caption text, full title and artist name, or instructions on how to purchase the content, and the like. The above list of applications is not intended to be exhaustive, as many other present and future systems can benefit from co-channel transmission of main and auxiliary information.


Watermark system design involves balancing a number of different requirements, such as imperceptibility, robustness, security, false positive rate, processing load, payload size, etc. In some applications of watermarks, such as copy management applications, the watermarks that are embedded in a host content must often be extracted in consumer products (e.g., media players, copiers, etc.) that access and use the content. As a result of limited computational resources (e.g., memory, real estate on silicon, processing cycles, etc.) available to watermark extractors within such devices, these applications often create challenges in meeting all of the above noted requirements of the watermarking system since an improvement in one requirement often comes at the expense of another requirement. For example, the robustness of watermark extraction (i.e., a measure of how well an extractor can extract embedded watermarks in the presence of noise and other impairments in the host content and/or watermarking channel) can often be improved by increasing the number of extraction attempts at, for example, small offsets from a particular location of interest of the host content. An increase in the number of extraction attempts, however, increases both the processing load on the extractor and the probability of false watermark extractions. As another example, an increase in payload size typically comes at the expense of reduced robustness and/or increased false positive rate.


In should be noted that in the present application, the term “watermark extraction” is used to describe the operations that result in the extraction of a watermark payload, i.e. the bits or symbols of the message carried by the watermark, which is different from removal or erasure of watermarks from the host content. Alternatively, watermark extraction can be called watermark detection, but sometimes watermark detection is used to indicate the detection of the presence of a watermark within a host content without actually extracting the payload carried by that watermark.


SUMMARY

The disclosed embodiments relate to systems, devices, methods and computer program products that improve the detection of watermarks by providing information indicative of a ranking of watermark payloads to watermark extractors.


One aspect of the disclosed embodiments relates to a method that includes receiving a host content at a watermark extractor device and obtaining, at the watermark extractor device, information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values. Such information designates each watermark payload value within a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated rank value. The method further includes based at least in-part on the information indicative of the ranking, configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset, and extracting a payload value from one or more watermarks embedded in the host content. The extracted payload value is one of the payload values designated as belonging to the first subset.


In one exemplary embodiment, prioritizing resource allocation enables extraction of at least one payload value within the first subset with a higher robustness level compared to extraction of any payload value that is not in the first subset. In another exemplary embodiment, prioritizing resource allocation enables extraction of each of the payload values within the first subset with a higher robustness level compared to extraction of each of the payload values within the first subset without the additionally allocated resources. In yet another exemplary embodiment, the ranking comprises a listing of watermark payload values in a particular order of importance. In still another embodiment, the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on having a higher likelihood of being extracted compared to watermark payload values that are not in the first subset. The likelihood of being extracted for at least one of the watermark payload values within the first subset is, for example, determine based upon a likelihood of being extracted by other watermark extractor devices.


According to another exemplary embodiment, the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on one or more characteristics of the host content. The one or more characteristics can, for example, comprise one or both of: an age or popularity of the host content. In one exemplary embodiment, the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on an extent of economic loss associated with unauthorized dissemination of the host content. In still another exemplary embodiment, the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on statistics collected regarding one or both of: the host content, or one or more watermark payload values.


In one exemplary embodiment, the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on one or more of: a viewing history of a user of the extractor device, a location of a user of the extractor device, a preference of a user of the extractor device, a demographic information of a user of the extractor device, or a behavioral information of a user of the extractor device. In another exemplary embodiment, a count of watermark payload values in the first subset is determined based on a dynamic threshold value that is changeable, thereby allowing designation of a different number of watermark payload values as belonging to the first subset. In yet another exemplary embodiment, the above noted method further includes updating the first subset to include at least one watermark payload value that is different from the watermark payload values before the updating.


In still another exemplary embodiment, configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation includes one or more of: prioritizing usage of a memory resource, prioritizing usage of processing operations, enabling usage of additional watermark payload templates, or enabling usage of additional error correction code templates. In one exemplary embodiment, configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation enables extraction of at least one watermark payload value that is designated as belonging to the first subset with an increased robustness level and with an increased probability of false watermark extractions compared to a watermark payload value that is not designated as belonging to the first subset. In one exemplary embodiment, an expected probability of false watermark extractions for all watermark payload values is not increased. In another exemplary embodiment, the above noted method further comprises allocating additional watermark templates associated with the watermark payload values in the first subset to produce an expanded set of watermark templates, where extracting the payload value comprises comparing a candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to all templates in the expanded set of watermark templates to obtain a match to within a predefined error tolerance. In one variation, at least a subset of the expanded set of watermark templates is stored as a look up table (LUT) within the extractor device prior to initiating extraction of the payload value. In another variation, at least a subset of the expanded set of watermark templates is generated on-the-fly, subsequent to initiating extraction of the payload value.


According to one exemplary embodiment, configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset comprises configuring the watermark extractor device to conduct a search for payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset using template matching operations, where the watermark extractor is configured to conduct a search for payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset using non-template-matching error correction code decoding operations. For example, configuring the watermark extractor device to conduct a search for payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset using template matching operations can include constructing an error correction code watermark payload template for each of the payload values in the first subset.


In another exemplary embodiment, extracting the watermark payload value comprises comparing a candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to a plurality of constructed error correction code watermark payload templates corresponding to each of the watermark payload values in the first subset, producing a plurality of error counts, each error count representing a count of mismatched symbols between the candidate watermark payload value and a corresponding constructed error correction code watermark payload template, and identifying, as the extracted watermark payload value, a watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count.


In yet another exemplary embodiment, the above noted method further includes configuring the watermark extractor device to allocate fewer resources for extraction of watermark payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset compared to the watermark payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset. In one exemplary embodiment, the allocated sources for extraction of all payload values is not increased. In another exemplary embodiment, the information indicative of the ranking is obtained from a database located remotely from the extractor device. In still another exemplary embodiment, each of the watermarked payload values is ranked in an order of importance, and configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation comprises allocating more resources for extraction of a payload value that is ranked as being more important within the first subset compared to a payload values that is ranked as being less important within the first subset.


Another aspect of the disclosed embodiments relates to a device that includes a processor, and a memory comprising processor executable code. The processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to receive a host content, and obtain information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values, where the information designates each watermark payload value within a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated rank value. The processor executable code, when executed by the processor, also configures the device to, based at least in-part on the information indicative of the ranking, configure the device to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset. The processor executable code, when executed by the processor, further configures the device to extract a payload value from one or more watermarks embedded in the host content, where the extracted payload value is one of the payload values designated as belonging to the first subset.


In one exemplary embodiment, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, further configures the device to receive new information indicative of the ranking, and modify the first subset in accordance with the new information. In another exemplary embodiment, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to modify the first subset by at least one of: adding a payload value to the first subset that was not previously in the first subset, o removing an existing payload value from the first subset. In still another exemplary embodiment, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to allocate the additional resources including one or more of: prioritizing usage of an additional memory resource, prioritizing usage of additional processing operations, allocating additional watermark payload templates, or allocating additional error correction code templates.


In another exemplary embodiment, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, further configures the device to allocate additional watermark templates associated with the watermark payload values in the first subset to produce an expanded set of watermark templates. Further, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to extract the payload value by at least in-part comparing a candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to all templates in the expanded set of watermark templates to obtain a match to within a predefined error tolerance.


In still another exemplary embodiment, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to conduct a search for payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset using template matching operations, where the watermark extractor is configured to conduct a search for payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset using non-template-matching error correction code decoding operations. In another exemplary embodiment, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to construct an error correction code watermark payload template for each of the payload values in the first subset.


In one exemplary embodiment, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to compare a candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to a plurality of constructed error correction code watermark payload templates corresponding to each of the watermark payload values in the first subset, produce a plurality of error counts, each error count representing a count of mismatched symbols between the candidate watermark payload value and a corresponding constructed error correction code watermark payload template, and identify, as the extracted watermark payload value, a watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count. In still another exemplary embodiment, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, further configures the device to allocate fewer resources for extraction of watermark payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset compared to the watermark payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset.


In another exemplary embodiment a system is provided that includes the above noted device. Such a system further includes a management center comprising a database, where the management center is configured to provide the information indicative of the ranking from the database to the extractor device. Such a system can also include a plurality of additional devices, each of the plurality of additional devices comprising a corresponding watermark extractor device, where the management center is configured to communicate bi-directionally with each of the plurality of additional devices and with the device.


Another aspect of the disclosed embodiments relates to a computer program product, embodied on one or more non-transitory computer readable media. The computer program product includes program code for receiving a host content at a watermark extractor device, and program code for obtaining, at the watermark extractor device, information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values, where the information designates each watermark payload value within a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated rank value. The computer program product also includes program code for, based at least in-part on the information indicative of the ranking, configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset, and program code for extracting a payload value from one or more watermarks embedded in the host content, wherein the extracted payload value is one of the payload values designated as having belonging to the first subset.


Another aspect of the disclosed embodiments relates to a device that includes a receiver configured to receive a host content, and a processor implemented at least in-part in hardware and configured to obtain information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values. Such information designates each watermark payload value within a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated value. The processor is further configured to, based at least in-part on the information indicative of the ranking, configure a watermark extractor component to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset. The watermark extractor is also configured to extract at least one payload value designated as belonging to the first subset from one or more watermarks that are embedded in the host content.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 illustrates a system within which improved watermark extraction using payload ranking can be effectuated in accordance with an exemplary embodiment.



FIG. 2 illustrates a set of operations that can be carried out to improve watermark extraction operations in accordance with an exemplary embodiment.



FIG. 3 illustrates a device that can benefit from, and implement, improved watermark extraction based on watermark payload ranking in accordance with an exemplary embodiment.



FIG. 4 illustrates a block diagram of a device within which various disclosed embodiments may be implemented.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN EMBODIMENTS

In the following description, fir purposes of explanation and not limitation, details and descriptions are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the disclosed embodiments. However, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that the present invention may be practiced in other embodiments that depart from these details and descriptions.


Additionally, in the subject description, the word “exemplary” is used to mean serving as an example, instance, or illustration. Any embodiment or design described herein as “exemplary” is not necessarily to be construed as preferred or advantageous over other embodiments or designs. Rather, use of the word exemplary is intended to present concepts in a concrete manner.


As noted earlier, watermarks can be used in many different applications such as copy control, forensic marking, or automatic content recognition (ACR). In many of those applications, not all embedded watermark payloads are equally important or equally likely to be encountered by a particular extractor. For example, in ACR applications, where particular types of content, or particular content repositories and websites are examined, a watermark extractor may be provided with some prior knowledge as to which watermark payload values are likely to be presented to it. Such an advanced knowledge of watermark payload values can, for example, be acquired by the watermark extractor using a database that maintains information regarding watermark extractions occurring in other (e.g., similar) extractors. The extractor can then use such information to preferentially allocate more or less resources to extract certain watermark payloads. That is, allocation of resources are prioritized such that more resources are allocated for the extraction of watermark payload values that are designated as having a high rank. Non-limiting examples of such additional resources include additional memory resources, additional processing operations (e.g., computations cycles), additional watermark payload templates and additional error correction code templates. Further details of watermark and error correction code templates are provided in the sections that follow. In some embodiments, the allocation of total resources for the extraction of all watermark payloads remains unchanged (or is not increased) since an increase in allocation of resources for higher ranked payload values can be offset by a reduced allocation of resources for lower ranked payload values. Further, since, in some embodiments, the extraction of higher ranked payloads is more likely, the resources for extraction of lower ranked payloads may not get utilized.


In some embodiments, the designation of payload values as having a high rank value is based at least in-part on an extent of economic loss associated with unauthorized dissemination of the host content. For example, in a copy control watermarking system, a content that includes a “no home use” message as part of its embedded watermark payload often corresponds to a content that is only authorized for presentation in movie theatres. As such, any subsequent encounters with such a movie (e.g., at a file sharing website) should be treated as a movie piracy scenario, which can result in a significant economic loss to the movie studios, movie theatres, actors, and other personnel and entities that are involved in the production and distribution of the movie. In this case, proper extraction of a “no home use” watermark payload is treated as more important than extraction of, for example, a “no Internet redistribution” payload (which could represent unauthorized dissemination of a content that is intended to be only released on DVD).


In some exemplary embodiments, the designation of payload values as having a high rank value is based at least in-part on a contractual agreement that requires a watermark system designer or a system operator to treat particular watermark payloads with higher priority than other payloads.


In some embodiments, an extractor is configured to adjust its operations to conduct watermark extraction based on a received payload ranking information. For example, in one embodiment, an extractor first attempts to extract only those payloads that are most likely to be embedded in the content, and only upon a determination that those payloads cannot be reliably extracted, the extractor conducts further operations to extract less likely payloads. In such a configuration, the processing load is often reduced, since the extractor is more likely to conclude its operations when a likely payload is successfully extracted rather than expending resources in a systematic search of the payload space that includes unlikely watermark payload candidates.


In many applications, a watermarking system is designed based on a predefined maximum false positive rate. If all payloads are treated equally by the extractor, then each candidate watermark payload makes an equal contribution to the overall false positive rate of the watermarking system. On the other hand, when the payloads are ranked in a given priority order, in accordance with the disclosed embodiments, a watermark extractor can be configured to allocate a larger fraction of the overall false positive rate budget to the higher ranked payloads as compared to the lower ranked payloads. This way, the extractor becomes capable of extracting higher ranked codes with a higher robustness and/or at a higher confidence level. In such embodiments, the overall expected false positive rate associated with the extraction of all watermark payload values can remain unchanged (or is not increased) since, through proper allocation of extraction operations and resources, a potentially higher false positive rate for some payload values is offset by a tower false positive rate for other payload values.


Another aspect of the disclosed embodiments related to improving the robustness of watermark extractions for high ranking payloads. In particular, watermark extraction robustness in the presence of various signal distortions can be improved with incorporating additional processing steps in the watermark extraction process. For example, an extractor may attempt to invert (e.g., undo) various potential distortions that are likely to contaminate a particular host content, and then attempt to extract watermarks from both the received host content and the inverted host content. Alternatively, distorted watermark templates (e.g., representations of a watermark payload when the host content is subject to the corresponding distortions) can be provided to the extractor so as to allow the extractor to compare a candidate watermark payload that is extracted from the received content to the distorted watermark templates in search of a match. In both of the above extraction techniques, the chances of extracting a watermark improve by increasing the number of watermark extraction or template matching attempts. Such expanded extraction operations not only allow the search of a larger portion of the watermark extraction space, but they can be designed to enable a search of the extraction space with a finer search granularity. The drawback, however, is an increase in both the processing load and the probability of false watermark extractions.


The techniques of the disclosed embodiments allow an extractor to allocate a larger portion of the false positive rate budget and computational resources to the extraction of higher-ranking payloads, thus allowing more extraction attempts to be directed towards such higher ranking payloads while allocating fewer computational resources (e.g., extraction attempts) to the lower-ranking payloads. As a result, in systems that operate in accordance with such exemplary embodiments of the present application, the total number of processing operations and the probability of false watermark extractions can remain substantially the same as systems where such payload ranking techniques are not utilized. Yet, watermarks that are considered to be more important are extracted with an improved extraction robustness.


By the way of example, and not by limitation, the following provides an illustration of watermark extractor enhancements based on payload ranking for an ACR system. In ACR systems, the embedded watermarks can be used to identify the host content (e.g., a movie, a TV show, a song, an image, etc.). In such systems, watermarks can be used to additionally identify a content distribution channel, such as a theatre where the movie is shown or a broadcast station from which the content is being broadcast. Furthermore, watermarks can be used to identify one or more segments of the content by, for example, incorporating a field (e.g., a counter) into the watermark payload that is sequentially incremented (e.g., once per minute) for the duration of the content. In order to carry all of the above information, the watermark payload needs to be relatively large, e.g. between 20 and 100 bits. Such payload bits are typically linked to the content metadata through a database. For example, each field within the watermark payload can be used as a pointer (or a serial number) that identifies a database entry for the corresponding field.


In an ACR system, payload ranking can be implemented based on a number of different criteria. In one example embodiment, the payloads are ranked based on their likelihood of having been extracted by a similar and/or a same type of device. For example, a list of all extracted watermarks can be constructed for software extractors running on operating system A (i.e., device type A), software extractors running on operating system B (i.e., device type B), hardware extractors running on standalone media handling devices such as DVD players (i.e., device type C), hardware extractors running on integrated media handling devices such as media players incorporated in television sets (i.e., device D), etc. For each type of device, the extracted payload values are counted, and sorted to generate a listing (for each device type) that identifies the most frequently extracted payload as the top ranked payload, followed by the second most frequently extracted payload as the second highest ranked payload, and so on.


Alternatively, payload ranking can be implemented based on one or more characteristics of the host content. In some exemplary embodiments, the ranking is determined based on the age and/or popularity of the host content. For example, higher payload rankings can be assigned to currently broadcast content and lower rankings to older content. In one exemplary embodiment, the assignment of payload rankings is carried out at a database which includes, or can obtain, information regarding the age (e.g., whether the content is being currently broadcast) and/or popularity (e.g., if the content is on a top-50 list or has exceeded certain viewership). Such a database also includes, or can obtain, the payload values that have been embedded in such current or popular content, allowing it to generate a payload ranking list based on the age or popularity criteria, and communicate the ranking to one or more extractors. Additional non-limiting examples of payload ranking criteria includes assigning higher ranks to premium content, pay-per-view content, content belonging to customers with special privileges, etc.


Another aspect of the disclosed embodiments relates to providing a payload ranking technique that is based on the use of error correction codes. Since watermarks can be distorted due to various intentional or unintentional processing operations (e.g., as part of content post-processing, transmission and/or storage), watermark payloads are typically encoded using channel coding techniques that allow correction of error-contaminated symbols. Some examples of well-known error correction/error detection codes include Reed-Solomon codes, BCH codes, LDPC codes, CRCs, etc. An error correction code selected for a watermarking system allows a particular number of symbol errors (e.g., bit errors) to be detected and/or corrected depending on the particular parameters of the error correction code. This error correction/detection capability is obtained by adding parity (or redundancy symbols to each block of data e.g., to each watermark payload) that is to be protected, where a larger number of errors can be corrected resulting in a better watermark resilience to signal distortions) at the expense of an increased payload size. It should be noted that typical forward error correction codes treat all payload values equally during the decoding process.


In some exemplary embodiments, payload ranking is used to modify error correction code decoding operations to improve the detection of embedded watermarks with high ranking payloads. In one exemplary embodiment, a set of watermark templates is provided only for the higher ranking payloads. That is, the appropriate parity symbols (generated based on the particular error correction algorithm of the watermarking system) are appended to each of the higher ranking payloads to form “constructed error correction code (or error detection code) packet, templates” (hereinafter a “constructed ECC templates”). A candidate watermark packet that is extracted from a received content is then compared against all such constructed. ECC templates to determine if a match within a predefined error tolerance is found. Upon a determination that such a match is found, the corresponding payload value is declared as the extracted payload value.


In some exemplary embodiments, the constructed ECC templates are stored in a look-up-table (LUT). Alternatively, or additionally, ECC packet templates can be generated on-the-fly after the initiation of watermark extraction operations (e.g., upon acquisition of a watermark packet candidate).


In some exemplary embodiments related to the ECC constructed templates, such templates are only generated for higher ranking payloads and all other payloads are decoded using conventional (i.e., non-template matching) error correction code decoding techniques. For example, upon a determination that no higher ranking code is extracted, the extractor can make a decision as to whether or not to pursue the detection of lower ranking payloads based on conventional techniques. In these embodiments, the extraction robustness of higher ranking payloads is improved since template matching (e.g., based on LUT decoding or on-the-fly generation of templates) typically allows a higher number of errors to be corrected, while maintaining a substantially similar (e.g., within the same order of magnitude) false positive extraction rate, compared to non-template matching techniques. However, depending on the type of error correction code algorithm and the size of error correction code space, LUT decoding results in consumption of additional memory, while computing the templates on-the-fly increases the processing load of the watermark extractor. Thus, in some implementations, the additional robustness for higher ranking payloads is achieved at the expense of consumption of additional resources. It should be noted that on-the-fly generation of watermark templates typically involves generation of the watermark templates based on an algorithm during the watermark extraction process (e.g., after the extraction process is initiated). Thus, on-the-fly watermark generation means that watermark templates are created as needed and then are erased from memory, which is repeated whenever a new need for watermark templates arises, i.e. many times during an extractor run. In contrast, creating templates as, for example, part of extractor initialization process would only require storing the watermark templates in a LUT, which requires memory resources but not much processing, since the templates are created only once per run.


In a first exemplary embodiment where LUT decoding is carried out, the LUT is created by a database and communicated to the extractors. In a second exemplary embodiment, the higher ranking payloads are selected by the database and communicated to the extractor, but generation of the LUT comprising watermark templates for such higher ranking watermark payloads are conducted at the extractor. In the first exemplary embodiment, through the use of some communication bandwidth between the database and the extractors, processing load of the extractors is reduced, whereas in the second embodiment the opposite holds true. The above two exemplary embodiments (and combinations thereof) illustrate how communication bandwidth between the database and the extractors can be traded off for processing load at the extractor. Such tradeoff considerations can be utilized to implement the disclosed embodiments on a case-by-case basis. For instance, in scenarios where communication bandwidth is at a premium, the second exemplary embodiment may be implemented.


In some exemplary embodiments related to the ECC constructed templates, such templates are generated for all payloads, but the higher ranking payloads are treated preferentially. For example, additional variations of ECC construed templates are generated for only the higher ranking payloads while one (or a limited number) of such templates are generated for the remaining payloads. This way, an expanded search of the extraction payload space (i.e., search of a larger portion of the extraction space and/or search a particular portion of the watermark extraction space with finer granularity) is conducted for only the higher ranking payloads. The generation of ECC constructed templates for all payload values can be particularly useful (or efficient) when the watermark payload size is small, and/or when only a limited number of watermark payloads have been implemented.


In some exemplary embodiments, the list of high ranking payloads is dynamically adjusted. For example, the payload values can change over time as certain payloads gain further importance while other payloads lose their importance. Similarly, the count of high ranking payload values can dynamically change as the list of important payloads shrinks or expands to include fewer or additional payload values. In embodiments that template matching is utilized, a list of watermark templates as well as the associated error thresholds, can be updated dynamically to reflect changes in the ranking of the payloads. These changes can be implemented at the extractor device pursuant to communications with a database that decides which payloads should get preferential treatment during a given period of time and/or which extractors should such information be conveyed to. In deciding which payloads to be treated preferentially, additional considerations can be used, such as viewing history of a particular user, user's location obtained through, for example, its IP address, user provided data regarding the user's preferences, a demographic information of a user of the extractor device, a behavioral information of a user of the extractor device, etc.



FIG. 1 illustrates a system within which improved watermark extraction using payload ranking can be effectuated in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. In FIG. 1, the management center 102 is directly or indirectly in communication with a variety of devices 104 to 112 through one or more communication links 118. In some examples, the communication links are secure links and may be bi-directional. A variety of device authentication and handshaking protocols may be used to establish a secure link between the management center 102 and devices 104 to 112. Such devices can include, for example, media players 104, personal computers 106, smart phones 108, game consoles 110, televisions 112, and other devices that include a media handling device with an associated watermark extractor. The management center 102 includes, or is in communication with, a database 114, which stores information related to payload rankings, watermark and error correction code templates, statistics regarding watermark payloads including the frequency of extraction of particular watermark payloads on particular devices, statistics regarding various host content including their age and popularity, and other information. The management center 102 can also be in communication with other entities and devices (not shown), such as certificate authorities and authorization authorities, or may be part of a larger system of content management and distribution network. The management center 102 also includes one or more processors (not shown) with computational capabilities to process the information received and/or stored at the management center 102, to select various watermark payloads, to compute various thresholds, watermarks and error correction code templates and other parameters or values, at least some of which can be subsequently communicated to one or more of the devices 104 through 112. Although FIG. 1 illustrates a single management center 102, it is understood that the functionality of the management center 102 can be implemented as a distributed system comprising a plurality of connected devices and entities.



FIG. 2 illustrates a set of operations that can be carried out to improve watermark extraction operations in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. At 202, a host content is received at an extractor device. Such an extractor device may be a component within a larger device or system, such as a smartphone, a DVD player, a television set and the like. At 204, information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values is obtained. Such information designates a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated rank value. The associated rank value, for example, indicates a ranking tier the corresponding payload that is higher than other watermark payload values not in the first subset. At 206, based, at least in part, on the information indicative of the ranking, the watermark extractor device is configured to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset. At 208, a payload value is extracted from one or more watermarks embedded in the host content. Such an extracted payload value is one of the payload values designated as belonging to the first subset.



FIG. 3 illustrates a device 300 that can benefit from, and implement, improved watermark extraction based on watermark payload ranking in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. The device 300 in FIG. 3 includes a watermark extractor 302 that is configured to extract one or more watermark payloads from the watermarks that are embedded in a host content. For example, the watermark extractor 302 can be configured to perform template matching, error correction code decoding, correlation computations, filtering and other operations that are needed to extract the watermark payloads. The communication components 310 in FIG. 3 are configured to enable communication between the device 300 (and its components) and other entities outside of the device 300, and as such, they can include, or be in communication with, the appropriate transmitter and receiver circuitry (e.g., antenna, analog and digital components, etc.) that are needed to carry out wired or wireless transmission of signals. The buffer 308 in FIG. 3 is used for temporary storage of information and intermediate data and parameters during the extraction of watermarks. For example, the buffer 308 can include a look-up-table with watermark templates that are generated either by Management Center 102 in FIG. 1 or by the extractor itself based on the payload ranking information obtained from the Management Center 102. The device 300 in FIG. 3 can also include at least one processor 304 (e.g. a microprocessor) and a memory 306 comprising processor executable code. Such a processor executable code can configure the device to perform various operations, to allocate resources for extraction of payloads with varying degrees of importance. The processor 304 can be also used to, for example, coordinate the operations of other components within the device 300, to initiate transfer of information and data from/to the device 300, and perform other computations. The memory 306 can include additional data and information that may be needed to carry out the watermark extraction operations.


The disclosed embodiments can be implemented using hardware devices that comprise particular physical components. For example, the devices of the present application can be implemented as an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), as part of a field programmable gate array (FPGA), and/or using digital and analog components and circuitry.


Certain aspects of the disclosed embodiments can be implemented as a device that includes a processor and a memory comprising processor executable code. The processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to perform any one of and/or all operations that are described in the present application. For example, FIG. 4 illustrates a block diagram of a device 400 within which various disclosed embodiments may be implemented. The device 400 comprises at least one processor 404 (e.g., a microprocessor) and/or controller, at least one memory 402 unit that is in communication with the processor 404, and at least one communication unit 404 that enables the exchange of data and information, directly or indirectly, through the communication link 408 with other entities, devices, databases and networks. The communication unit 406 may provide wired and/or wireless communication capabilities in accordance with one or more communication protocols, and therefore it may comprise the proper transmitter/receiver, antennas, circuitry and ports, as well as the encoding/decoding capabilities that may be necessary for proper transmission and/or reception of data and other information. The exemplary device 400 of FIG. 4 may be integrated as part of any of the devices that are shown in FIG. 1, such as part of a device at the management center 102, and any of the devices 104 to 112.


Various embodiments described herein are described in the general context of methods or processes, which may be implemented in one embodiment by a computer program product, embodied in a computer-readable medium, including computer-executable instructions, such as program code, executed by computers in networked environments. A computer-readable medium may include removable and non-removable storage devices including, but not limited to, Read Only Memory (ROM), Random Access Memory (RAM), compact discs (CDs), digital versatile discs (DVD), Blu-ray Discs, etc. Therefore, the computer-readable media described in the present application include non-transitory storage media. Generally, program modules may include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, etc. that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. Computer-executable instructions, associated data structures, and program modules represent examples of program code for executing steps of the methods disclosed herein. The particular sequence of such executable instructions or associated data structures represents examples of corresponding acts for implementing the functions described in such steps or processes.


For example, one aspect of the disclosed embodiments relates to a computer program product that is embodied on a non-transitory computer readable medium. The computer program product includes program code for carrying out any one or and/or all of the operations of the disclosed embodiments.


The foregoing description of embodiments has been presented for purposes of illustration and description. The foregoing description is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit embodiments of the present invention to the precise form disclosed, and modifications and variations are possible in light of the above teachings or may be acquired from practice of various embodiments. The embodiments discussed herein were chosen and described in order to explain the principles and the nature of various embodiments and their practical application to enable one skilled in the art to utilize the present invention in various embodiments and with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated. The features of the embodiments described herein may be combined in all possible combinations of methods, apparatus, modules, systems, and computer program products.

Claims
  • 1. A method, comprising: receiving a host content at a watermark extractor device;obtaining, at the watermark extractor device, information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values, the information designating each watermark payload value within a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated rank value;based at least in-part on the information indicative of the ranking, configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset; andextracting a payload value from one or more watermarks embedded in the host content, wherein extracting the payload value comprises: comparing a candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to a plurality of constructed error correction code watermark payload templates corresponding to each of the watermark payload values in the first subset,producing a plurality of error counts, each error count representing a count of mismatched symbols between the candidate watermark payload value and a corresponding constructed error correction code watermark payload template, andidentifying, as the extracted watermark payload value, a watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count, andwherein the extracted payload value is one of the payload values designated as belonging to the first subset.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation enables extraction of at least one payload value within the first subset with a higher robustness level compared to extraction of any payload value that is not in the first subset.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation enables extraction of each of the payload values within the first subset with a higher robustness level compared to extraction of each of the payload values within the first subset without the additionally allocated resources.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the ranking comprises a listing of watermark payload values in a particular order of importance.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on having a higher likelihood of being extracted compared to watermark payload values that are not in the first subset.
  • 6. The method of claim 5, wherein the likelihood of being extracted for at least one of the watermark payload values within the first subset is determined based upon a likelihood of being extracted by other watermark extractor devices.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on one or more characteristics of the host content.
  • 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the one or more characteristics comprise one or both of: an age or popularity of the host content.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on an extent of economic loss associated with unauthorized dissemination of the host content.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on statistics collected regarding one or both of: the host content, orone or more watermark payload values.
  • 11. The method of claim 1, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on one or more of: a viewing history of a user of the extractor device,a location of a user of the extractor device,a preference of a user of the extractor device,a demographic information of a user of the extractor device, ora behavioral information of a user of the extractor device.
  • 12. The method of claim 1, wherein a count of watermark payload values in the first subset is determined based on a dynamic threshold value that is changeable, thereby allowing designation of a different number of watermark payload values as belonging to the first subset.
  • 13. The method of claim 1, further comprising updating the first subset to include at least one watermark payload value that is different from the watermark payload values before the updating.
  • 14. The method of claim 1, wherein configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation includes one or more of: prioritizing usage of a memory resource,prioritizing usage of processing operations,allocating additional watermark payload templates, orallocating additional error correction code templates.
  • 15. The method of claim 1, wherein configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation enables extraction of at least one watermark payload value that is designated as belonging to the first subset with an increased robustness level and with an increased probability of false watermark extractions compared to a watermark payload value that is not designated as belonging to the first subset.
  • 16. The method of claim 15, wherein an expected probability of false watermark extractions for all watermark payload values is not increased.
  • 17. The method of claim 1, further comprising allocating additional watermark templates associated with the watermark payload values in the first subset to produce an expanded set of watermark templates, wherein extracting the payload value comprises comparing the candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to all templates in the expanded set of watermark templates to obtain a match to within a predefined error tolerance.
  • 18. The method of claim 17, wherein at least a subset of the expanded set of watermark templates is stored as a look up table (LUT) within the extractor device prior to initiating extraction of the payload value.
  • 19. The method of claim 17, wherein at least a subset of the expanded set of watermark templates is generated on-the-fly, subsequent to initiating extraction of the payload value.
  • 20. The method of claim 1, wherein configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset comprises: configuring the watermark extractor device to conduct a search for payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset using non-template-matching error correction code decoding operations.
  • 21. The method of claim 1, further comprising configuring the watermark extractor device to allocate fewer resources for extraction of watermark payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset compared to the watermark payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset.
  • 22. The method of claim 21, wherein allocated resources for extraction of all payload values is not increased.
  • 23. The method of claim 1, wherein the information indicative of the ranking is obtained from a database located remotely from the extractor device.
  • 24. The method of claim 1, wherein: each of the watermarked payload values is ranked in an order of importance; and configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation comprises allocating more resources for extraction of a payload value that is ranked as being more important within the first subset compared to a payload value that is ranked as being less important within the first subset.
  • 25. The method of claim 1, wherein the watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count is identified as the extracted watermark payload value upon a determination that the smallest error count is below a predefined error tolerance value.
  • 26. A device, comprising: a processor; anda memory comprising processor executable code, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to:receive a host content;obtain information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values, the information designating each watermark payload value within a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated rank value;based at least in-part on the information indicative of the ranking, configure the device to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset; andextract a payload value from one or more watermarks embedded in the host content, wherein extraction of the payload value comprises: comparison of a candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to a plurality of constructed error correction code watermark payload templates corresponding to each of the watermark payload values in the first subset,production of a plurality of error counts, each error count representing count of mismatched symbols between the candidate watermark payload value and a corresponding constructed error correction code watermark payload template, andidentification, as the extracted watermark payload value, a watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count, andwherein the extracted payload value is one of the payload values designated as belonging to the first subset.
  • 27. The device of claim 26, wherein configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation enables extraction of at least one payload value within the first subset with a higher robustness level compared to extraction of any payload value that is not in the first subset.
  • 28. The device of claim 26, wherein configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation enables extraction of each of the payload values within the first subset with a higher robustness level compared to extraction of each of the payload values within the first subset without the additionally allocated resources.
  • 29. The device of claim 26, wherein the ranking comprises a listing of watermark payload values in a particular order of importance.
  • 30. The device of claim 26, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on having a higher a likelihood of being extracted compared to watermark payload values that are not in the first subset.
  • 31. The device of claim 30, wherein the likelihood of being extracted for at least one of the watermark payload values within the first subset is determined based upon a likelihood of being extracted by other devices.
  • 32. The device of claim 26, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on one or more characteristics of the host content.
  • 33. The device of claim 32, wherein the one or more characteristics comprise one or both of: an age or popularity of the host content.
  • 34. The device of claim 26, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on an extent of economic loss associated with unauthorized dissemination of the host content.
  • 35. The device of claim 26, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on statistics collected regarding one or both of: the host content, orone or more watermark payload values.
  • 36. The device of claim 26, wherein the designation as belonging to the first subset is based at least in-part on one or more of: a viewing history of a user of the device,a location of a user of the device,a preference of a user of the device,a demographic information of a user of the extractor device, ora behavioral information of a user of the extractor device.
  • 37. The device of claim 26, wherein the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, further configures the device to: receive new information indicative of the ranking; andmodify the first subset in accordance with the new information.
  • 38. The device of claim 26, wherein the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to modify the first subset by at least one of: adding a payload value to the first subset that was not previously in the first subset, orremoving an existing payload value from the first subset.
  • 39. The device of claim 26, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to prioritize resource allocation by including one or more of: prioritizing usage of a memory resource,prioritizing usage of processing operations,allocating additional watermark payload templates, orallocating additional error correction code templates.
  • 40. The device of claim 26, wherein configuring the device to prioritize resource allocation enables extraction of at least one watermark payload value that is designated as belonging to the first subset with an increased robustness level and with an increased probability of false watermark extractions compared to a watermark payload value that is not designated as belonging to the first subset.
  • 41. The device of claim 40, wherein an expected probability of false watermark extractions for all watermark payload values remains unchanged.
  • 42. The device of claim 26, wherein: the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, further configures the device to allocate additional watermark templates associated with the watermark payload values in the first subset to produce an expanded set of watermark templates; andthe processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to extract the payload value by at least in-part comparing the candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to all templates in the expanded set of watermark templates to obtain a match to within a predefined error tolerance.
  • 43. The device of claim 42, wherein the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, further configures the device to store at least a subset of the expanded set of watermark templates as a look up table (LUT) within the device prior to initiating extraction of the payload value.
  • 44. The device of claim 42, wherein the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, further configures the device to generate at least a subset of the expanded set of watermark templates on-the-fly, subsequent to initiating extraction of the payload value.
  • 45. The device of claim 26, the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to conduct a search for payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset using non-template-matching error correction code decoding operations.
  • 46. The device of claim 26, wherein the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, further configures the device to allocate fewer resources for extraction of watermark payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset compared to the watermark payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset.
  • 47. The device of claim 46, wherein allocated resources for extraction of all payload values is not increased.
  • 48. The device of claim 26, wherein: each of the watermarked payload values is ranked in an order of importance; and the processor executable code, when executed by the processor, configures the device to prioritize resource allocation by allocating more resources for extraction of a payload value that is ranked as being more important within the first subset compared to a payload value that is ranked as being less important within the first subset.
  • 49. A system comprising the device of claim 26, and further comprising a management center comprising a database, wherein the management center is configured to provide the information indicative of the ranking from the database to the extractor device.
  • 50. The system of claim 48, further comprising a plurality of additional devices, each of the plurality of additional devices comprising a corresponding watermark extractor device, wherein the management center is configured to communicate bi-directionally with each of the plurality of additional devices and with the device.
  • 51. The device of claim 26, wherein the watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count is identified as the extracted watermark payload value upon a determination that the smallest error count is below a predefined error tolerance value.
  • 52. A computer program product, embodied on one or more non-transitory computer readable media, comprising: program code for receiving a host content at a watermark extractor device;program code for obtaining, at the watermark extractor device, information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values, the information designating each watermark payload value within a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated rank value;program code for, based at least in-part on the information indicative of the ranking,configuring the watermark extractor device to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset; andprogram code for extracting a payload value from one or more watermarks embedded in the host content, wherein extracting the payload value comprises: comparing a candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to a plurality of constructed error correction code watermark payload templates corresponding to each of the watermark payload values in the first subset,producing a plurality of error counts, each error count representing a count of mismatched symbols between the candidate watermark payload value and a corresponding constructed error correction code watermark payload template, andidentifying, as the extracted watermark payload value, a watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count, andwherein the extracted payload value is one of the payload values designated as belonging to the first subset.
  • 53. The A computer program product of claim 52, wherein the watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count is identified as the extracted watermark payload value upon a determination that the smallest error count is below a predefined error tolerance value.
  • 54. A device, comprising: a receiver configured to receive a host content;a processor implemented at least in-part in hardware and configured to obtain information indicative of a ranking of a plurality of watermark payload values, the information designating each watermark payload value within a first subset of the plurality of watermark payload values as having an associated value;the processor further configured to, based at least in-part on the information indicative of the ranking, configure a watermark extractor component to prioritize resource allocation for extraction of payload values that are designated as belonging to the first subset over payload values that are not designated as belonging to the first subset, wherein:the watermark extractor is configured to extract at least one payload value designated as belonging to the first subset from one or more watermarks embedded in the host content, wherein extraction of the payload value comprises: comparison of a candidate watermark payload value obtained from the host content to a plurality of constructed error correction code watermark payload templates corresponding to each of the watermark payload values in the first subset,production of a plurality of error counts, each error count representing a count of mismatched symbols between the candidate watermark payload value and a corresponding constructed error correction code watermark payload template, andidentification, as the extracted watermark payload value, a watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count.
  • 55. The device of claim 54, wherein the watermark payload value that corresponds to the smallest error count is identified as the extracted watermark payload value upon a determination that the smallest error count is below a predefined error tolerance value.
US Referenced Citations (684)
Number Name Date Kind
3406344 Hopper Oct 1968 A
3842196 Loughlin Oct 1974 A
3885217 Cintron May 1975 A
3894190 Gassmann Jul 1975 A
3919479 Moon et al. Nov 1975 A
3973206 Haselwood et al. Aug 1976 A
4048562 Haselwood et al. Sep 1977 A
4176379 Wessler et al. Nov 1979 A
4199788 Tsujimura Apr 1980 A
4225967 Miwa et al. Sep 1980 A
4230990 Lert, Jr. et al. Oct 1980 A
4281217 Dolby Jul 1981 A
4295128 Hashemian et al. Oct 1981 A
4425578 Haselwood et al. Jan 1984 A
4454610 Sziklai Jun 1984 A
4464656 Nakamura Aug 1984 A
4497060 Yang Jan 1985 A
4512013 Nash et al. Apr 1985 A
4547804 Greenberg Oct 1985 A
4564862 Cohen Jan 1986 A
4593904 Graves Jun 1986 A
4639779 Greenberg Jan 1987 A
4669089 Gahagan et al. May 1987 A
4677466 Lert, Jr. et al. Jun 1987 A
4686707 Iwasaki et al. Aug 1987 A
4703476 Howard Oct 1987 A
4706282 Knowd Nov 1987 A
4723302 Fulmer et al. Feb 1988 A
4729398 Benson et al. Mar 1988 A
4739398 Thomas et al. Apr 1988 A
4750173 Bluthgen Jun 1988 A
4755871 Morales-Garza et al. Jul 1988 A
4755884 Efron et al. Jul 1988 A
4764608 Masuzawa et al. Aug 1988 A
4764808 Solar Aug 1988 A
4789863 Bush Dec 1988 A
4805020 Greenberg Feb 1989 A
4807013 Manocha Feb 1989 A
4807031 Broughton et al. Feb 1989 A
4840602 Rose Jun 1989 A
4843562 Kenyon et al. Jun 1989 A
4876617 Best et al. Oct 1989 A
4876736 Kiewit Oct 1989 A
4930011 Kiewit May 1990 A
4931871 Kramer Jun 1990 A
4937807 Weitz et al. Jun 1990 A
4939515 Adelson Jul 1990 A
4943963 Waechter et al. Jul 1990 A
4945412 Kramer Jul 1990 A
4967273 Greenberg Oct 1990 A
4969041 O'Grady et al. Nov 1990 A
4972471 Gross et al. Nov 1990 A
4972503 Zurlinden Nov 1990 A
4979210 Nagata et al. Dec 1990 A
5057915 Von Kohorn Oct 1991 A
5073925 Nagata et al. Dec 1991 A
5080479 Rosenberg Jan 1992 A
5113437 Best et al. May 1992 A
5116437 Yamamoto et al. May 1992 A
5161251 Mankovitz Nov 1992 A
5191615 Aldava et al. Mar 1993 A
5200822 Bronfin et al. Apr 1993 A
5210820 Kenyon May 1993 A
5210831 Emma et al. May 1993 A
5213337 Sherman May 1993 A
5214792 Alwadish May 1993 A
5237611 Rasmussen et al. Aug 1993 A
5251041 Young et al. Oct 1993 A
5270480 Hikawa Dec 1993 A
5294962 Sato et al. Mar 1994 A
5294982 Salomon et al. Mar 1994 A
5319453 Copriviza et al. Jun 1994 A
5319735 Preuss et al. Jun 1994 A
5351304 Yamamoto Sep 1994 A
5379345 Greenberg Jan 1995 A
5402488 Karlock Mar 1995 A
5404160 Schober et al. Apr 1995 A
5404377 Moses Apr 1995 A
5408258 Kolessar Apr 1995 A
5414729 Fenton May 1995 A
5424785 Orphan Jun 1995 A
5425100 Thomas et al. Jun 1995 A
5432799 Shimpuku et al. Jul 1995 A
5436653 Ellis et al. Jul 1995 A
5450490 Jensen et al. Sep 1995 A
5452901 Nakada et al. Sep 1995 A
5473631 Moses Dec 1995 A
5481294 Thomas et al. Jan 1996 A
5497372 Nankoh et al. Mar 1996 A
5502576 Ramsay et al. Mar 1996 A
5504518 Ellis et al. Apr 1996 A
5508754 Orphan Apr 1996 A
5519454 Willis May 1996 A
5523794 Mankovitz et al. Jun 1996 A
5526427 Thomas et al. Jun 1996 A
5537484 Kobayashi Jul 1996 A
5579124 Aijala et al. Nov 1996 A
5581658 O'Hagan et al. Dec 1996 A
5581800 Fardeau et al. Dec 1996 A
5592553 Guski et al. Jan 1997 A
5612729 Ellis et al. Mar 1997 A
5613004 Cooperman et al. Mar 1997 A
5636292 Rhoads Jun 1997 A
5664018 Leighton Sep 1997 A
5687191 Lee et al. Nov 1997 A
5687236 Moskowitz et al. Nov 1997 A
5699427 Chow et al. Dec 1997 A
5719619 Hattori et al. Feb 1998 A
5719937 Warren et al. Feb 1998 A
5737329 Horiguchi Apr 1998 A
5752880 Gabai et al. May 1998 A
5761606 Wolzien Jun 1998 A
5764763 Jensen et al. Jun 1998 A
5778108 Coleman, Jr. Jul 1998 A
5787334 Fardeau et al. Jul 1998 A
5805635 Andrews, Jr. et al. Sep 1998 A
5809064 Fenton et al. Sep 1998 A
5809139 Girod et al. Sep 1998 A
5819289 Sanford, II et al. Oct 1998 A
5822360 Lee et al. Oct 1998 A
5822432 Moskowitz et al. Oct 1998 A
5825892 Braudaway et al. Oct 1998 A
5828325 Wolosewicz et al. Oct 1998 A
5832119 Rhoads Nov 1998 A
5841978 Rhoads Nov 1998 A
5848155 Cox Dec 1998 A
5850249 Massetti et al. Dec 1998 A
5850481 Rhoads Dec 1998 A
5862260 Rhoads Jan 1999 A
5870030 DeLuca et al. Feb 1999 A
5887243 Harvey et al. Mar 1999 A
5889868 Moskowitz et al. Mar 1999 A
5892900 Ginter et al. Apr 1999 A
5893067 Bender et al. Apr 1999 A
5901178 Lee et al. May 1999 A
5905800 Moskowitz et al. May 1999 A
5930369 Cox et al. Jul 1999 A
5933798 Linnartz Aug 1999 A
5937000 Lee et al. Aug 1999 A
5940124 Janko et al. Aug 1999 A
5940134 Wirtz Aug 1999 A
5940135 Petrovic et al. Aug 1999 A
5940429 Lam et al. Aug 1999 A
5943422 Van Wie et al. Aug 1999 A
5945932 Smith et al. Aug 1999 A
5949885 Leighton Sep 1999 A
5960081 Vynne et al. Sep 1999 A
5963909 Warren et al. Oct 1999 A
5986692 Logan et al. Nov 1999 A
6021432 Sizer, II et al. Feb 2000 A
6031914 Tewfik et al. Feb 2000 A
6035171 Takaya et al. Mar 2000 A
6035177 Moses et al. Mar 2000 A
6037984 Isnardi et al. Mar 2000 A
6044156 Honsinger et al. Mar 2000 A
6061793 Tewfik et al. May 2000 A
6067440 Diefes May 2000 A
6078664 Moskowitz et al. Jun 2000 A
6094228 Ciardullo et al. Jul 2000 A
6101310 Terada et al. Aug 2000 A
6128597 Kolluru et al. Oct 2000 A
6145081 Winograd et al. Nov 2000 A
6154571 Cox et al. Nov 2000 A
6160986 Gabai et al. Dec 2000 A
6173271 Goodman et al. Jan 2001 B1
6175627 Petrovic et al. Jan 2001 B1
6175842 Kirk et al. Jan 2001 B1
6189123 Anders Nystrom et al. Feb 2001 B1
6209092 Linnartz Mar 2001 B1
6209094 Levine et al. Mar 2001 B1
6222932 Rao et al. Apr 2001 B1
6229572 Ciardullo et al. May 2001 B1
6233347 Chen et al. May 2001 B1
6246775 Nakamura et al. Jun 2001 B1
6246802 Fujihara et al. Jun 2001 B1
6249870 Kobayashi et al. Jun 2001 B1
6252972 Linnartz Jun 2001 B1
6253113 Lu Jun 2001 B1
6253189 Feezell et al. Jun 2001 B1
6268866 Shibata Jul 2001 B1
6278792 Cox et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282299 Tewfik et al. Aug 2001 B1
6285774 Schumann et al. Sep 2001 B1
6289108 Rhoads Sep 2001 B1
6290566 Gabai et al. Sep 2001 B1
6330335 Rhoads Dec 2001 B1
6330672 Shur Dec 2001 B1
6332031 Rhoads et al. Dec 2001 B1
6332194 Bloom et al. Dec 2001 B1
6353672 Rhoads Mar 2002 B1
6363159 Rhoads Mar 2002 B1
6373974 Zeng Apr 2002 B2
6374036 Ryan et al. Apr 2002 B1
6381341 Rhoads Apr 2002 B1
6385330 Powell et al. May 2002 B1
6388712 Shinohara et al. May 2002 B1
6389152 Nakamura et al. May 2002 B2
6389538 Gruse et al. May 2002 B1
6400826 Chen et al. Jun 2002 B1
6400827 Rhoads Jun 2002 B1
6404781 Kawamae et al. Jun 2002 B1
6404898 Rhoads Jun 2002 B1
6411725 Rhoads Jun 2002 B1
6415040 Linnartz et al. Jul 2002 B1
6415041 Oami et al. Jul 2002 B1
6424726 Nakano et al. Jul 2002 B2
6427012 Petrovic Jul 2002 B1
6430301 Petrovic Aug 2002 B1
6430302 Rhoads Aug 2002 B2
6442285 Rhoads et al. Aug 2002 B2
6449367 Van Wie et al. Sep 2002 B2
6449496 Beith et al. Sep 2002 B1
6473560 Linnartz et al. Oct 2002 B1
6477431 Kalker et al. Nov 2002 B1
6487301 Zhao Nov 2002 B1
6490355 Epstein Dec 2002 B1
6496591 Rhoads Dec 2002 B1
6505160 Levy et al. Jan 2003 B1
6510233 Nakano Jan 2003 B1
6510234 Cox et al. Jan 2003 B1
6512837 Ahmed Jan 2003 B1
6523113 Wehrenberg Feb 2003 B1
6529506 Yamamoto et al. Mar 2003 B1
6530021 Epstein et al. Mar 2003 B1
6535617 Hannigan et al. Mar 2003 B1
6550011 Sims, III Apr 2003 B1
6553127 Kurowski Apr 2003 B1
6556688 Ratnakar Apr 2003 B1
6557103 Boncelet, Jr. et al. Apr 2003 B1
6570996 Linnartz May 2003 B1
6571144 Moses et al. May 2003 B1
6574350 Rhoads et al. Jun 2003 B1
6577744 Braudaway et al. Jun 2003 B1
6584138 Neubauer et al. Jun 2003 B1
6590996 Reed et al. Jul 2003 B1
6590997 Rhoads Jul 2003 B2
6591365 Cookson Jul 2003 B1
6592516 Lee Jul 2003 B2
6598162 Moskowitz Jul 2003 B1
6614914 Rhoads et al. Sep 2003 B1
6618484 Weber et al. Sep 2003 B1
6625297 Bradley Sep 2003 B1
6628729 Sorensen Sep 2003 B1
6633653 Hobson et al. Oct 2003 B1
6636615 Rhoads et al. Oct 2003 B1
6636967 Koyano Oct 2003 B1
6647128 Rhoads Nov 2003 B1
6647129 Rhoads Nov 2003 B2
6654501 Acharya et al. Nov 2003 B1
6661905 Chupp et al. Dec 2003 B1
6665419 Oami Dec 2003 B1
6668068 Hashimoto Dec 2003 B2
6671376 Koto et al. Dec 2003 B1
6671388 Op De Beeck et al. Dec 2003 B1
6674861 Xu et al. Jan 2004 B1
6674876 Hannigan et al. Jan 2004 B1
6675146 Rhoads Jan 2004 B2
6678389 Sun et al. Jan 2004 B1
6681029 Rhoads Jan 2004 B1
6683958 Petrovic Jan 2004 B2
6697944 Jones et al. Feb 2004 B1
6700990 Rhoads Mar 2004 B1
6704431 Ogawa et al. Mar 2004 B1
6707926 Macy et al. Mar 2004 B1
6721439 Levy et al. Apr 2004 B1
6728390 Rhoads et al. Apr 2004 B2
6737957 Petrovic et al. May 2004 B1
6738495 Rhoads et al. May 2004 B2
6744906 Rhoads et al. Jun 2004 B2
6748360 Pitman et al. Jun 2004 B2
6751337 Tewfik et al. Jun 2004 B2
6757405 Muratani et al. Jun 2004 B1
6757908 Vogel Jun 2004 B1
6760463 Rhoads Jul 2004 B2
6768807 Muratani Jul 2004 B1
6771797 Ahmed Aug 2004 B2
6785399 Fujihara Aug 2004 B2
6785401 Walker et al. Aug 2004 B2
6785815 Serret-Avila et al. Aug 2004 B1
6792542 Lee et al. Sep 2004 B1
6798893 Tanaka Sep 2004 B1
6801999 Venkatesan et al. Oct 2004 B1
6810527 Conrad et al. Oct 2004 B1
6823455 Macy et al. Nov 2004 B1
6829368 Meyer et al. Dec 2004 B2
6829582 Barsness Dec 2004 B1
6834344 Aggarwal et al. Dec 2004 B1
6834345 Bloom et al. Dec 2004 B2
6850555 Barclay Feb 2005 B1
6850626 Rhoads et al. Feb 2005 B2
6856693 Miller Feb 2005 B2
6871180 Neuhauser et al. Mar 2005 B1
6880082 Ohta Apr 2005 B2
6888943 Lam et al. May 2005 B1
6891958 Kirovski et al. May 2005 B2
6912010 Baker et al. Jun 2005 B2
6912294 Wang et al. Jun 2005 B2
6912315 Wong et al. Jun 2005 B1
6915002 Gustafson Jul 2005 B2
6915422 Nakamura Jul 2005 B1
6915481 Tewfik et al. Jul 2005 B1
6928233 Walker et al. Aug 2005 B1
6931536 Hollar Aug 2005 B2
6944313 Donescu Sep 2005 B1
6944771 Epstein Sep 2005 B2
6947571 Rhoads et al. Sep 2005 B1
6947893 Iwaki et al. Sep 2005 B1
6952774 Kirovski et al. Oct 2005 B1
6954541 Fan et al. Oct 2005 B2
6961854 Serret-Avila et al. Nov 2005 B2
6973195 Matsui Dec 2005 B1
6993154 Brunk Jan 2006 B2
6996249 Miller et al. Feb 2006 B2
7007166 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2006 B1
7020304 Alattar et al. Mar 2006 B2
7024018 Petrovic Apr 2006 B2
7043049 Kuzma May 2006 B2
7043536 Philyaw et al. May 2006 B1
7043638 McGrath et al. May 2006 B2
7046808 Metois et al. May 2006 B1
7054461 Zeller et al. May 2006 B2
7054462 Rhoads et al. May 2006 B2
7058809 White et al. Jun 2006 B2
7058815 Morin Jun 2006 B2
7068809 Stach Jun 2006 B2
7072492 Ogawa et al. Jul 2006 B2
7103678 Asai et al. Sep 2006 B2
7107452 Serret-Avila et al. Sep 2006 B2
7111169 Ripley et al. Sep 2006 B2
7113613 Echizen et al. Sep 2006 B2
7123718 Moskowitz et al. Oct 2006 B1
7142691 Levy Nov 2006 B2
7162642 Schumann et al. Jan 2007 B2
7164778 Nakamura et al. Jan 2007 B1
7167560 Yu Jan 2007 B2
7167599 Diehl Jan 2007 B1
7171020 Rhoads et al. Jan 2007 B2
7177429 Moskowitz et al. Feb 2007 B2
7197368 Kirovski et al. Mar 2007 B2
7206649 Kirovski et al. Apr 2007 B2
7224819 Levy et al. May 2007 B2
7231061 Bradley Jun 2007 B2
7289643 Brunk et al. Oct 2007 B2
7298865 Lubin et al. Nov 2007 B2
7319759 Peinado et al. Jan 2008 B1
7321666 Kunisa Jan 2008 B2
7334247 Finseth et al. Feb 2008 B1
7336802 Kunisa Feb 2008 B2
7346514 Herre et al. Mar 2008 B2
7369677 Petrovic et al. May 2008 B2
7369678 Rhoads May 2008 B2
7389421 Kirovski et al. Jun 2008 B2
7409073 Moskowitz et al. Aug 2008 B2
7430670 Horning et al. Sep 2008 B1
7450727 Griesinger Nov 2008 B2
7454019 Williams Nov 2008 B2
7562392 Rhoads et al. Jul 2009 B1
7581103 Home et al. Aug 2009 B2
7587601 Levy et al. Sep 2009 B2
7616776 Petrovic et al. Nov 2009 B2
7617509 Brunheroto et al. Nov 2009 B1
7630497 Lotspiech et al. Dec 2009 B2
7644282 Petrovic et al. Jan 2010 B2
7660991 Nakamura et al. Feb 2010 B2
7664332 Wong et al. Feb 2010 B2
7693297 Zhang et al. Apr 2010 B2
7698570 Schumann et al. Apr 2010 B2
7756272 Kocher et al. Jul 2010 B2
7788684 Petrovic et al. Aug 2010 B2
7788693 Robbins Aug 2010 B2
7797637 Marcjan Sep 2010 B2
7818763 Sie et al. Oct 2010 B2
7840006 Ogawa et al. Nov 2010 B2
7979881 Wong et al. Jul 2011 B1
7983922 Neusinger et al. Jul 2011 B2
7986806 Rhoads Jul 2011 B2
7991995 Rabin et al. Aug 2011 B2
8005258 Petrovic et al. Aug 2011 B2
8015410 Pelly et al. Sep 2011 B2
8055013 Levy et al. Nov 2011 B2
8059815 Lofgren et al. Nov 2011 B2
8059858 Brundage et al. Nov 2011 B2
8106744 Petrovic et al. Jan 2012 B2
8106745 Petrovic et al. Jan 2012 B2
8138930 Heath Mar 2012 B1
8151113 Rhoads Apr 2012 B2
8155463 Wong et al. Apr 2012 B2
8181262 Cooper et al. May 2012 B2
8189861 Rucklidge May 2012 B1
8194803 Baum et al. Jun 2012 B2
8249992 Harkness et al. Aug 2012 B2
8259938 Petrovic et al. Sep 2012 B2
8301893 Brundage Oct 2012 B2
8315835 Tian et al. Nov 2012 B2
8346532 Chakra et al. Jan 2013 B2
8346567 Petrovic et al. Jan 2013 B2
8451086 Petrovic et al. May 2013 B2
8467717 Croy et al. Jun 2013 B2
8479225 Covell et al. Jul 2013 B2
8538066 Petrovic et al. Sep 2013 B2
8588459 Bloom et al. Nov 2013 B2
8589969 Falcon Nov 2013 B2
8681978 Petriovic et al. Mar 2014 B2
8791789 Petrovic et al. Jul 2014 B2
20010001159 Ford May 2001 A1
20010021926 Schneck et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010022786 King et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010025341 Marshall Sep 2001 A1
20010044899 Levy Nov 2001 A1
20010051996 Cooper et al. Dec 2001 A1
20010054146 Carro et al. Dec 2001 A1
20020007403 Echizen et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020010684 Moskowitz Jan 2002 A1
20020012443 Rhoads et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020019769 Barritz et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020033844 Levy et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020044659 Ohta Apr 2002 A1
20020052885 Levy May 2002 A1
20020053026 Hashimoto May 2002 A1
20020054089 Nicholas et al. May 2002 A1
20020068987 Hars Jun 2002 A1
20020078356 Ezaki et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020080964 Stone et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020080976 Schreer Jun 2002 A1
20020082731 Pitman et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020095577 Nakamura et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020097873 Petrovic Jul 2002 A1
20020120849 McKinley et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020120854 LeVine et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020126842 Hollar Sep 2002 A1
20020126872 Brunk et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020138734 David et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020154144 Lofgren et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020168082 Razdan Nov 2002 A1
20020168087 Petrovic Nov 2002 A1
20020178368 Yin et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020181706 Matsumura et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020199106 Hayashi Dec 2002 A1
20030009671 Yacobi et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030012098 Sako et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030012403 Rhoads et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030016825 Jones Jan 2003 A1
20030021439 Lubin et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030021441 Levy et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030028796 Roberts et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030031317 Epstein Feb 2003 A1
20030032033 Anglin et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030033321 Schrempp et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030037075 Hannigan et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030051143 Razdan et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030053655 Barone et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030056103 Levy et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030056213 McFaddin et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030061489 Pelly et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030063570 Katayama et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030063747 Petrovic Apr 2003 A1
20030070075 Deguillaume et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030072468 Brunk et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030076955 Alve et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030078891 Capitant Apr 2003 A1
20030081780 Kim May 2003 A1
20030081809 Fridrich et al. May 2003 A1
20030112974 Levy Jun 2003 A1
20030112997 Ahmed Jun 2003 A1
20030115504 Holliman et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030131350 Peiffer et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030152225 Kunisa Aug 2003 A1
20030174862 Rhoads et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030177359 Bradley Sep 2003 A1
20030179901 Tian et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030185417 Alattar et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030187679 Odgers et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030188166 Pelly et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030190054 Troyansky et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030190055 Kalker et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030191941 Terada et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030200438 Kirovski et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030223584 Bradley et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040005076 Hosaka et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040008864 Watson et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040009763 Stone et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040010692 Watson Jan 2004 A1
20040015400 Whymark Jan 2004 A1
20040025023 Yamada et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040025176 Franklin et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040028255 Miller Feb 2004 A1
20040042635 Epstein et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040042636 Oh Mar 2004 A1
20040073916 Petrovic et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040078575 Morten et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040088556 Weirauch May 2004 A1
20040091111 Levy et al. May 2004 A1
20040093202 Fischer et al. May 2004 A1
20040093523 Matsuzaki et al. May 2004 A1
20040098593 Muratani May 2004 A1
20040101160 Kunisa May 2004 A1
20040103293 Ryan May 2004 A1
20040111740 Seok et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040120544 Eguchi et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040133794 Kocher et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040136531 Asano et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040151316 Petrovic Aug 2004 A1
20040169581 Petrovic et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040174996 Tewfik et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040202324 Yamaguchi et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040204943 Kirovski et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040216157 Shain et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040250078 Stach et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040258274 Brundage et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040260930 Malik et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050008190 Levy et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050010779 Kobayashi et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050013462 Rhoads Jan 2005 A1
20050025332 Seroussi Feb 2005 A1
20050050332 Serret-Avila et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050063027 Durst et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050071283 Randle et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050071669 Medvinsky et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050120220 Oostveen et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050144632 Mears et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050154891 Skipper Jul 2005 A1
20050177861 Ma et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050196051 Wong et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050202781 Steelberg et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050242568 Long et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050251683 Levy et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050254649 Demos Nov 2005 A1
20050267928 Anderson et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060005029 Petrovic et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015927 Antonellis et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060056653 Kunisa Mar 2006 A1
20060062426 Levy et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060075424 Talstra et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060104477 Isogai et al. May 2006 A1
20060133644 Wells et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060156009 Shin et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060190403 Lin et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060218604 Riedl et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060227968 Chen et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060239501 Petrovic et al. Oct 2006 A1
20070003103 Lemma et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070005500 Steeves et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070033146 Hollar Feb 2007 A1
20070039018 Saslow et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070064545 Carson et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070100483 Kentish et al. May 2007 A1
20070110237 Tehranchi et al. May 2007 A1
20070143617 Farber et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070150418 Ben-Menahem et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070168673 Van Der Veen et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070177761 Levy Aug 2007 A1
20070192261 Kelkar et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070208711 Rhoads et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070214049 Postrel Sep 2007 A1
20070223708 Villemoes et al. Sep 2007 A1
20080002854 Tehranchi et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080016360 Rodriguez et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080031463 Davis Feb 2008 A1
20080209219 Rhein Aug 2008 A1
20080219643 Le Buhan et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080228733 Davis et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080250240 Celik et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080273861 Yang et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080281448 Uhrig et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080298632 Reed Dec 2008 A1
20080301304 Chitsaz et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080310629 Van Der Veen et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080310673 Petrovic et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080313741 Alve et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090031134 Levy Jan 2009 A1
20090033617 Lindberg et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090100492 Hicks, III et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090136082 Zandifar et al. May 2009 A1
20090158318 Levy Jun 2009 A1
20090172405 Shiomi et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090175594 Ann et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090177674 Yoshida Jul 2009 A1
20090208008 Lubin Aug 2009 A1
20090262932 Petrovic Oct 2009 A1
20090268942 Price Oct 2009 A1
20090319639 Gao et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090326961 Petrovic et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100011217 Tachibana et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100023489 Miyata et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100034513 Nakano et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100069151 Suchocki Mar 2010 A1
20100111355 Petrovic et al. May 2010 A1
20100115267 Guo et al. May 2010 A1
20100121608 Tian et al. May 2010 A1
20100146286 Petrovic et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100159425 Hamlin Jun 2010 A1
20100162352 Haga et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100214307 Lee et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100226525 Levy et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100228632 Rodriguez Sep 2010 A1
20100228857 Petrovic et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100287579 Petrovic et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100287609 Gonzalez et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100332723 Lin et al. Dec 2010 A1
20110016172 Shah Jan 2011 A1
20110068898 Petrovic et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110091066 Alattar Apr 2011 A1
20110103444 Baum et al. May 2011 A1
20110123063 Delp et al. May 2011 A1
20110173210 Ahn et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110185179 Swaminathan et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110194727 Guo et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110202687 Glitsch et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110202844 Davidson et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110209191 Shah Aug 2011 A1
20110909191 Shah Aug 2011
20110214044 Davis et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110214143 Rits et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110216936 Reed et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110219229 Cholas et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110225427 Wood et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110235908 Ke et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110255690 Kocher et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110261667 Ren et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110286625 Petrovic et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110293090 Ayaki et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110311056 Winograd Dec 2011 A1
20110320627 Landow et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120017091 Petrovic et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120023595 Speare et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120026393 Petrovic et al. Feb 2012 A1
20120072729 Winograd et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120072730 Winograd et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120072731 Winograd et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120084870 Petrovic Apr 2012 A1
20120102304 Brave Apr 2012 A1
20120122429 Wood et al. May 2012 A1
20120129547 Andrews, III et al. May 2012 A1
20120130719 Petrovic et al. May 2012 A1
20120203556 Villette et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120203734 Spivack et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120216236 Robinson et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120265735 McMillan et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120272012 Aronovich et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120272327 Shin et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120300975 Chalamala et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120300977 Petrovic et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120304206 Roberts et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120308071 Ramsdell et al. Dec 2012 A1
20130007462 Petrovic et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130011006 Petrovic et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130031579 Klappert Jan 2013 A1
20130060837 Chakraborty et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130073065 Chen et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130108101 Petrovic et al. May 2013 A1
20130114847 Petrovic et al. May 2013 A1
20130114848 Petrovic et al. May 2013 A1
20130117570 Petrovic et al. May 2013 A1
20130117571 Petrovic et al. May 2013 A1
20130129303 Lee et al. May 2013 A1
20130132727 Petrovic May 2013 A1
20130142382 Petrovic et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130151855 Petrovic et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130151856 Petrovic et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130152210 Petrovic et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130283402 Petrovic Oct 2013 A1
20130339029 Petrovic et al. Dec 2013 A1
20140029786 Winograd Jan 2014 A1
20140067950 Winograd Mar 2014 A1
20140071342 Winograd et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140074855 Zhao et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140075465 Petrovic et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140075466 Zhao Mar 2014 A1
20140075469 Zhao Mar 2014 A1
20140229963 Petrovic et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140237628 Petrovic Aug 2014 A1
20140267907 Downes et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140270337 Zhao et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140270338 Zhao et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140279296 Petrovic et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140279549 Petrovic et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140325550 Winograd et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140325673 Petrovic Oct 2014 A1
20140355817 Wong et al. Dec 2014 A1
20140376723 Petrovic Dec 2014 A1
20150016228 Petrovic et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150016663 Tehranchi et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150036873 Petrovic et al. Feb 2015 A1
20150121534 Zhao et al. Apr 2015 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (117)
Number Date Country
2276638 Jan 2000 CA
1447269 Oct 2003 CN
1556987 Dec 2004 CN
101001354 Jul 2007 CN
282734 Sep 1988 EP
372601 Jun 1990 EP
581317 Feb 1994 EP
1137250 Sep 2001 EP
2166725 Mar 2010 EP
2605485 Jun 2013 EP
2653964 Oct 2013 EP
2782337 Sep 2014 EP
2260246 Apr 1993 GB
2292506 Feb 1996 GB
2358313 Jul 2001 GB
2363027 Dec 2001 GB
10-150548 Jun 1998 JP
11-086435 Mar 1999 JP
11-284516 Oct 1999 JP
11-346302 Dec 1999 JP
2000-069273 Mar 2000 JP
2000083159 Mar 2000 JP
2000-174628 Jun 2000 JP
2000163870 Jun 2000 JP
2000216981 Aug 2000 JP
2001022366 Jan 2001 JP
2001-119555 Apr 2001 JP
2001175270 Jun 2001 JP
2001-188549 Jul 2001 JP
2001-216763 Aug 2001 JP
2001-218006 Aug 2001 JP
2001245132 Sep 2001 JP
2001257865 Sep 2001 JP
2001-312570 Nov 2001 JP
2001-527660 Dec 2001 JP
2001339700 Dec 2001 JP
2002-010057 Jan 2002 JP
2002-024095 Jan 2002 JP
2002-027223 Jan 2002 JP
2002-091465 Mar 2002 JP
2002091712 Mar 2002 JP
2002100116 Apr 2002 JP
2002125205 Apr 2002 JP
2002135557 May 2002 JP
2002-165191 Jun 2002 JP
2002176614 Jun 2002 JP
2002-519916 Jul 2002 JP
2002-232693 Aug 2002 JP
2002232412 Aug 2002 JP
2002319924 Oct 2002 JP
2002354232 Dec 2002 JP
2003-008873 Jan 2003 JP
2003-039770 Feb 2003 JP
2003-091927 Mar 2003 JP
2003134461 May 2003 JP
2003-230095 Aug 2003 JP
2003-244419 Aug 2003 JP
2003-283802 Oct 2003 JP
2003316556 Nov 2003 JP
2003348324 Dec 2003 JP
2004-023786 Jan 2004 JP
2004070606 Mar 2004 JP
2004-163855 Jun 2004 JP
2004173237 Jun 2004 JP
2004-193843 Jul 2004 JP
2004194233 Jul 2004 JP
2004-328747 Nov 2004 JP
2005051733 Feb 2005 JP
2005-094107 Apr 2005 JP
2005525600 Aug 2005 JP
20080539669 Nov 2008 JP
20100272920 Dec 2010 JP
5283732 Jul 2013 JP
1020080087047 Sep 2008 KR
20100009384 Jan 2010 KR
1020120128149 Nov 2012 KR
94-10771 May 1994 WO
95-14289 May 1995 WO
97-09797 Mar 1997 WO
97-33391 Sep 1997 WO
98-53565 Nov 1998 WO
99-03340 Jan 1999 WO
99-39344 May 1999 WO
99-45706 Oct 1999 WO
99-62022 Dec 1999 WO
00-00969 Jan 2000 WO
00-13136 Mar 2000 WO
00-56059 Sep 2000 WO
01-54035 Jul 2001 WO
0150665 Jul 2001 WO
01-55889 Aug 2001 WO
0197128 Dec 2001 WO
0213138 Feb 2002 WO
0219589 Mar 2002 WO
0223883 Mar 2002 WO
0249363 Jun 2002 WO
02095727 Nov 2002 WO
2003052598 Jun 2003 WO
03102947 Dec 2003 WO
2005017827 Feb 2005 WO
2005-027501 Mar 2005 WO
2005038778 Apr 2005 WO
2006051043 May 2006 WO
2006116394 Nov 2006 WO
2009031082 Mar 2009 WO
2010073236 Jul 2010 WO
2010135687 Nov 2010 WO
2011116309 Sep 2011 WO
2013067439 May 2013 WO
2013090462 Jun 2013 WO
2013090466 Jun 2013 WO
2013090467 Jun 2013 WO
2013163921 Nov 2013 WO
2014144101 Sep 2014 WO
2014153199 Sep 2014 WO
2014160324 Oct 2014 WO
2015013419 Jan 2015 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (131)
Entry
Wang, Honggang. “Communication-resource-aware adaptive watermarking for multimedia authentication in wireless multimedia sensor networks.” The Journal of Supercomputing 64, No. 3 (Jun. 1, 2013): 883-897.
Yeung, M. M., et al., “An invisible watermarking technique for image verification,” Image Processing, International Conference Proceedings, 2:680-683, Oct. 26-29, 1997.
Zhao, J., “A WWW service to embed and prove digital copyright watermarks,” Proc. European Conf. on Multimedia Applications, Services and Techniques (ECMAST96), May 1996 (15 pages).
Zhao, J., “Applying digital watermarking techniques to online multimedia commerce,” Proc. Int. Conf. on Imaging Science, Systems and Applications (CISSA'97), Jun./Jul. 1997 (7 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Sep. 26, 2008 for International Application No. PCT/US2007/016812, filed Jul. 25, 2007 (6 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 18, 2013 for International Application No. PCT/US2012/063431, filed Nov. 2, 2012 (10 pages).
Jacobsmeyer, J., et al., “Introduction to error-control coding,” Pericle Communications Company, 2004 (16 pages).
Kalker, T., et al., “A security risk for publicly available watermark detectors,” Proc. Benelux Info. Theory Symp., Veldhoven, The Netherlands, May 1998 (7 pages).
Kalker, T., et al., “System issues in digital image and video watermarking for copy protection,” Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Multimedia Computing and Systems, pp. 562-567, Jun. 1999.
Kang, X., et al., “A DWT-DFT composite watermarking scheme robust to both affine transform and JPEG; compression,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 8(13):776-786 Aug. 2003.
Kim, T.Y., et al., “An asymmetric watermarking system with many embedding watermarks corresponding to one detection watermark,” IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 3(11):375-377, Mar. 2004.
Kirovski, D., et al., “Multimedia content screening using a dual watermarking and fingerprinting system,” Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference, pp. 372-381, 2002.
Kirovski, D., et al., “Randomizing the replacement attack,” ICASSP, pp. 381-384, 2004.
Kirovski, D., et al., “Robust spread-spectrum audio watermarking,” IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 3:1345-1348, 2001.
Kirovski, D., et al., “Multimedia content; screening using a dual watermarking and fingerprinting system,” Multimedia '02 Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference on Multimedia, 2002 (11 pages).
Kocher, P., et al., “Self-Protecting Digital Content: A Technical Report from the CRI Content Security Research Initiative,” Cryptography Research, Inc. (CRI), 2002-2003 (14 pages).
Kutter, M., et al., “The watermark copy attack,” Proc. of the SPIE: Security and Watermarking of Multimedia Content II, 3971:1-10, Jan. 2000.
Kuznetsov, A.V., et al., “An error correcting scheme for defective memory,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, 6(4):712-718, Nov. 1978 (7 pages).
Lacy, J., et al., “Intellectual property protection systems and digital watermarking,” Proceedings: Information Hiding, Second International Workshop, Portland, Oregon, pp. 158-168, 1998.
Lin, E.T., et al., “Detection of image alterations using semi-fragile watermarks,” Proceedings of the SPIE International Conference on Security and Watermarking of Multimedia Contents II, Jan. 2000 (12 pages).
Lin, P.L., et al., “Robust transparent image watermarking system with spatial mechanisms,” The Journal of Systems and Software, 50:107-116, Feb. 2000.
Lotspeich, J., “The Advanced Access Content System's Use of Digital Watermarking,” MCPS '06, Oct. 28, 2006, pp. 19-21.
Lu, C.S., et al., “Oblivious cocktail watermarking by sparse code shrinkage: A regional-and global-based scheme,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 4(2):209-224, Dec. 2000.
Maehara, F., et al., “A proposal of multimedial home education terminal system based on flash-squeak OS,” Technical report of the institute of image information and television engineers, 28(43):Jul. 21-24, 2004.
Mason, A. J., et al., “User requirements for watermarking in broadcast applications,” IEEE Conference Publication, International Broadcasting Convention (BC 2000), Amsterdam, Sep. 8-12, 2000 (7 pages).
Mintzer, F., et al., “If one watermark is good, are more better?,” Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, ICASSP, 4:2067-2069, Mar. 1999.
Mobasseri, B.G., et al. “Content authentication and tamper detection in digital video,” Image Processing Proceedings, International Conference, 1:458-461, 2000.
Moulin, P., et al., “Detection-theoretic analysis of desynchronization attacks in watermarking, ” Technical Report MSR-TR-2002-24, Microsoft Corporation, Mar. 2002.
Muranoi, R., et al., “Video retrieval method using shotID for copyright protection systems,” Proc. SPIE Multimedia Storage and Archiving Systems III, 3527:245-252, Nov. 1998.
Nikolaidis, N., et al., “Watermark detection: benchmarking perspectives,” 2002 IEEE Conference on Multimedia and Expo, 2002 (4 pages).
Office Action dated Jul. 21, 2011 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2008-508985 (6 pages).
Office Action dated Mar. 16, 2012 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2008-508985 (8 pages).
Office Action dated Mar. 18, 2011 for European Patent Application No. 03774648.4 (6 pages).
Office Action dated May 8, 2012 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2009-522802 (4 pages).
Office Action dated Nov. 26, 2012 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-114667 (8 pages).
Office Action dated May 1, 2013 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-114667 (6 pages).
Office Action dated Nov. 28, 2012 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2011-114666 (8 pages).
Park, J.H., et al., “Robust and fragile watermarking techniques for documents using bidirectional diagonal profiles,” Information and Communications Security: Third International Conference, Xian, China, Nov. 2001, pp. 483-494.
Perez-Gonzalez, F., et al., “Approaching the capacity limit in image watermarking a perspective on coding techniques for data hiding applications,” Signal Processing, 6(81):1215-1238 Jun. 2001.
Petitcolas, F., et al., “The blind pattern matching attack on watermark systems,” IEEE Trans. Signal Processing, Apr. 2003 (4 pages).
Petitcolas, F.A.P., et al., “Attacks on copyright marking systems,” Second Workshop on Information Hiding, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Portland, Oregon, pp. 218-238, Apr. 1998.
Philips Research Liquid Audio Fraunhofer Institute, “Digital Audio Screening Technology for Phased Rollout,” Version 1.00, May 1999 (38 pages).
Pytlak, J.,“Anti-piracy coding,” URL: http://www.tele.com/pipermail/tig/2003-November/003842.html; Nov. 2003 (2 pages).
RSA Laboratories, “Frequently asked questions about today's cryptography,” Version 4.1, May 2000 (37 pages).
Schneier, B., “Applied cryptography, second edition: protocols, algorithms and source code in C,” Oct. 1995 (10 pages).
Seok, J., et al., “A novel audio watermarking algorithm for copyright protection of digital audio,” ETRI Journal, 24 (3):181-189, Jun. 2002.
Shih, F.Y., et al., “Combinational, image watermarking in the spatial and frequency domains,” Pattern Recognition, 36:696-975, May 2002.
Solanki, K., et al., “Robust image-adaptive data hiding: modeling, source coding and channel coding”, 41st Allerton Conference on Communications, Control and Computing, Oct. 2003 (10 pages).
Steinebach, M., et al., “StirMark benchmark: audio watermarking attacks,” International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing (ITCC 2001), Las Vegas, Nevada, Apr. 2001 (6 pages).
Tanaka, K., et al., “Secret transmission method of character data in motion picture communication,” SPIE Visual Communications and Image Processing '91, 1605:646-649, 1991.
Tsai, M.J., et al., “Wavelet packet and adaptive spatial transformation of watermark for digital image authentication,” IEEE Image Processing, 2000 International Conference, 1:450-453, 2000 (4 pages).
Verance Corporation, “Confirmedia,” PowerPoint presentation made to National Association of Broadcasters; Apr. 24, 2001 (40 pages).
Wolfgang, R., et al., “Perceptual watermarks for digital images and video,” Proceedings of the IEEE, 87 (7):1108-1126, Jul. 1999.
Xu, C., et al., “Applications of digital watermarking technology in audio signals,” Journal of Audio Eng. Soc., 10 (47):805-812, Oct. 1999.
“Advanced Access Content System (AACS), Pre-recorded Video Book,” Revision 0.951, Sep. 2009 (86 pages).
“Content Protection—Self Protecting Digital Content,” http://www.cryptography.com/technology/spdc/index.html, May 2010 (1 page).
“Microsoft response to CfP for technology solutions to screen digital audio content for LCM acceptance,” Microsoft Corporation, May 23, 1999 (9 pages).
“Task AC122—copy protection for distribution services,” http://acad.bg/WISE/english/rd/partners/acts/areal/ac122-t.html, Jul. 1, 1997 (2 pages).
Adelsbach, A., et al., “Proving Ownership of Digital Content,” Proc. 3rd Int. Workshop on Information Hiding, 1768:117-133, Sep. 1999.
Aggarwal, A., et al., “Multi-Layer Grid Embeddings,” Foundations of Computer Science, 26th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 85:186-196, Oct. 1985.
Aris Technologies, Inc. “Audio Watermarking System to Screen Digital Audio Content for LCM Acceptance,” May 1999 (17 pages).
Bangaleea, R., et al., “Performance improvement of spread spectrum spatial-domain watermarking scheme through diversity and attack characterisation,” IEEE Africon, pp. 293-298, 2002.
Barreto, P.S.L.M., et al. “Toward Secure Public-Key Blockwise Fragile Authentication Watermarking,” IEEE Proceedings Vision, Image, and Signal Processing, 149(2):57-62, Apr. 2002.
Boney, L., et al., “Digital Watermarks for Audio Signals,” Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Univ. of Minnesota, Mar. 1996 (4 pages).
Cappellini, V., et al. “Robust Frame-based Watermarking for Digital Video,” Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, Sep. 2001 (5 pages).
Caronni, G., “Assuring Ownership Rights for Digital Images,” Proceedings of reliable IT systems VIS 95, Vieweg Publishing Company, Germany, 1995 (10 pages).
Chen, B. et al., “Quantization index modulation: a class of provably good methods for digital watermarking and information embedding,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 47(4):1423-1443 May 2001.
Chou, J., et al., “A Robust Blind Watermarking Scheme based on Distributed Source Coding Principles,” Multimedia! 2000 Proceedings of the eighth ACM international conference on multimedia, Los Angeles, California, 2000 (8 pages).
Chou, J., et al., “A Robust Optimization Solution to the Data Hiding Problem using Distributed Source Coding Principles,” Pro. SPIE, 3971, San Jose, California, Jan. 2000 (10 pages).
Cinea, Inc., “Forensic watermarking deterring video piracy,” 2004, (9 pages). [http://www.cinea.com/whitepapers/forensic—watermarking.pdf].
Costa, M., “Writing on Dirty Paper,” IEEE Trans. on Info. Theory, 29(3):439-441, May 1983.
Cox, I. J., et al., “Some general methods for tampering with watermarks,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 16(4): 587-593, May 1998.
Coxford, A., et al., “Advanced Mathematics: A Preparation for Calculus, Second Edition,” Harcourt Brace Jovanovish, Inc., 1978 (14 pages).
Das, et al., “Distributed Priority Queues on Hybercube Architectures,” IEEE, 1996, pp. 620-627.
Davidson, M.F., “Music File Filter,” Sony Music, New York, May 23, 1999 (2 pages).
Digimarc Corporation, “Digimarc Watermarking Guide,” 1999 (22 pages).
Dittmann, J., “Combining digital watermarks and collusion secure fingerprints for customer copy monitoring,” Proc. IEEE Seminar on Secure Images and Image Authentication, Apr. 2000 (6 pages).
Dittmann, J., et al., “Combining digital watermarks and collusion secure fingerprints for digital images,” Proc. SPIE 3657:171-182, Jan. 1999 (12 pages).
Epp, L.W., et al., “Generalized scattering matrices for unit cell characterization of grid amplifiers and device de-embedding,” IEEE, 2:1288-1291, Jun. 1995.
European Search Report dated Apr. 12, 2012 for European Patent Application No. 07836262.1 filed Jul. 25, 2007 (12 pages).
European Search Report dated Jul. 3, 2012 for European Patent Application No. 12150742.0, filed Oct. 7, 2003 (5 pages).
European Search Report dated Nov. 10, 2010 for European Patent Application No. 03774648.4, filed Oct. 7, 2003 (5 pages).
European Search Report dated Oct. 24, 2012 for European Patent Application No. 06758537.2, filed Apr. 21, 2006 (6 pages).
European Search Report dated Oct. 31, 2012 for European Patent Application No. 06758577.8, filed Apr. 25, 2006 (6 pages).
European Search Report dated Nov. 8, 2012 for European Patent Application No. 06785709.4, filed Jun. 27, 2006 (5 pages).
Furon, T., et al., “An asymmetric watermarking method,” IEEE Trans. Signal Processing, 4(51):981-995, Apr. 2003.
Guth H J. et al., “Error-and collusion-secure fingerprinting for digital data,” Proc. 3rd Int. Workshop on Information Hiding, LNCS 1768:134-145, Sep./Oct. 1999.
Hartung, F., et al., “Digital watermarking of MPEG-2 coded video in the bitstream domain,” Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 4:2621-2624, Apr. 1997.
Hartung, F., et al., “Watermarking of MPEG-2 encoded video without decoding and re-coding,” Proc. SPIE Multimedia Computing and Networking 97, 3020:264-274, Feb. 1997.
Hartung, F., et al., “Watermarking of uncompressed and compressed video,” Signal Processing, 3(66):283-301, May 1998.
Heegard, C., et al., “On the capacity of computer memory with defects,” IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, 5(IT-29):731-739, Sep. 1983.
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Apr. 8, 2013 for International Application No. PCT/US2012/069306, filed Dec. 12, 2012 (12 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 25, 2013 for International Application No. PCT/US2012/069302, filed Dec. 12, 2012 (22 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Apr. 24, 2012 for International Application No. PCT/US2011/051857, filed Sep. 15, 2011 (9 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 14, 1998 for International Application No. PCT/US1998/009587, filed May 12, 1998 (3 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 22, 2007 for International Application No. PCT/US2006/031267, filed Aug. 9, 2006 (2 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Feb. 14, 2002 for International Application No. PCT/US2001/026505, filed Aug. 27, 2001 (2 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Feb. 28, 2013 for International Application No. PCT/US2012/066138, filed Nov. 20, 2012 (11 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jan. 4, 2008 for International Application No. PCT/US2006/015615, filed Apr. 25, 2006 (5 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 14, 2013 for International Application No. PCT/US2012/069308, filed Dec. 12, 2012 (10 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 28, 2012 for International Application No. PCT/US2011/051855, filed Sep. 15, 2011 (8 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated May 13, 2008 for International Application No. PCT/US2006/025090, filed Jun. 27, 2006 (2 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated May 19, 2004 for International Application No. PCT/US2003/031816, filed Apr. 29, 2004 (3 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated May 29, 2008 for International Application No. PCT/US2006/015410, filed Apr. 21, 2006 (6 pages).
“ATSC-3.0 Automatic Content Recognition Watermarking Solutions,” ATSC Technology Group, Advanced Television Systems Committee, Inc., Jan. 2014 (6 pages).
“Civolution's 2nd screen synchronisation solution wins CSI product of the year 2011 award at IBC,” IBC Press Release, Hall 2—Stand C30, Sep. 2011 (2 pages).
“Red Bee and Civolution develop companion app for FX UK,” http://www.digitaltveurope.net/19981/red-bee-and-civolution-develop-companion-app-for-fx-uk, Jan. 2012 (2 pages).
Baudry, S., et al., “Estimation of geometric distortions in digital watermarking,” IEEE International Conference on Watermarking, (2):885-888, Sep. 2002.
European Search Report dated Oct. 14, 2014 for European Patent Application No. 14173053.1, filed Oct. 7, 2003 (5 pages).
European Search Report dated Apr. 23, 2015 for European Patent Application No. 12846172.0, filed Nov. 2, 2012 (8 pages).
European Search Report dated May 28, 2015 for European Patent Application No. 11825990.2, filed Sep. 15, 2011 (6 pages).
European Search Report dated May 29, 2015 for European Patent Application No. 11825992.8 filed Sep. 15, 2011 (6 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated May 28, 2015 for International Application No. PCT/US2015/020282, filed Mar. 12, 2015 (7 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated May 1, 2015 for International Application No. PCT/US2014/052973, filed Aug. 27, 2014 (16 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Sep. 12, 2014 for International Application No. PCT/US2014/035474, filed Apr. 25, 2014 (17 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Sep. 15, 2014 for International Application No. PCT/US2014/035539, filed Apr. 25, 2014 (16 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 25, 2014 for International Application No. PCT/US2014/029564, filed Mar. 14, 2014 (10 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 25, 2013 for International Application No. PCT/US2014/026322, filed Aug. 25, 2014 (12 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 8, 2014 for International Application No. PCT/US2014/028372, filed Mar. 14, 2014 (18 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Nov. 11, 2014 for International Application No. PCT/US2014/047840, filed Jul. 23, 2014 (15 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Feb. 25, 2015 for International Application No. PCT/US2014/041166, filed Jun. 5, 2014 (10 pages).
Miller, M.L. et al. “Computing the probability of false watermark detection,” Published in the Proceedings of the Workshop on Information Hiding, Dresden, Germany, Sep. 29-Oct. 1, 1999.
Miller, M.L. et al. “Informed embedding: exploiting image and detector information during watermark insertion,” IEEE Conference Publication, Image Processing, (3)1-4, Sep. 2000.
Office Action dated Dec. 29, 2014 for Chinese Patent Application No. 201180051690.8 (14 pages).
Office Action dated Jan. 20, 2014 for Japanese Patent Application No. 2013-036990 (6 pages).
Office Action dated Oct. 30, 2014 for Korean Patent Application No. 10-2013-7009718 (8 pages).
Office Action dated Mar. 30, 2015 for Korean Patent Application No. 10-2014-7015220 (19 pages).
Office Action dated Feb. 3, 2015 for Chinese Patent Application No. 201180051678.7 (27 pages).
Richenaker, G., “Next generation NP solutions and ENUM,” https://www.itu.int/ITU-D/treg/Events/Seminars/2011/Moldova/pdf/Session8—NextGeneration—Solutions.pdf, Neustar Inc., May 2011 (37 pages).
Spangler, T., “Social Science,” http://www.multichannel.com/content/social-science, Sep. 2011 (5 pages).
Wang, X, et al., “Robust correlation of encrypted attack traffic through stepping stones by manipulation of interpacket delays,” Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on computer communications security, Oct. 27-30, 2003, Washington D.C., USA.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20150030200 A1 Jan 2015 US