IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`
`
`Petitioner: Apple Inc.
`
`Attorney Docket No.:
`
` 104677-5008-802
`Customer No. 28120
`
`§
`Inventor: Hulst et al.
`United States Patent No.: 8,118,221 §
`Formerly Application No.: 12/943,872 §
`Issue Date: February 21, 2012
`§
`Filing Date: November 10, 2010
`§
`Former Group Art Unit: 2887
`§
`Former Examiner: Thien M. Le
`§
`
`For: Data Storage and Access Systems
`
`MAIL STOP PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Post Office Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`DECLARATION OF ANTHONY J. WECHSELBERGER IN SUPPORT OF
`APPLE INC.’S PETITION FOR COVERED BUSINESS METHOD
`PATENT REVIEW OF UNITED STATES PATENT NO. 8,118,221
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 321, 37 C.F.R. § 42.304
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Apple Exhibit 1121 Page 00001
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`
`
`Petitioner: Apple Inc.
`
`Attorney Docket No.:
`
` 104677-5008-802
`Customer No. 28120
`
`§
`Inventor: Hulst et al.
`United States Patent No.: 8,118,221 §
`Formerly Application No.: 12/943,872 §
`Issue Date: February 21, 2012
`§
`Filing Date: November 10, 2010
`§
`Former Group Art Unit: 2887
`§
`Former Examiner: Thien M. Le
`§
`
`For: Data Storage and Access Systems
`
`MAIL STOP PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Post Office Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`DECLARATION OF ANTHONY J. WECHSELBERGER IN SUPPORT OF
`APPLE INC.’S PETITION FOR COVERED BUSINESS METHOD
`PATENT REVIEW OF UNITED STATES PATENT NO. 8,118,221
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 321, 37 C.F.R. § 42.304
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Apple Exhibit 1121 Page 00001
`
`
`
`
`I, Anthony J. Wechselberger, declare as follows:
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`I.
`INTRODUCTION
`1. My name is Anthony Wechselberger. I am the President of Entropy
`
`Management Solutions (EMS), a consulting company I founded in 1999. I have been
`
`retained by Apple Inc. to provide assistance regarding U.S. Patent No. 8,118,221 (“the
`
`’221 patent”). Specifically, I have been asked to consider the validity of claims 1, 2,
`
`11-14, and 32 of the ’221 patent (“the challenged claims”). I have personal knowledge
`
`of the facts and opinions set forth in this declaration, and, if called upon to do so, I
`
`would testify competently thereto.
`
`2. My areas of expertise include broadcast and broadband content
`
`distribution networks and communications infrastructures (Internet, broadcast, cable,
`
`satellite and wireless mediums) including one-way and two-way interactive
`
`architectures, computer networks, communications systems technologies and
`
`equipment, various content and information distribution and merchandizing channels,
`
`digital television, digital cinema, interactive media/multimedia systems, Internet
`
`technologies (including but not limited to delivering content via the Internet,
`
`communications standards and protocols), digital rights management (DRM), physical
`
`media and file based and streaming content delivery, and other areas of expertise
`
`relevant to the technologies of this matter. Attached hereto as Appendix A is a true
`
`and correct copy of my Curriculum Vitae describing my background and experience.
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`Page 00002
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`I am currently the President of Entropy Management Solutions
`
`
`
`3.
`
`(“EMS”), a position I have held since I founded the company in 1999. In this
`
`capacity I perform consulting services related to technology and business
`
`development, content management, distribution and merchandizing, systems
`
`engineering and product design in the areas of industrial and consumer broadband
`
`and multimedia technologies and associated commercial systems.
`
`4.
`
`I have forty years of experience working with high technology systems
`
`related to military, commercial, and consumer communication systems and networks.
`
`I have held various design, leadership and executive positions in, for example,
`
`engineering, operations, sales and marketing, and product management at leading
`
`companies in those fields, such as TV/COM International, Inc. (TV/COM) and Oak
`
`Communications, Inc. Over many years I have published and/or presented a number
`
`of articles and papers related to content/information creation,
`
`transmission/distribution and reception/consumption in various media sectors,
`
`including cable, satellite, broadcast/wireless, Internet and digital cinema. Attached as
`
`part of Appendix A is a list of my publications.
`
`5.
`
`I specialize in the areas of digital communications technologies, systems
`
`and networks, including infrastructures, signal processing, network management and
`
`command and control, and information security as used for content management,
`
`merchandizing and delivery. My background includes much experience with
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`Page 00003
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`interactive and client-server technologies, such as those used in broadband and
`
`Internet networks. Network management and command and control refers to the
`
`technical oversight and management of communication systems and equipment
`
`within a distribution system to direct both the transmission equipment (e.g., network
`
`infrastructures, servers, hubs, nodes, head ends and uplinks etc.) and receiving
`
`equipment (e.g., personal computer, television, set top box, handset/mobile device or
`
`other consumer appliance) as to communications, applications and set-up and
`
`operation in order to perform required features and functions.
`
`6.
`
`As a Vice President at Oak Communications (1980s) and Chief
`
`Technology Officer at TV/COM (1990s), I was involved in the development of
`
`terrestrial broadcast, satellite uplink and cable head end industrial equipment for
`
`television transmissions, as well as consumer appliance equipment such as STBs and
`
`other home based or home networked devices. All of these architectures included
`
`computer control systems for network and associated network device command and
`
`control, and for management of content distribution and consumer appliance
`
`functions.
`
`7.
`
`I was involved from the start with the development and evolution of
`
`modern consumer digital audio and video communications systems and technologies.
`
`In 1991, my employer, TV/COM, and I began to participate in the International
`
`Organization for Standardization (ISO) MPEG-2 digital television standards
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`Page 00004
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`initiatives, and, in the following year, in both the both the European Digital Video
`
`Broadcast (DVB) and U.S. Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC) forums
`
`(which were based upon MPEG-2). I was an active participant and contributor to the
`
`first two standard-setting bodies, and was a voting member of the ATSC. As Chief
`
`Technology Officer of TV/COM, I developed a business strategy based on
`
`supporting open international standards for digital television (DTV). In the mid
`
`1990s, as the technologies and standards in support of DTV moved towards
`
`implementation, the dawn of the Internet age arrived. This had a dramatic impact on
`
`the way broadband systems engineers like me began to plan for the future. This is
`
`because the concept of convergence—the melding of traditional broadband
`
`communications systems and equipment, computers and computer networks, and the
`
`telecommunications worlds—was changing the communications infrastructure and
`
`technology landscape. When television distribution went all-digital, the information
`
`of television became simply “data”—and it became possible for the technologies of
`
`digital television, computers and computer networks and the telephony industry
`
`(which was in the midst of its transition to digital infrastructure that began in the
`
`1970s) to coalesce. Support for on-line and Internet services demanded a high
`
`performance two-way data transmission capability, and so broadband network
`
`providers began to upgrade their distribution infrastructures accordingly.
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`Page 00005
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`In conjunction with this convergence, as TV/COM’s Chief Technology
`
`
`
`8.
`
`Officer I directed the expansion of our network products into broadband data
`
`communications generally, from an initial focus on digital television. Networks
`
`became more advanced in order to support real-time interaction between consumers
`
`and information sources within the network. Interactive and on-line applications led
`
`to rapid adoption of client-server information access approaches (typical of the
`
`computer industry) in the products and technologies I worked with for content
`
`delivery and network command and control functions. Starting in the early 1990s the
`
`ubiquitous set top box began to evolve from a minimalist appliance towards its
`
`current status as a communications hub of the consumer’s media room. In this same
`
`time period, the PC had also become a ubiquitous consumer appliance, and with the
`
`Internet age came much innovation in electronic information distribution and
`
`electronic merchandizing—that is, technology related to complementing physical
`
`information media and brick and mortar institutions with all-electronic digital
`
`alternatives. This was an explosive period of so called digital rights management
`
`(“DRM”), which I will discuss in more detail below. I and TV/COM were part of
`
`this evolution until TV/COM was purchased in 1999.
`
`9.
`
`In my consulting work I have continued to work with technologies and
`
`network infrastructures for content distribution and management. My current work
`
`involves both traditional and newly developing architectures and distribution
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`Page 00006
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`channels. As an example of the latter, I am the chief security systems architect on
`
`behalf of the six major Hollywood studios for their “Digital Cinema Initiatives” (DCI)
`
`consortium.1 DCI develops and evolves the specifications for transitioning first run
`
`theatrical movie releases from film to digital for distribution and exhibition display. I
`
`am responsible for all elements of command and control and digital rights
`
`management (DRM) for digital cinema system design and implementation. I also
`
`represent DCI at the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE),
`
`which is developing the set of internationally recognized standards for global adoption
`
`of digital cinema. The migration to all-digital distribution impacts other content
`
`distribution channels such as early window release for hospitality, airplane and
`
`cable/satellite video-on-demand (VOD), as well as newer so-called “over-the-top”
`
`distribution channels based on Internet distribution. I have also been a strategy and
`
`technology consultant to content management and distribution entities in those areas.
`
`10. The technologies of the ’221 patent and its family relate generally to
`
`apparatus, systems and methods to download content over a network from a source
`
`location to a data carrier storage device via an intermediary device called a data access
`
`terminal, after which content on the data carrier can be consumed by a user via a
`
`rendering device. This involves methods and technologies to collect (select or
`
`source), distribute and deliver content to consumers, who interact with supplied
`
`1 See: http://www.dcimovies.com
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`Page 00007
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`information and supporting network infrastructure in real time. My experience with
`
`these types of technologies stretches from the late 1970s until today, inclusive of
`
`similar network architectures, systems and equipment, and associated consumer
`
`appliances.
`
`11. My consulting practice today includes a balance of technology and
`
`systems engineering services and assistance to the legal community as a technology
`
`consultant and/or expert witness. I have been accepted to provide, and have
`
`provided expert testimony in the areas of multimedia technologies and associated
`
`networks as used for content management and delivery on many occasions.
`
`12.
`
`I have a Bachelors degree and a Master’s degree in Electrical
`
`Engineering, conferred by the University of Arizona in 1974 and San Diego State
`
`University in 1979, respectively. I also completed the Executive Program for
`
`Scientists and Engineers at the University of California at San Diego in 1984. I am a
`
`named inventor on two patents, U.S. Patent No. 4,531,020, “Multi-layer Encryption
`
`System for the Broadcast of Encrypted Information,” and U.S. Patent No. 5,113,440,
`
`“Universal Decoder.”
`
`13. A listing of testimony that I have provided in the last five years is
`
`attached hereto as Appendix B. I am being compensated for my time spent in
`
`connection with this case at a flat rate of $325 per hour (plus expenses). I am being
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`Page 00008
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`paid regardless of the facts I know or discover and/or the conclusions or opinions I
`
`reach. I have no personal interest or financial stake in the outcome of this case.
`
`14.
`
`In preparing my opinions I have considered the materials itemized in
`
`Appendix C.
`
`II. THE ’221 PATENT
`15. The ’221 patent, entitled “Data Storage and Access Systems,” issued on
`
`February 21, 2012, to assignee Smartflash Technologies Limited and named inventors
`
`Patrick Racz and Hermen-ard Hulst. The ’221 patent purports to cover “[d]ata
`
`storage and access systems [that] enable downloading and paying for data such as
`
`audio and video data, text, software, games and other types of data.” See, e.g., Ex.
`
`1101 (the ’221 patent) at Abstract. The alleged invention applies classical client-server
`
`models in a multi-stage architecture that revolves around appliances and methods for
`
`loading data into a memory storage device generally referred to as a data carrier. The
`
`user can then access the data subject to certain conditions.
`
`16.
`
`I have analyzed claims 1, 2, 11-14, and 32 of the ’221 patent and
`
`reviewed the File History of the ’221 patent (Ex. 1111).
`
`17. The ’221 patent issued from application number 12/943,872, which was
`
`filed on November 10, 2010. This application issued from a chain of applications
`
`claiming priority to United Kingdom application no. 9925227, filed October 25, 1999.
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`Page 00009
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`18. The Examiner considering the application leading to the ’221 patent
`
`
`
`issued a Restriction Requirement on the originally filed claims on March 22, 2011.
`
`The Examiner stated that the filed claims were drawn to five inventions that are
`
`“related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination.”
`
`(Ex. 1111, 3/22/2011 OA at 3). The Examiner defined Group I as “drawn to a
`
`method for providing data,” Group II as “drawn to a portable data carrier,” Group
`
`III as “drawn to a method for controlling access,” Group IV as “drawn to a reader
`
`terminal and its specifics,” and Group V as “drawn to a computer system for handling
`
`data payment and security procedures.” (Ex. 1111, 3/22/2011 OA at 2).
`
`19. Applicants filed an amendment responsive to the Restriction
`
`Requirement on May 20, 2011. Applicants elected to prosecute the claims designated
`
`as Group IV in the Restriction Requirement (claims 35-65, 73, and 75) and cancelled
`
`the remaining claims (1-34, 66-72, 74, and 76) without traverse. (Ex. 1111, 5/20/2011
`
`Amend. at 9).
`
`20. On July 19, 2011, Applicants filed a Petition to Change Order of Names
`
`of Joint Inventors in the Heading of the Patent Application under 37 CFR 1.182. The
`
`order of the inventors was changed to list Patrick S. Racz first, followed by Hermen-
`
`ard Hulst. (Ex. 1111, 7/19/2011 Petition at 1-2). The Office of Petitions granted the
`
`petition to change the order of the names of the inventors on August 19, 2011. (Ex.
`
`1111, 8/19/2011 Decision on Petition).
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`Page 00010
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`21. The Examiner issued a first non-final office action on July 29, 2011.
`
`
`
`The Examiner rejected application claims 35-55, 57-59, 62, 73, and 75 on the ground
`
`of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting over claims of U.S. Patent
`
`7,334,720. (Ex. 1111, 7/29/2011 OA at 3). The Examiner recited claim 3 of the ’720
`
`patent to reject pending independent claims 35, 73, and 75, and cited to additional
`
`claims of the ’720 patent to reject other pending independent and dependent claims.
`
`(Ex. 1111, 7/29/2011 OA at 3-5). The Examiner rejected application claims 63-65 on
`
`the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting over claims 1 and 3 of
`
`the ’720 patent in view of claims of U.S. Patent 7,942,317. (Ex. 1111, 7/29/2011 OA
`
`at 5-7). The Examiner objected to application claims 56, 60, and 61 as being
`
`dependent upon a rejected base claim. (Ex. 1111, 7/29/2011 OA at 9).
`
`22. On August 16, 2011, Applicants filed a reply to the office action along
`
`with a terminal disclaimer to overcome the double patenting rejection. The Examiner
`
`issued a Notice of Allowance on October 25, 2011. The Examiner stated that “the
`
`prior art fails to disclose a data access terminal comprising the interface, the data
`
`carrier, the processor and the program store for storing the codes in the manner as
`
`recited in claim 35,” and also “fails to disclose the limitations of claims 46, 51, 58, 62,
`
`and 73.” (Ex. 1111, 10/25/2011 Notice at 2). On December 9, 2011, the Examiner
`
`issued a Supplemental Notice of Allowance to correct the dependency of claim 75.
`
`(Ex. 1111, 12/09/2011 Supp. Notice at 2).
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`Page 00011
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`III. ONE OF ORDINARY SKILL
`I understand that the factors considered in determining the ordinary
`
`
`
`23.
`
`level of skill in the art include the level of education and experience of persons
`
`working in the field; the types of problems encountered in the field; and the
`
`sophistication of the technology.
`
`24.
`
`In my opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art relating to the
`
`technology of the asserted patents at the time at which the patents were filed—the
`
`field of “data storage and access systems,” including the use of a “portable data carrier
`
`for storing and paying for data and to computer systems for providing access to data
`
`to be stored” (see, e.g.¸ Ex. 1101, the ’221 patent at 1:20-23)—would have had at least
`
`a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering, computer science or a
`
`telecommunications related field, and at least three years of industry experience that
`
`included client-server data/information distribution and management architectures.
`
`25. As I described in the discussion of my background beginning at
`
`paragraph 3 above, I have had decades of experience with computer based content/
`
`information distribution networks, which included mixtures of consumer and
`
`industrial equipment. As of October 25, 1999, I would have qualified as one of skill
`
`in art according to the above definition.
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`Page 00012
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`IV. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`For the purposes of this declaration, I have been asked to assume
`
`
`
`26.
`
`constructions for certain claim terms as presented in the following table. For all
`
`remaining claim terms, I have assumed their plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`Claim Term
`
`Claim Construction
`
`“payment data”
`(claims 1, 2, 11-14, and 32)
`
`“data representing payment made for
`requested content data” and is distinct
`from “access control data.”
`
`V.
`STATE OF THE ART
`27. By Smartflash’s claimed priority date of October 25, 1999, the elements
`
`of the challenged claims were all well-known in the art, and their combination as
`
`claimed was also well-known or at minimum obvious to a person of ordinary skill.2
`
`28. Years before the October 25, 1999 priority date claimed by Smartflash,
`
`the sale and distribution of digital products and content protection for digital products
`
`were well-known. Further, the concept of providing access to data in exchange for
`
`payment as well known.
`
`
`2 At various points in this declaration I refer to my opinions about the knowledge or
`
`understanding of a person of ordinary skill in the art. All of these opinions should be
`
`understood to refer to the knowledge or understanding of a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art as of October 25, 1999, unless specifically noted otherwise.
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`Page 00013
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`For example, U.S. Patent No. 4,999,806, entitled “Software Distribution
`
`
`
`29.
`
`System,” filed on September 4, 1987 and issued on March 12, 1991, to Fred Chernow
`
`and Randy J. Peterson (“the Chernow patent”), discloses a system and method for the
`
`sale and distribution of digital data by telephone, including content protection for the
`
`purchased content. See, e.g., Ex. 1106, the Chernow Patent at Abstract “A central
`
`station distributes software by telephone. The central station accepts credit card
`
`information, transmits an acceptance code to a caller and then terminates the call.
`
`After verifying the credit card information, the station calls the purchaser back and
`
`continues with the transaction only after receiving the acceptance code.”); col. 1, ln.
`
`67- col. 2, ln. 9 (“It is an object of this invention to provide a means for selling and
`
`distributing protected software using standard telephone lines for transferring the
`
`software from the seller to the purchaser. Another object of this invention is to
`
`permit the purchaser to rent the protected software for a period of time after which it
`
`will self destruct. Another object of this invention is to permit the purchaser to rent
`
`the protected software for a specific number of runs which would be useful, e.g., if the
`
`software were a game.”).
`
`30. U.S. Patent No. 4, 878, 245, entitled “Control and Metering System for
`
`Pay Television Over a Cable Network,” filed January 22, 1987 and issued October 31,
`
`1989, to Graham C. Bradley et al. (“the Bradley patent”), discloses a system for pay
`
`television. See, e.g., Ex. 1107, the Bradley patent, at Abstract, col. 4 lns. 27-35 (“This
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`Page 00014
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`apparatus can permit programming to be sold to the subscriber by the month, by the
`
`program, and by the hour of any portion thereof. Payment by the month is known as
`
`Subscription Television. Payment by the program is known as Pay-per-View.
`
`Payment by viewing time is known as Pay-for-Use (PFU) television. It also permits
`
`the Cable Operator to share revenues with independent programming suppliers
`
`sharing some portion of the cable TV distribution system.”).
`
`31. U.S. Patent No. 5,675,734, entitled “Method for Transmitting a Desired
`
`Digital Video or Audio Signal,” filed September 18, 1990 and issued March 2, 1993, to
`
`Arthur R. Hair (“the Hair patent”), discloses a method for electronic sales of digital
`
`audio and digital video. See, e.g., Ex. 1105, the Hair patent, at Abstract (“A method for
`
`transferring desired digital video of digital audio signals”), col. 1, lns. 15-20 (“The
`
`present invention is related to a system and associated method for the electronic sales
`
`and distribution of digital audio or digital video signals, and more particularly, to a
`
`system and method which a user may purchase and receive digital audio or digital
`
`video signals from any location which the user has access to telecommunications
`
`lines.”).
`
`32.
`
`In addition, U.S. Patent No. 5,103,392, entitled “System for Storing
`
`History of Use of Programs Including User Credit Data and Having Access by the
`
`Proprietor,” filed on December 5, 1990 and issued on April 7, 1991, to Ryoichi Mori
`
`and assigned to Fujitsu Limited (“the Mori patent”), discloses a method for storing
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`Page 00015
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`information about customer use so that a customer can be charged according to that
`
`use and in accordance with that customer’s credit. See, e.g., Ex. 1112, the Mori Patent
`
`at col. 1, ln. 64 - col. 2, ln. 17 (“In accordance with a fundamental aspect of the
`
`present invention, there is provided a system for storing data on the history of use of
`
`programs, including a data processing apparatus used by a user and program storage
`
`means for storing a program acquired from a proprietor and program-specific data.
`
`The data processing apparatus includes user-specific credit data storage means for
`
`storing data identifying the user of the data processing apparatus and indicating credit
`
`for payment capacity, use time length, or the like of the user of the data processing
`
`apparatus. Also included is use decision means for determining permission to use the
`
`program on the data processing apparatus on the basis of program-specific data
`
`supplied from the program storage means or user-specific credit data supplied from
`
`the user-specific credit data storage means, the use decision means delivering either an
`
`affirmative or negative signal corresponding to results of the decision. Also included
`
`is program use history storage means connected to the use decision means for storing
`
`program use history data derived from the program-specific data or the user-specific
`
`credit data.”).
`
`33.
`
`Further, European Patent Application, Publication No. EP0809221A2,
`
`entitled “Virtual vending system and method for managing the distribution, licensing
`
`and rental of electronic data,” listing applicant Sun Microsystems, Inc. and inventors
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`Page 00016
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`Andrew A. Poggio and Leo A. Hejza, and published on November 26, 1997 (“the
`
`Poggio patent application”), likewise discloses a content distribution system that
`
`provides for secure transactions and content protection. See, e.g., Ex. 1116, the Poggio
`
`patent application, at Abstract (“A virtual vending machine manages a comprehensive
`
`vending service for the distribution of licensed electronic data (i.e., products) over a
`
`distributed computer system. . . . The virtual vending machine distributes licenses for
`
`the electronic data for the complete product or for components thereof and for a
`
`variety of time frames, including permanent licenses and rental period licenses. The
`
`virtual vending machine provides client computers with the capability to obtain
`
`information regarding the available products and the associated license fees and rental
`
`periods, to receive the product upon receipt of a corresponding electronic payment,
`
`and to reload the product during the term of the license.”). The Poggio patent
`
`application will be discussed in more detail below and in Appendix D, and that
`
`discussion is incorporated here by reference.
`
`34.
`
`Similarly, a 1997 IEEE article, “The Secure Distribution of Digital
`
`Contents,” by Eberhard von Faber, Robert Hammelrath, and Franz-Peter Heider
`
`(“the von Faber article”), recognized in its Introduction that “Electronic commerce
`
`systems dealing with the distribution of digital contents like software or multimedia
`
`data have to couple the use of the provided digital goods with a prior payment for the
`
`goods in a way which cannot be bypassed.” See Ex. 1120, the von Faber article at 1.
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`Page 00017
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`The von Faber article sets forth a proposal for a system in which encrypted contents
`
`are distributed and customers purchase keys required to utilize that encrypted content.
`
`See, e.g., Ex. 1120, the von Faber article at 1 (“The basic idea of one possible solution
`
`is to distribute the contents in encrypted form, and to have the customer pay for the
`
`key which he needs to transform the encrypted content in an usable form. The
`
`security problem can in this way be transformed into a problem of key distribution.”);
`
`(“The Content Provider provides digital contents in encrypted form being distributed
`
`by the Content Distributor. The Key Management System holds the keys for the
`
`contents to be decrypted. The Authorisation System permits the distribution of the
`
`appropriate key after settling of the fees payable by the Customer, who will enjoy the
`
`decrypted digital contents. The role of the Content Distributor is not essential for the
`
`subsequent discussion but, of course, for the business to take place.”); see also Ex.
`
`1120, the von Faber article Fig. 1.
`
`35. The von Faber article recognizes that its system could be used for
`
`different content distribution methods and different payment methods known in the
`
`art. See, e.g., Ex. 1120, the von Faber article, at 22 (“The outlined system has the
`
`following characteristics: Different methods can be used to distribute the encrypted
`
`contents (standard techniques). This includes broadcasting, point-to-point
`
`networking, as well as offering disks. Different electronic payment methods can be
`
`integrated independent from the number of protocol steps needed. This includes
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`Page 00018
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`credit card based systems as well as electronic purses. This flexibility leads to the fact
`
`that totally different authorisation methods can be integrated.”).
`
`36.
`
`Further, the von Faber article recognized that the issue of payment
`
`distribution to content providers, such as royalties, would also need to be addressed.
`
`See, e.g., Ex. 1120, the von Faber article, at 22 (“The system will support re-selling in a
`
`simple way. Re-sellers can integrate other manufacturer’s products into own packages
`
`without the need of signing any extra contract. The system automatically divides the
`
`package price (payments) and guarantees that the money is transferred to each
`
`Content Provider whose product has been integrated into the package.”).
`
`37. U.S. Patent No. 5,530,235, entitled “Interactive Contents Revealing
`
`Storage Device,” filed February 16, 1995 and issued June 25, 1996 to Mark J. Stefik et
`
`al., and assigned to Xerox Corporation (“the ’235 Stefik patent”), which incorporates
`
`by reference U.S. Patent No. 5,629,980, entitled “System for Controlling the
`
`Distribution and Use of Digital Works,” filed November 23, 1994 and issued May 13,
`
`1997 to Mark J. Stefik and Michalene M. Casey, and assigned to Xerox Corporation
`
`(“the ’980 Stefik patent”). See Ex. 1113, the ’235 Stefik patent, at col. 2, lns. 48-53
`
`(“The currently preferred embodiment of a DocuCard is an instance of a repository,
`
`as defined in co-pending application entitled ‘System for Controlling the Distribution
`
`and Use of Digital Works,’ serial number not yet assigned, which is assigned to the
`
`assignee of the present invention and which is herein incorporated by reference.”). I
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`Page 00019
`
`
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review
`United States Patent No. 8,118,221
`
`will accordingly refer collectively to the ’235 Stefik patent and the ’980 Stefik patent it
`
`incorporates as “the Stefik patent.”3
`
`38. The Stefik patent discloses “[a] Document Card (DocuCard) for storing
`
`documents and which is content revealing. The DocuCard is a transportable unit
`
`having a nonvolatile storage means for storing information in a digital form, a control
`
`processor for processing user initiated functions; an I/O port for interfacing to
`
`external devices for reading and writing digital information, and a user interface for
`
`allowing a user to directly interact with the DocuCard.” See Ex. 1113, ’235 Stefik
`
`patent, at Abstract; see also, e.g., Ex. 1114, the ’980 Stefik patent, at Abstract (“Digital
`
`work playback devices, coupled to the repository containing the work, are used to
`
`play, display or print the work.”). In addition, the Stefik patent discloses a broader
`
`system within which the DocuCard is used: “A system for controlling use and
`
`distribution of digital works. In the present invention, the owner of a digital work
`
`attaches usage rights to that work.” See Ex. 1113, the ’235 Stefik patent, at Abstract.
`
`The Stefik patent also discloses protecting content with “usage rights.” See, e.g., Ex.
`
`1114, the ’980 Stefik patent, at Abstract (“Usage rights are granted by the ‘owner’ of a
`
`3 Because the ’235 Stefik patent incorporates by reference the ’980 Stefik patent, these
`
`should be considered a single reference. For clarity to citations, I will refer to these
`
`collectively as “the Stefik patent” as provided above, but cite to them as separate
`
`patents when providing citations to each disclosure herein and
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
