throbber
\/I'eu.J0la.,f:a,’ X0)
`
`J-bhjon) /950.
`
`\[lEWDAT
` AND
`VlDEO‘l'EX'l',
`1980-81 ::
` A
`Worldwide
` Report
`
`Transcript of viewdata ’80,
`first world conference A
`on viewdata, videotex, and teletext
`
`Knowledge Industry Publications, Inc.
`White Plains, New York
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibitzm
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 1
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 1
`
`

`
`Viewdata and Videotext, 1980-81: A Worldwide Report
`
`Transcript of Viewdata ’80, first world conference on Viewdata, videotex and teletext, London,
`March 26-28, 1980
`
`ISBN 0-914236-77-6
`
`LC: 80—l8234
`
`This title is being published simultaneously in the United Kingdom under the title: Videotex, Viewdata
`& Teletext
`
`Copyright © 1980 by Online Conferences Ltd.
`
`Published by Knowledge Industry Publications, Inc. in conjunction with Online Conferences Ltd. No
`part of this book may be reproduced in any form whatsoever without the written permission of the
`publisher, Knowledge Industry Publications, Inc., 2 Corporate Park Drive, White Plains, New ‘York
`10604.
`
`Printed in the United States of America
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 2
`
`I:I.
`
`I
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 2
`
`

`
`iii
`
`Introduction & Preface
`
`The use of theubiquitous TV set as an information display and
`interactive personal electronic communication device will bring
`dramatic changes to 'the way in which we conduct our day—to—day lives.
`The effect will at first be most apparaent in business with the easy
`
`availability of computer-stored information and the ability to send and
`receive mail electronically. The effect will then become apparent in
`
`the home with the TV set gradually enhancing its primary role of
`
`entertainment device to incorporate information acquisition, computer-
`aided education and electronic message transmission.
`
`This book comprises written back-up to the presentations given at
`
`Viewdata '80 — The First World Conference on Viewdata, Videotex and
`Teletext.
`
`To ensure that the preprints are as up-to-date as possible,
`
`the authors
`
`have supplied them to us in camera-ready form which does not allow
`
`for editing and for this reason we would ask for your understanding
`with some of the overseas papers where English is not the author's
`native language.
`In orderato keep the book as up-to—date as possible,
`the papers have been printed in random order.
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 3
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 3
`
`

`
`l85
`
`
`
`THE ROLE OF VIEWDATA IN ELECTRONIC FUNDS TRANSFER
`
`R F PARK
`
`Senior Consultant
`
`Inter-Bank Research Organisation
`
`Summary
`
`Viewdata could enable banks to communicate with their customers in
`
`new ways, and create opportunities for developing new services. Bank
`customers might be given immediate access to their account
`information and shown balance levels or transactions on their
`accounts since their last statement. Banks could use viewdata to
`
`the regular payments they
`keep their customers better informed about
`make on their behalf.
`The response facility might be used for
`sending messages of instruction to banks - to order cheque books or
`statements,
`to transfer funds or to make payments.
`
`Key issues in all viewdata banking services will be security of
`personal identification, data communication and data storage.
`Personalised banking service will almost certainly be based on
`private bank databases, but could use the Prestel communication
`network if on-line interfaces between Prestel and private systems
`were developed.
`
`The type of services which would be developed will depend largely on
`the sophistication of viewdata systems installed, and so the level
`of security that can be achieved. Services to individuals will be
`constrained by the security that can be achieved by standard Prestel
`sets. Services to businesses could be more extensive if viewdata
`
`terminals in this sector became more sophisticated with local
`intelligence and processing capability.
`
`Goods can already be ordered and paid for through Prestel by using a
`credit card number. Making similar payments from a current account
`using viewdata would require far greater system sophistication to
`achieve the necessary levels of security. It is therefore questionable
`whether such a facility would be economic to develop. However,
`viewdata could be used for settling regular bills where details of who
`is paying whom can be specified in advance,
`thereby greatly
`simplifying the security problems.
`
`Banks would only consider developing viewdata banking services if they
`can be justified economically. Some,
`like regular payments might be
`cost justified against current methods, however giving customers
`better access to the state of their financial affairs will involve a
`real
`increase in service at an additional cost
`to the banks.
`Such
`
`developments will only be justified if customers are prepared to pay
`for this increase in service.
`
`Copyright © l98O by Online Conferences Ltd.
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 4
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 4
`
`

`
`l86
`
`Electronic Funds Transfer Today
`
`Any discussion of the way we are all moving towards an electronic
`age always seems to be incomplete without
`some mention of the
`electronic transfer of funds - EFTS — and the plastic path to a
`cashless society.
`It must have something to do with the universal
`fascination with money.
`It is not my intention to demolish all the
`myths surrounding the concept of a cashless society other than to
`say that in the United Kingdom 95% of all transactions are still in
`cash, and that about
`two thirds of payments handled by banks are
`still by cheque. Any move away from this domination of cash and
`cheques will be slow, however movement
`there has been, and before
`considering what role viewdata might play,
`I would like to describe
`briefly the position in the UK today.
`
`The pace of change towards electronic payments depends as much on
`the growing sophistication of bank customers as on initiatives taken
`by the banks themselves. Clearly the banks have taken the
`so far
`initiative with most plastic card based services. However,
`the use of cards has not been part of EFTS.
`They either support
`the
`cheque system as with cheque guarantee cards, or lead to the
`generation of paper sales slips as with credit cards.
`Ironically
`use of more sophisticated cards which include a magnetic stripe and
`enable on—line access to the banking system, are used primarily to
`give customers cash, albeit in an automated way through the latest
`generation of cash dispensers.
`
`the electronic transfer of funds has
`In this country at least,
`depended to a great extent on the ability of bank customers to
`handle financial information electronically. All payments passing
`between banks in electronic form are handled by a jointly owned bank
`computer centre at Edgware, Bankers Automated Clearing Services
`(BACS). Over half the payments processed by BACS are received on
`magnetic tapes created and submitted directly by customers. These
`are largely direct debits and payroll credits.
`The remainder of
`electronic payments are largely standing orders where banks submit
`tapes of payments destined for other banks to BACS and process
`internally payments to their own customers.
`
`In this country individuals with bank accounts pay for just over
`half their regular commitments such as mortgages, rates, rent, gas,
`electricity and regular savings by using standing orders or direct
`debits. Nearly all monthly wage and salary payments in the UK are
`processed via BACS, on magnetic tape.
`In all nearly 400 million
`transactions are made each year without use of cash or paper, a
`greater Volume of electronic transactions than achieved by any other
`country, and with not a plastic card in sight.
`
`— »/lug
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 5
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 5
`
`

`
`l8?
`
`If that is the current position on electronic payments in this
`country, where does the information technology revolution fit in
`with these developments? In many respects the handling of these
`existing electronic payments mirrors the past
`technological
`capability of
`the more sophisticated bank customers — the ability to
`produce magnetic tapes to be handled in batch mode, a characteristic
`of early computer technology. Developments in information
`technology will be putting a lot more information processing
`capability into the hands of a great many more bank customers.
`Money is just information and as such, its handling will be
`transformed just as will be that of any other form of information.
`
`Increasingly customers might wish to communicate directly with their
`banks using telecommunication both for sending messages of
`instruction as well as for receiving financial information. Banks
`will be able to link their own systems directly to those of a great
`many of their customers. Automated bank services will have to fit
`in with this new environment and it is here that I think viewdata
`
`could play a part - as a new way for customers to communicate with
`their banks, and as such an adjunct
`to existing individual bank and
`inter~bank systems.
`
`The Issues to be Covered
`
`Before going any further I must stress that what follows is a
`personal View and a speculative one. Viewdata, if not
`in its
`infancy, at least is not yet beyond the kindergarten, and
`discussions of its use in new areas beyond its first stages of
`development must contain a high degree of speculation.
`In this
`paper I will be describing the sort of bank services which I think
`could be offered via some form of viewdata system.
`I will be
`zonsidering the particular requirements that I think will be
`necessary for personalised banking services, such as security of
`personal identification, and security of information storage and
`transmission, and I will
`then describe in a bit more detail how a
`viewdata system meeting these requirements might be used for making
`payments.
`
`Obviously viewdata banking services will depend on the take up of
`Prestel and viewdata itself.
`I will,therefore, consider the way the
`market for viewdata banking services might develop in relation to
`the way customers will be investing in their own viewdata
`facilities.
`In all this speculation I have not restricted myself to
`what is currently available solely via Prestel, but anticipated
`certain developments which I see as inevitable, namely the
`increasing sophistication of terminals for business use, and the
`existence of on—line links between Prestel and other databases.
`
`
`
`
`
`y..,.,..,,.,.V,,.,$,.a.m.....«¢».~..w..,ma,».Mm,...-ymwm.W,i.,......rw..,.,«W.«Irma»/.f’V|~hp\/').V‘,"7’jvA»-«v_~,r,m(v¢1-1«zv.WmvV,’fv>7>‘i.,..,.__,f\v1V',"«¢>'s<(,§4/|<A’>‘wvfKA<<wi)~»/\'Ov-1.,.,W
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`ApmevPMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page6
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 6
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 7
`
`188
`
`What Sort of Services?
`
`From its inception
`So what sort of services might be developed?
`viewdata has been seen as a computerised information retrieval
`system to be used by anybody, regardless of previous experience of
`direct use of computers. Banks maintain large quantities of
`information on computers about
`the state of their customers‘
`financial affairs, and most customers would not know one end of a
`computer from another. What better than to use viewdata to give
`customers direct access to this information in the privacy and
`comfort of their own homes or businesses.
`
`Keeping Customers Informed
`
`Customers might be given a balance enquiry facility on any of their
`accounts, current, deposit,
`loan or budget for example.
`They might
`like to see details of all transactions on their current account
`
`since receiving their last statement.
`
`Banks make or permit regular payments on their customers behalf with
`standing orders and direct debits. There is a growing trend in the
`use of these payment media for budget payments as people
`increasingly wish to even out their comitments by paying smaller
`amounts more frequently. However,
`from personal experience I find
`it difficult to keep track of all the payment mandates I sign.
`Banks might use viewdata to tell each customer what regular payments
`are made on their behalf each month, and maintain for each customer
`subscribing to the service an additional file showing what other
`regular payments the customer makes month by month throughout
`the
`year to assist in budgeting.
`
`One of the consequences of more use of electronic payments is the
`need to give customers better access to the state of their accounts,
`given that customers may no longer have a paper record of each item.
`The use of viewdata in the ways I have described could be an
`excellent means of achieving this.
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 7
`
`

`
`l89
`
`Acting on Customers‘ Instructions
`
`With the response facility, and eventually the ability to transmit
`messages between users, viewdata is very much more than information
`retrieval - it is the basis of an entirely new communication medium.
`If customers were given direct access to the state of their
`financial affairs via viewdata,
`they could well want
`to be able to
`act on that
`information equally directly. Many bank
`services are initiated by messages of instruction to banks from
`their customers:
`
`-
`
`—
`
`-
`
`-
`
`-
`
`to order cheque books
`
`to request statements
`
`to transfer funds
`
`to make payments
`
`to order currency and travellers cheques
`
`to set up or change standing order mandates
`
`The viewdata response frame could be a vehicle for these messages of
`instruction. Prestel could probably be used for requesting cheque
`books and statements as they would only be sent
`to the address of
`the terminal if this address tallied with bank records.
`The other
`
`messages of instruction require the bank to debit customers‘
`accounts and to do something with the money - put it into another
`account, pay it to somebody else or buy something with it like
`foreign currency.
`
`This immediately raises some thorny questions — amongst others, what
`constitutes a customer's authority, and how banks will
`identify each
`individual user of viewdata banking services with sufficient
`security. I would therefore like to consider some of the specific
`banking requirements that would have to be met before going on to
`describe a possible viewdata payment service. Firstly, how can
`banks use Prestel at present?
`
`Bank Use of Prestel
`
`the capabilities of Prestel are at present restricted to
`Given that
`generalised information dissemination and very simple message
`transmission, current use by banks and organisations offering
`similar services is limited to general advertising plus detailed
`information about bank services - location of cash dispensers, where
`to use credit cards,
`loan packages available and so on.
`The most
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`ApmemPMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page8
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 8
`
`

`
`l9O
`
`interesting use in many ways is the ability to order goods and pay
`by credit card - more about that later.
`
`More personalised services will require a high level of security for
`personal identification, data communication and data storage -
`probably more than is available with Prestel at present. Although
`as I have already mentioned certain simple services such as ordering
`cheque books or statements, could be offered via Prestel as it
`stands,
`I think the greatest scope for banking services will have to
`come from viewdata systems tailored to meet specific banking
`requirements.
`
`
`Use of a Specialised Banking System
`
`For security reasons alone, banks will wish to maintain full control
`of computer files of confidential customer and account
`information,
`and so will wish to locate them on secure bank premises. Files with
`individual records for each customer are going to be very large.
`These records will have to be stored in highly compressed form, and
`when interogated by a viewdata system,
`they will have to be
`extracted and reformatted as a valid viewdata page.
`
`these reasons viewdata banking services would have to be
`For
`supplied either by a completely private viewdata system provided by
`the bank, and designed to meet its specific needs, or alternatively
`the banks might need switching and translation capability in Prestel
`so that users can gain access to bank files kept on bank premises
`but "transparently".
`The banks would appear to customers just like
`any other Prestel information provider.
`
`One thing is certain, services would have to be within a local
`telephone call distance from customers.
`A system totally private to
`the banks would require them to offer viewdata connections to their
`own telecommunication networks which currently link branches to
`their central computer centres or provide some other national
`network.
`The communications would be parallel to Prestel and might
`look something like Diagram 1.
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 9
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 9
`
`

`
`
`
`vr<Aw¥,‘»r>-,{<f“7“~,2<?;.
`
`l9l
`
`DIAGRAM 1
`
`Banking services via a Private Network
`
`
`
`Prestel
`local
`
`coputer
`
`
`
`
`
`Prestel
`
`central
`
`computer
`
`
`
`bank
`
`network
`
`IJBIRCD
`
`Prestel
`
`
`
`
`
`However, it is more likely that banks would wish to separate their
`own telecommunication networks used for internal operational
`purposes from any viewdata system, whose terminal use
`In which
`characteristics would be different from banking terminals.
`case an on-line central link to Prestel would be an alternative, so
`that
`the Prestel system would be used for the message switching, as
`shown in Diagram 2.
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 10
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 10
`
`

`
`
`
`bi
`
`g i
`
`W»«um,.,,,,_,,..r..W.‘,N,,.y,,.{4:4.
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 11
`
`.l92
`
`DIAGRAM 2
`
`Banking services via a Prestel ‘window’
`
` Prestel
`computer
`
`local
`
`
`local
`computer
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Prestel
`central
`
`compte
`
`IIJBIRCD
`
`The final choice would obviously depend on the nature and cost of
`future Prestel facilities, and the banks‘
`individual policies for
`their own communication networks. Apart from the need for private
`systems with specialised files located on secure premises,
`there are
`questions of personal identification and secure data communications.
`
`Personal Identification
`
`Secure personal identification will be a key issue in developing any
`personalised banking service.
`The various levels of security, both
`in personal identification and data communication will determine the
`nature of the services that will be possible. There are at least
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 11
`
`

`
`
`
`‘Es
`
`l93
`
`four levels of security that might be available, namely that offered
`by:-
`
`-
`
`-
`
`—
`
`-
`
`Prestel and a standard Prestel set;
`
`a standard Prestel set linked to a private system;
`
`more sophisticated viewdata terminals with local
`intelligence and processing capability which will be
`used for many purposes, but primarily by businesses;
`
`terminals with specialised banking features such as
`magnetic card reading devices (features not demanded for
`any other uses).
`
`the wider could be the range of
`Clearly the greater the security,
`possible services which could be offered, however,
`the fewer will be
`the terminals and systems with the added security features added.
`Thus it will be a question of identifying those mass services which
`require relatively low security, and more specialised services for
`which customers might be prepared to pay a premium price to take
`account of
`the cost of greater security. Whether Prestel is used as
`the customer's "window" to banking services, or a bank opts for an
`entirely private system,
`into which the customer dials directly,
`am assuming that most
`terminals (certainly in domestic locations)
`will be the standard viewdata TV set, at least within the
`foreseeable future.
`
`I
`
`The key to existing automated cash dispensing, and in future
`possibly to automated payments at the point-of-sale,
`is the plastic
`card with a magnetic stripe.
`The card carries the fixed information
`sufficient to identify the account being activated.
`The customer
`enters in a secret personal
`identity number (PIN), which together
`with information held on the card,
`is sufficient to identify him
`securely.
`So long as viewdata banking services to an individual are
`only available through a specified set,
`then I see
`the combination of the unique set number plus a personal identity
`code to be entered via the key-pad by that
`individual, as analogous
`to a plastic card and a PIN.
`
`PIN's are already used with magnetic striped plastic cards in
`on-line automated cash dispensers and would be the basis of secure
`personal identification in any point of sale system using plastic
`cards.
`If the same PIN were to be used for viewdata banking then
`encryption of at least this number would be essential.
`The
`alternative would be a different PIN and bankers are very reluctant
`at
`the thought of proliferating personal numbers, which are likely
`to get lost or written down by customers,
`thereby increasing
`security risks. Whether this is a real problem or not,
`there is the
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`ApmemPMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 12
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 12
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 13
`
`l94
`
`question of the need for security of the actual information itself
`and whether data encryption would be needed.
`
`Security of Data Communication
`
`In the domestic market, which I assume will have only standard
`Prestel sets, I presume there will not be an encryption capability,
`so it will be a question of designing viewdata banking services
`which do not require a high degree of security of data
`communication. My views on this are probably heretical in banking
`circles.
`I see no reason why this choice should not be left to
`customers themselves. Most individuals, myself included, might feel
`that their own personal financial affairs are sufficiently
`uninteresting to anybody else that the use of a standard set, a
`secret code known only to the individual, and a secure bank database
`are good enough.
`
`Those not trusting a non-encrypted system, more likely to be
`businesses, would have to resort either to traditional methods of
`receiving information from their banks, namely by post, or to
`invest
`in more sophisticated terminals which had encryption
`facilities. The willingness of banks to offer specialisd encrypted
`services for the few would depend very much on those customers‘
`willingness to pay.
`
`Services to Whom?
`
`Having considered the way viewdata might give customers better
`access to information about their accounts, and might enable them to
`send messages of instruction to their banks, and given all the
`systems issues, where will
`the viewdata banking market lie?
`To whom
`will services be provided given the likely variety of viewdata
`system sophistication amongst bank customers, and what services are
`likely to appeal and be developed for different market sectors?
`
`In the personal market bank services via viewdata will be limited by
`the capabilities of the standard viewdata set.
`Individuals will be
`most unlikely to invest
`in added sophistication simply to obtain
`bank services in the home. Personal viewdata banking will
`therefore be constrained by the security features for personal
`identification and data transmission which will be available via
`
`Prestel, or what can be achieved by a standard viewdata set and a
`private bank system.
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 13
`
`

`
`
`
`l95
`
`to develop
`There is then the question of why any bank would want
`viewdata services at all.
`Some use of viewdata could be a cheaper
`way of delivering existing services, such as ordering cheque books
`and statements, and also, as I will mention later, automating
`certain regular payments. Other uses, such as giving customers
`better access to their accounts, and more information about their
`financial affairs, will be a real
`increase in service, and one that
`would require considerable investment by the banks in either
`
`restructuring their existing databases, or creating new ones. These
`developments could only be justified if as part of a "gold star"
`service for which customers were prepared to pay.
`
`Such enhanced services are likely to be attractive to the corporate
`sector and it is here that most of the initial potential will
`probably lie, especially given that the early spread of viewdata is
`expected to be in the business sector. This would be particularly
`true if business terminals become more sophisticated with local
`storage and intelligence, and banks are able to offer services
`involving financial information processing such as cash flow
`forecasting, financial modelling, and account reconciliation.
`However, very large corporate customers will soon have (if they do
`not already have) direct and specialised links with their banks.
`Thus use of viewdata as a comunications medium could well be more
`
`applicable to medium and small sized businesses, so long as adequate
`security can be achieved at an acceptable cost.
`
`If one considers payment services then it is necessary to
`distinguish between using viewdata to buy goods and using it to
`settle regular bills. The former would tend to be spontaneous,
`once—off payments arising when viewdata was used primarily as a
`sales medium. Users could see what was on offer, and then order and
`pay for the goods or services at the same time.
`Payments for
`regular bills are essentially pre-determined and apart
`from amount
`and exact
`timing can be pre-specified in terms of who is paying whom
`for what.
`
`
`
`Buying Goods Via Viewdata
`
`Already users can order goods and pay for them via Prestel by using
`their credit card number.
`The system is simple and conceptually no
`different from ordering goods over the phone and quoting the card
`number, or filling it in on mail order coupons in magazines.
`Transactions are authorised only if the address to which the goods
`are to be dispatched tallies with the card issuers’ own records.
`The messages that need to be conveyed are shown in Diagram 3.
`Prestel merely conveys the necessary information to the merchant who
`then verifies the payment and collects the money using existing
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`ApmevPMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page14
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 14
`
`

`
`l96
`
`procedures, as does the card company when obtaining eventual payment
`from the cardholder.
`
`DIAGRAM 3
`
`A Viewdata payment system — by Credit Card
`
` please pay me
`
`IJBIKC)
`
`Credit card companies already have large and efficient authorisation
`systems as a key part of their existing operations,so authorising
`Prestel payments imposes no significant extra cost.
`If banks were
`to allow payment on a current account
`in exactly the same way then
`they would have to set up such systems from scratch themselves.
`Unless both user and retailer had accounts with the same bank,
`systems would have to involve an inter-bank element, enabling
`requests for payment made to one bank to be passed to another.
`
`these
`
`In fact a similar form of payment system already exists with direct
`debits. However,
`this depends on bank customers signing mandates
`specifying exactly who can originate such payments and when, and
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`Apple v. PMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page 15
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 15
`
`

`
`
`
`197'
`
`direct debits are only used for payments made at regular intervals
`which are known in advance.
`I do not
`think that bankers or their
`
`customers would accept an open mandate which enabled Prestel
`retailers to originate a request for payment at any time for any
`amount given only an account number provided by such an open system
`as Prestel. At least with credit card payments the customers do not
`actually part with their money until they have received their
`statement
`from the card company, and agreed to pay.
`
`It is therefore my view that any payment via viewdata from a current
`account will need to be individually authorised at the moment of the
`transaction.
`Thus any system based on viewdata which enabled
`spontaneous payments to be made from a current account would have to
`be very different
`from the current
`form of Prestel and the following
`is just one way that this might be achieved.
`
`The Prestel response frame would be the obvious vehicle for telling
`the merchant
`that an order was made and that payment would be
`coming,
`this time from a current account.
`A message would also have
`to go from the user to his bank containing the necessary information
`to authorise the payment.
`If encryption facilities existed then
`some form of coded message could be sent via the retailer who could
`originate a direct debit complete with authorisation details which
`only the bank could decode. However, without encryption there would
`have to be a direct link from the user to his bank as shown in
`
`Diagram 4, which shows the flow of messages that would be necessary.
`
`AVievvdata payment system—by Credit Transfer
`
`
`
`dehit my account
`& pa}-I merchant
`
`ou have
`een pa1d
`
`SYS’€€m
`
` flow of funds
`
`IJBIRCJ
`
` ,
`Ei
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`ApmemPMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page16
`
`L’
`
`QQg
`
`oiXI.I
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 16
`
`

`
`l98
`
`The link to the bank to give authorisation could be used to convey
`sufficient information to enable the bank to debit
`the user's
`
`to the merchant, complete with
`account, and to create a credit
`reference information so the merchant would know which transaction
`
`The bank could then create an automated credit
`the payment was for.
`transfer to be processed by existing mechanisms (BACS if the payment
`is to another bank) for the actual transfer of funds.
`
`With such a system these would then be a real problem in creating
`all the information needed by the user's bank to make the payment.
`Allowing the user to enter it via the keypad is no guarantee of
`accuracy and would be an unacceptable security risk.
`It viewdata
`sets had magnetic card reading devices then some of these problems
`could be overcome.
`As this is not a development I foresee, other
`than in specialised locations such as hotel bedrooms or places with
`public terminals,
`then somehow the necessary information would have
`to be generated and transmitted by combined Prestel and private bank
`systems themselves. This would require considerable development of
`Prestel and also need a high degree of cooperation between the
`various participating institutions.
`
`Given that the same end result - namely the user getting the goods
`and the merchant getting the money - can already be achieved using
`credit cards I question whether the facility to make spontaneous
`payments via viewdata from a current account will be developed.
`will
`involve considerable development costs to overcome the real
`security problems without giving many additional benefits. However,
`I do not
`think the same applies to regular payments.
`
`It
`
`Using Viewdata to Pay Bills
`
`With regular payments most of the information needed to effect the
`transaction can be pre—specified - payer's and payee's bank and
`account
`information, and the reference number. With pre-authorised
`payments such as standing orders and direct debits the amount and
`timing are already pre—specified. However, over two-thirds of
`regular commitments of personal bank account holders are still
`settled by cheques or cash.
`The proportion is far higher for
`businesses. There are many good economic reasons why certain
`regular payments should not change to payment by standing order or
`direct debit.
`The former are often extremely expensive to the banks
`where frequent mandate changes are needed, and even the latter can
`be more expensive if their use means a greater frequency of
`payments. Many customers value the ability to decide the timing of
`payments - a facility given to them by cheques and cash. Viewdata
`could be a cost effective means of permitting customers to make
`automated regular payments, yet maintain full control of amount and
`timing. Diagram 5 shows how such a system might work.
`
`PMC Exhibit 21 12
`
`ApmevPMC
`|PR2016-00755
`
`Page17
`
`PMC Exhibit 2112
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-00755
`Page 17
`
`

`
`
`
`l99
`
`DIAGRAM 5
`
`Viewdata Regular Payments
`
`V011 halfe
`
`been Paid
`
`1 Rates
`2 Telephone
`
`3 Electricity
`
`4 Build. Soc.
`
`5 Deposit ak:
`
`pay $50
`
`
`for my Rates
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`__1
`
`
`
`4}V r 1 _H
`
`
`
`IIJBIICD
`
`A bank might create and maintain for a customer a file of all his
`regular commitments.
`The customer could ask for the information to
`be displayed and then decide which payments to authorise. This
`could be a valuable service to corporate customers (in particular
`small businesses) who could have on file all their regular
`suppliers.
`The file could also contain details of other accounts
`held by the customer and so transfers could be effected between
`acc

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket