`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`=
`past Available COPY
`| Conference Qube 3/%0
`
`1980
`
`i
`
`A Public Broadcaster's View of
`
`Teletext
`
`in the United States
`
`Hartford Gunn
`Senior Vice President and Manager
`KCET
`USA
`
`Gregory W. Harper
`Teletext Consultant
`USA
`
`a system that
`We cannot automatically assume that
`provides a valuable service in Europe will provide
`an equally valuabld service in the U.S.
`The infor-
`mation communication environments are different.
`Instead of a Hardware-related text-broadcasting sys-
`tem,
`the U.S. should have a flexible data trans-
`mitting system that could be used with sophisticated
`decoders or even home computers.
`Some, perhaps most,
`of the content should be program-related.
`
`San 4S anf applise
`tibetinct
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`Apple v. PMC
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-01520
`IPR2016-01520
`Page 1
`Page 1
`
`
`
`4
`
`is coming to the U.S. and cominy
`teletext
`Broadcast
`soon -- that much is certain.
`The enthusiasm we feel
`for
`the vast possibilities of this important
`technology
`is rapidly catching on all across the country. OGroadcast-
`ers have a serious interest in it.
`CBS,
`for example,
`in association with Electronic Industries Association,
`has conducted experiments at its station “MX in St.
`Louis that establish beyond doubt. that teletext is
`feasible in the U.S. And, as we shall explain, KCET,
`the member station of the Public Broadcasting Service in
`Los Angeles, will soon be conducting some rather different
`experiments of its own.
`The question American Geoaadeasters and regulators
`face now is how teletext will be applied in the
`must
`The applications are virtually Limitless. Which
`U.S.
`ones are chosen will determine the future of
`the tech-
`nology -- how quickly it
`is put
`into use, where, and by
`whom.
`We have learned a great deal
`from observing how
`it’ has been applied elsewhere.
`We are learning more
`every day.
`Our conclusion, based on these oheervations
`and on our own knowledge and research,
`is that
`the way
`teletext
`is applied in the U.S. ought
`to be -- must be
`-- different.
`the existing
`Thiss camclusion reflects in part
`American information marketplace.
`Thanks to our efficient
`telephone system, Americans have aeveis to vast data bases
`through computer
`terminals. Many businesses and now some
`private individuals can call on data bases as general as
`Tr lecomputing Corporation of America's "The Suurce," a
`Prestel-like service using standard computer
`terminals or
`home computers, of as complex as the one offered by
`"LEXIS," a computerized key-word file-search system used
`hy attorneys to research legal cases.
`Even television is playing a role in the informa-
`(ion marketplace. Apart
`from the numerous channels broad-
`casting a wide variety of entertatumen!
`aid news,
`a rela-
`tively new service, cable television, covering the nation
`by satellite,
`is growing rapidly. Largely because the
`ale operators need to fill their excess cable space,
`they have have programmed full band-width video channels
`with scrolling text, each channel devoted to a different
`topic.
`For example, Channel C in New York carries program
`guide information. Another channel has up-lu-tinhe-minute
`news from Reuters. Still another channel has stock market
`quotes.
`A fourth and fifth are programmed with competi-
`tive prices of cunsumer goods.
`<A service called UPI News-
`lime uses slow-scan television not only to bring audio
`teports on the day's happenings, but alsa to provide
`newspaper-quality pictures of the events.
`Ted Turner
`in Atlanta is ready to inauyurate what
`could be the ultimate in information delivery:
`a twenty-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`Apple v. PMC
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-01520
`IPR2016-01520
`Page 2
`Page 2
`
`
`
`®
`
`Fouc-hour broadcast news program with news, weather, and
`sports from around the world and distributed across the
`U.S. via satellite. Naturally one cannot forget
`the radio
`with its round-the-clock news stations and all-day sports.
`The regular telephone also gives access to the
`time, weather, stock market quotes, your daily horoscope,
`or even a
`joke to brighten your day.
`Americans are beseiged by tons of printed matter
`every day. Almost every organization, from the smallest
`ehurch group to the Largest corporation, sends out news-
`letters. Most professions have dozens of specialized
`journals addressing issues important only to that field.
`Nf course hobbyists are served by tremendous amounts of
`information,
`from how-to-do-it shows on cable television
`or videocassette to Literally thousands of monthly
`magazines.
`lacking to the
`information is nut
`As one can see,
`American consumer.
`Take,
`for example,
`the rotating full-
`page text of
`the cable system.
`Each page is on the serieen
`for
`twenty seconds:
`ten to write it on,
`ten to read it.
`A twenty-page cycle would take about six-and-a-half
`minutes for the viewer to read if he wanted to read it
`all.
`This compares favorably with a teletext system with
`an average access time of fifteen seconds per page; but
`of course the advantage of teletexl
`is that you can get
`the information when you request it and -it doesn't take
`up a full band-width channel.
`We are not saying there's no advantage to teletext.
`But we are saying we cannot automatically assume that
`a
`system that provides a valuable service in Europe will
`provide an equally valuable service in the United States.
`The information communication environment
`is different.
`You may be excused for wondering if we believe
`that broadeast teletext has any future at all in the
`U.S.
`We da.
`The idea of stretching the preseil
`tele-
`vision system to pravide a new service is extremely
`attractive.
`The technology is there, and it will
`happen just as surely as broadcasting itself happened.
`What strikes us, when we consider the possibilities
`embodied in this idea,
`is that
`to broadcast a certain
`number of pages over and
`over again in
`the vert
`ica
`
`
`
`
`
`
`interval
`is a waste of
`spectrum.
`e are convinced that
`a carefully chosen American system must, and can, avoid
`this.
`
`tlw should teletext be
`is the answer?
`And so what
`applied in the U.S.? After long study and consideration,
`we believe that
`the best application is a mixture of
`general
`information for
`the viewer and program-related
`teletext -- a truly new service, and one that really
`puts the technology to work.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`Apple v. PMC
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-01520
`IPR2016-01520
`Page 3
`Page 3
`
`
`
`i"}
`|
`
`-@
`
`
`
`
`
`ate
`ea
`
`Pa
`
`
`
`
`
`tunes
`the viewer
`With program-related teletext,
`d
`telet
`t
`in not “onTy ash
`b
`I
`t
`broadcast
`c_teletext
`show,
`but also a spec
`
`
`e€ actual
`content of
`these teletext
`
`broadcasts we will come to; but first note the immediate
`advantages of program-related teletext:
`it adds something
`to the program,
`it uses the spectrum more efficiently be-
`cause it is broadcasting something new with each new pro-
`gram (and in fact can use the spectrum far more efficient-
`ly than this, as we will show), and it is brand new to the
`U.S., not
`a variation on an existing service.
`Specifically, we can foresee a teletext system
`ou KCET that would operate on three levels, all of which
`could operate simultaneously.
`Level
`l would be a very
`small magazine of revolving payes, say 1M or 15.
`It
`would be broadcast constantly and would include the day's
`(or week's) program schedule, general
`information and
`local news, and other information about KCET.
`The
`Level
`2 would be program-related notes.
`On
`possibilities here are both obvious and exciting.
`news broadcasts,
`the viewer would he able to read more
`details about subjects in which he had a part.icular in-
`terest.
`For example, we have had floods in Califarnia
`and the Federal government
`is going to offer aid. But
`what kind of aid?
`To whom? Where do you get
`the kind
`for you? What's the telephone number? All of
`this would
`be available.
`On opera broadcasts,
`the viewer could call
`up detailed program notes,
`just as if he were watching in
`person.
`The possibilities for sports programs are alu
`interesting.
`So great
`is the American sports fan's appe-
`tite for statistics that
`a Leletext service packed with
`statistics related lo the «vent being broadcast would
`surely be an instant success.
`These are just three ex-
`amples of what could be done with Level 2, program-re lial -
`vf noted.
`It's clear that one could program interesting,
`useful notes for every program on the air.
`is viewer in-
`Level
`3 is the most
`intriguing.
`It
`form, viewers
`teraction with the proyram.
`[In its simplest
`could be given a multiple-choice question, with each
`choice corresponding to a teletext page. When the viewer
`pushes the number representing the answer of his chuice,
`he sees whether he was right and,
`if he was wrong, an ex-
`planation of why.
`Since only a few payess would need to
`be broadcast, and only at
`the precise moment
`in the pro-
`gram when they were needed, access to any one of
`them
`would be virtually instant ineous.
`Another means of interaction is somewhat more com-
`plex and requires a more sophisticated decoder.
`Suppose,
`as an example,
`that your daughter
`is Learning the word
`“smile" on the children's proyram Sesame Street, but
`she has not quite got it.
`She asks the set for help.
`
`Qe
`
`PMC Exhibit2109
`
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`Apple v. PMC
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-01520
`IPR2016-01520
`Page 4
`Page 4
`
`
`
`(5)
`
`[1 not only spells the word leltar by letter,
`
`it pro-
`
`the
`imagine an episode of
`Or
`for her as well.
`nounces it
`Kk
`po
`program on the
`pular American public television
`e _stoc
`
`reet Week on the sub-
`market
`and American economy
`Wa
`
`
`ject of how an investor should analyze his portfolio.
`As
`the
`ques
`gq
`explains wha
`o
`do,
`the viewer is actual’ : do-
`ing it at home wi
`taw data and so ware supplied via
`
`te Tetex
`Obvious
`this interact
`shed
`
`
`-hroug
`-ware downloaded at the user end. This assumes
`that
`the teletext decoder
`be connected not only
`to
`-he
`television sef.
`ut alsa to the home computer -- and
`why not? Why should we assume that
`the decoter will be
`built
`into the television set at all? It may very well
`make sense to put it into the home computer instead, or
`even to put
`the computer
`into the television set, especi-
`ally with the type of infinitely flexible teletext we ad-
`vocate.
`
`Yet another possible means of interaction would
`involve software provided on cassettes through stores or
`by schools.
`The software would be activated by the tele-
`text signal.
`This way, viewers at different educational
`levels could use different software and thus interact with
`the same program in different ways, according to their age
`and ability.
`As public broadcasters, we would Like to put spe-
`cial emphasis on the educational value of interaction.
`It
`is well known that children spend an enormous amount of
`time watching television -- hours every day, on average.
`On public television we have always tried at
`least to make
`it
`time well spent. But
`there is not much doubt
`that
`the
`big advances in education come when the child feels per-
`sonal
`involvement with the lesson -- when they interact.
`This,
`in our minds, is what makes the potential of Level
`3 so exciting.
`This is the end we're working toward. But what
`the means of getting there? We have looked at every ex-
`isting teletext system that we know of and have been im-
`pressed by them all, and each one has its own advantages.
`
`is
`
`but
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`text,
`transmitting
`as a system Tor
`sole
`igned not
`rather as a data-transmitting system.
`In our minds the
`system should not be shackled by its hardware.
`It should
`not care what data are transmitted over it.
`The system we
`
`
`cnvision—ahould_be_asystemsothatalltypeslt_typestransparent
`
`of data can
`pass
`through it.
`The French have developed a system that
`involves
`some software processing at
`the user end. Because the
`user has a microprocessor with memory, it isn't necessary
`to send pages of text over and over again, but rather only
`once. After that,
`the broadcaster need send only updates
`of pages,
`leaving the rest of
`the time free for a wids
`range of additional services.
`A flexible and expandable
`
`ah.
`
`PMC Exhibit2109
`
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`Apple v. PMC
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-01520
`IPR2016-01520
`Page 5
`Page 5
`
`
`
`@
`
`system will be the key.
`We
`think that
`the graptiics in any U.S. system are
`very important.
`We are very encouraged by the progress of
`the Canadians in refining the graphics capability of tele-
`text.
`We are also encouraged by the capabilities of
`the
`It
`free-form French system, which they call teleecriture.
`allows a user to draw on a pad -- or write, scribble, dia-
`gram, chart, as he wishes -- and transmits these graphics
`accurately to the viewer.
`The advantages of this system
`are obvious. Our
`long-term goal, after all,
`is to communi-
`cate freely, not
`in pre-defined shapes but
`in any of the
`infinite ways that express what we want
`to express.
`We
`believe that
`the day will come when there will be a wide
`variety of input and output devices for the teletext ser-
`vice. Already being tested are devices such as electronic
`writing pads, full alphanumeric key boards, and even audio
`control.
`
`tele-
`important characteristic of any U.S.
`Another
`text system will be its ability to caption a program in
`multiple languages.
`We believe that
`the U.S.
`is rapidly
`approaching a bilingual status,
`the two languages being
`English and Spanish. Much of
`the southwest and some of
`the larger cities elsewhere are becoming increasingly bi-
`lingual.
`further,
`there are also many hearing-impaired
`viewers who would benefit
`from captions.
`The Public
`Broadcasting Service was a pioneer in developing a cloas-
`ed captioning system for the hearing impaired, and we are
`very proud of it.
`We
`think the next step is using tele-
`text. Captions in three or
`four different
`languages could
`be sent simultaneously, with the viewer selecting a
`lan-
`guage simply by selecting a teletext page number.
`The
`color of
`the caption could change to define who was speak-
`ing. With flexible graphics it would even be possible to
`create speech balloons on the screen of
`the type used in
`cartoons; and to go one step further, one could,
`through
`the use of teleecriture, write the words in the balloons
`in such a way as to express feelings.
`All
`these services are very interesting, but we
`lose sight of the issue of cost
`to the consumer.
`must not
`What we are looking for is a system that can start at
`a
`low cost and easily expand to meet
`these and future needs.
`At
`the same time as we address the many options
`for broadcast teletext, it is essential that we recog-
`nize the broadcasting environment of the United States.
`There are special prgblems in our country because. our
`It
`broadcasting system is much different
`from Europe's.
`developed not as a government broadcasting system but as
`a private enterprise with limited government regulation.
`The broadcasting stations in a given locality are not on
`the same tower.
`They operate at different powers,
`from
`different heights and are aimed in many directions.
`Some
`are in the VHF band, others in the UHF band.
`Standards
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`Apple v. PMC
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-01520
`IPR2016-01520
`Page 6
`Page 6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.
`
`eee
`
`So
`
`for manufacturing receivers have been extremely broad.
`Our first step must
`therefore be to test the technical
`parameters of
`the various teletext systems in the U.S.
`At KCET, our efforts take three forms. First, we
`are conducting tests to find out which lines in the verti-
`cal
`interval are available to use for teletext. Because
`of different set manufacturers’ designs,
`there is some un-
`certainty about this.
`Second, we are bringing together
`experts to find out what sort of educational uses teletext
`would have in actual practice.
`Third, KCET will start a
`working, flexible, program related teletext system in Los
`Angeles in late 1980.
`We will explore the Link between
`present teletext decoders and the home computer.
`We hope
`to show that with a properly designed system one can
`broadcast tens of thousands of pages,
`taking full advan-
`tage of the technology, and not
`just ome or
`two hundred.
`We will gather the response of the viewers and report it.
`Without proper care, teletext could become much
`like those single-function electronic games that were so
`popular a
`few years ago. Most of them have been thrown
`away by now, and for a good reason:
`the users got bored.
`Teletext
`in the U.S. must be infinitely flexible from the
`eginning; otherwise,
`it won't be around much longer than
`
`$
`
`a system that places the emphasis
`believe that
`e
`on the transmission of data instead of text,
`a system that
`has thecapability of
`refined graphics,
`that
`is easily
`ex-
`sandable,thet16wicto_proceSsor-basedandCompatible
`
`
`
`
`
`withinteractivevideotextis,inouropinion,thesystem
`most. appropriate to the communications needs of the United
`tates.
`
`
`
`
`
`, PMC Exhibit 2109
`
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`Apple v. PMC
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-01520
`IPR2016-01520
`Page 7
`Page 7
`
`
`
`r
`
`t
`
`'
`
`1
`
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`Apple v. PMC
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-01520
`IPR2016-01520
`Page 8
`Page 8
`
`
`Hartford Gunn is the senior vice president and
`manager of KCET,
`the member station of
`the Public Broad-
`casting Service in Los Angeles. Mr. Gunn has served in
`American public broadcasting for the past
`twenty-eight
`years.
`From 1970 to 1976 he was the first President of
`{he Public Broadcasting Service.
`For
`the twelve years
`previous to that he was the manager of WGBH,
`the PB8S
`station in Boston. Mr. Gunn holds an MBA degree from
`Harvard (1951) as well as an A.B.
`from Harvard (1948)
`and a B.S.
`from the Merchant Marine Academy at King's
`Point
`(1948).
`He
`is a Lieutenant Commander (Ret.) in
`the U.S. Naval Reserve.
`Mr. Gunn joined KCET in 1980 toconcentrate on
`its local station efforts.
`He will explore how KCET
`might expand its services through the use of other tele-
`
`communications media.
`
`.
`
`Gregory W. Harper has been a producer of tele-
`vision documentaries for WGBH in Boston and of syndi-
`cated television game shows in the U.S.
`He has been
`conducting research on teletext for the past
`two years,
`specializing in its educational uses and in the prob-
`lems of teletext
`interfaces with computers.
`He
`is an
`uctive participant
`in the Electronic Industries Associ-
`at-ion's Committee on Teletext, acting as Liaison with
`the international standards organizations.
`Mr. Harper
`is now a consultant on teletext.
`
`
`
` \
`
`aay
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`» 260
`
`DIALOG (R) File 248:PIRA ®
`
`ic} 1996 Pira International. All rts. reserv.
`
`©
`
`Pira Abstract Numbers: 12-80-03536
`Pira Acc. Num.: 3463536
`00070475
`Title: A PUBLIC BROADCASTER’S VIEW OF TELETEXT IN THE UNITED STATES
`
`Authors: Gunn H; Harper G W__!?
`/
`oy
`
`
`
`
`Source:
`e
`26-28 Mar 1980 in London 1980 (PM 6575 (part)
`
`
`lication Year: 1980
`a
`
`/ Document
`Language:
`>?
`
`
`
`unspecified
`
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`PMC Exhibit 2109
`Apple v. PMC
`Apple v. PMC
`IPR2016-01520
`IPR2016-01520
`Page 9
`Page 9
`
`