`
`2010-08-31 T-915=P.033/034=F-12305:07pm From-Coremetrics 6507621499
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`09/991,324
`Appl. No.
`8/31/2010
`Response dated
`Reply to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment of 3/31/20/0
`
`useridentifier of other users of said computer network". [Emphasis added]
`
`Argument 2:
`
`The combination of Sheiderman and Manolis would be inoperable.
`
`Asdiscussed, Manolis mentions the potential use of "keywords" tut does not disclose, suggest, or
`
`infer associating those "keywords"with otherspecific users, nor does he t:zch how such a system could
`
`be implemented. Manolis does not teach how to ensure that keywords subinilted by different users but
`
`referring to the same object wouldretain the sameidentifier. Manolis does not disclose how they could be
`
`combined. Manolis does not teach, or even mention, how such “keywords ‘would be shared across
`
`multiple users ofthe system. Forillustrative purposes, under the teachings 191’ Manolis, assume that several
`
`different users associate the keyword "Jacob"to photos they have uploade:|. In such a case, eitherall
`
`"Jacobs" could be associated with the sameidentifier, each "Jacob" could “«: associated with a different
`
`identifier, or some other logic must be employedto determine when they slwuld be associated with the
`
`sameidentifier and when they should associated with different identifiers.consequently, any queries
`
`returmed to a user based the keywords would be either too narrow (excludi “4 instances of"Jacob") or too
`broad (including non-relevantinstances of "Jacob"), Applicant acerts the present invention solves this
`problem.
`
`Similarly, Sheiderman's teachings would, in fact, ensure that these z2mmon “keywords"or
`
`"annotations" wouldresult in differing identifiers across any users sharing keywords. As such,
`
`Sheiderman wouldfail to maintain a commonsetofuser identifiers across all users of his system.
`Scheiderman doessuggest using e-mail addresses for exporting the Image Library to others". [Emphasis
`Added] (see Sheiderman, column9, tine 64 through column 10, line £). Thit the Image Library must be
`
`exported, by definition, means that it would reside in a different computer 3/stems, not one network.
`
`Schneiderman does not teach howthe identifying informationin the Imag:> Library could also be shared.
`
`Schneiderman does disclose a means for importing a list of name from other libraries. (see Sheiderman.
`
`PAGE 13/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daylight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * ONIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621499 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Page 10 of 17
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 607
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 607
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`2010-08-31 05:08pm©From-Coremetrics 6507621499 T-915 P.014/034 —-F~123
`
`
`
`
`
`09/991, 324
`Appl. No.
`8/31/2010
`Response dated
`Reply to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendmentof 3/3/2010
`
`column 12, lines 41 -50). Since Shneiderman does not disclose any mean:; for conflict reconciliation
`
`across multiple image libraries, the same keyword,or potentially the sam: person, would result in
`
`different identifiers in different image libraries.
`
`Toillustrate this, with Shneiderman's teachings, assume that “Library A" exported its library to
`
`“Library B". Further assumethe libraries have the following data.
`
`Library A
`
`Library B
`
`PdMark
`
`Asdisclosed by Shneiderman, "the software of the present inventicns supports a function to
`
`import the People Table from otherlibraries. The internal process of importing the People Tableis similar
`
`to that of creating a new person repeatedly. The only thing the software ol tte present invention should
`
`handle is checking and eliminating the duplication of the person name." (:nphasis added] (see
`
`Shneiderman,column12,lines 44 -50). Thus, following Shneiderman's teaching, after the import the
`
`Library B would retain a keyword identifier of I for keyword "Jacob"(sin::«:it was a duplicate) and a
`
`create keyword identifier of3 for keyword "Mark"(since it was a new recurs). These user identifiers
`
`would be inconsistent with those in Library A, and would not be unique across all users of Shneiderman’ s
`
`system.
`
`There is an additional, and critical, consequence with Sheiderman'3 teaching on sharing keyword
`lists. The inconsistencies in keyword identifiers that would renderthe ideutification information
`
`exported from Library A as inoperable and useless in Library B. Shneider:1n discloses no mean for
`
`updating identification information upon “eliminating the duplication of ‘he person name”. As such any
`
`PAGE 14/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 83:46:51 PM (Eastern Daylight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621499 * CURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Page 11 of 17
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 608
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 608
`
`

`

`2010-08-31 =P.015/034=-F-12305:08pm From-Coremetrics 6507621499 T-915
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`09/4991,324
`Appl. No.
`:
`8/3//2010
`Response dated
`Reply to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendmentof 3/31/2010
`
`identification information exported from Library A that is associated wih keyword "Mark" (PersonID
`1) would now be orphanedin Library B, since as described above keyword “Mark” in Library B would
`now have PersonIDof 3. Thus a search for photos of"Mark" would produi:e: undesired results.
`
`The modifications necessary to make the combination of Maloni: and Shneiderman operable are
`neither, taught, suggested, or implied by Malonis or Shneiderman.
`
`Argument 3: Manolis in view of Shneiderman does not meet the requitvinents for a prima facie case of
`
`obviousness.
`
`Applicant respectfully submits that the rejection of claim 118 on IMfanolis and Shneiderman does
`
`not meet two of the requirements for a prima facie case of obviousness, under Section 103 MPEP 2142:
`
`1,
`
`There must be some suggestion or motivation, either in tht: references themselvesorin
`
`the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the
`
`references(s) or to combine their teachings.
`
`2.
`
`Theprior art references must teach or suggestall the clain: ‘imitations.
`
`Applicant submits that the rejection does not meet Requirement } |because neither Manolis nor
`
`Sheiderman suggests such a combination,If this rejection is repeated, Apr: izant respectfully requests that
`
`Examiner explain where, in the references themselves,orin the art, there i: a suggestion that they be
`combined.
`
`Applicant further submits that the rejection does not meet Require nent 3 because even if the
`
`combination could have beenlegally made, the combinationstill does not :2ach how such "keywords"
`
`could be associated with other users of the computer network.
`
`PAGE 15/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daylight Time) * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:8507621499 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Page 12 of 17
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 609
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 609
`
`

`

`
`
`2010-08-31 T-915=P.016/034=F-12305:09pm From-Coremetrics 6507621499
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`09/991,324
`Appl. No.
`8/31/2010
`Response dated
`Reply to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment of 3/3//2010
`
`Argument 4: Commercial success and thefailure of other to successfully combine Manolis of
`
`Shneiderman argues against the obviousness of such conibination
`
`Applicant maintains that Embodimentsof the present invention bite been employed on many
`
`"social networking”sites and achieved significant commercial success in ‘ecent years. Enclosed in
`
`Exhibit | is a September 2009 newspaper article published in USA Todaywhich attests to this
`
`commercial success. The technology, termed “tagging”, allows a variety of users to store photos on a
`
`server and identify themselves and other users of the service in photogray;hs. Applicant views such
`
`“tagging” technologies as embodiments of the present invention.
`
`Several quotes from the article point to howcentralthe "tagging" technology is to changing the
`
`landscape of photo sharing and social networking. Excerpts below:
`
`“For over a decade, photosites such as Shutterfly, Kodak Galler’ ond Snapfish duked it outfor
`
`dominance in online photo sharing. But over the last 12 months, s“ucebook has surpassed them
`
`all, with a little photo application that letsyou simply "tag" and sure snapshots. [Emphasis
`
`added]
`
`“Scott Marlette, the Facebook engineer who oversees the applica:ion, thinks tagging is the
`
`reason photos are so popular on the social network" [Emphasis <.142d]
`
`"Being able to tag yourfriends in a photoand have it show up somewhere else was really
`
`powerfull, “ Marlette says. “And it turned out to be something the.really differentiated the way
`
`people used photos on Facebook vs. other sites. " [Emphasis adde-1|
`
`The current assignee of Manolis's patent, Shutterfly, Inc., is furthe - cited as encouraging
`
`its customersto utilize this "tagging" technology via another leading socia. :etworking site, Facebook.
`
`—
`
`PAGE 16/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daylight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-4/34 * ONIS:2738300 " CSID:8507621499 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Page 13 of 17
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 610
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 610
`
`

`

`2010-08-31
`
`05:09pm
`
`From-Coremetrics
`
`6507621499
`
`-
`T-915
`
`.
`P.017/034
`
`F-123
`
`09/991,324
`Appl. No.
`8/31/2010
`Response dated
`Reply to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendmentof 3/31/2010
`
`Excerpt below:
`
`"Ifyou can't beat them, join them. Now, Photo sites that rangef-cmprint sellers Shutterfly and
`Kodak to storage specialists such as Phanfare are encouragin;: customers to sharePhotos on
`Facebook"(Emphasis added}
`
`Exhibits 2 -4, cite otherarticles demonstrating commercial succvss and the failure of others to
`combine such teachings. Respectfully, Applicant views the failure to dev'2lopment or reduceto practice
`by even the assignee ofManolis's patent; Shutterfly Inc., as further evideace against the argument of
`
`obviousness.
`
`Explanation of Exhibits
`
`In the last OA the Examinerstated "it would have been obvioustn one having ordinary skill in the
`art at the time the invention was made to have modified Manolis etal. to include the teachings of
`Shneiderrnan". Applicantis submitting Exhibits 1-5 to demonstrate i) the arly commercial success
`ofApplicant's embodimentofthe present invention ii) the failure of others to develop and reduce to
`practice the present invention, andiii) continued commercial success in o:her embodiments. Applicant,
`respectfully requests Examinerto reconsider the position in light of this si:.ccess.
`
`Exhibit 1 attests to the extraordinary success ofwhat Applicant believes to be an embodiment
`ofthe present invention. The article was published in September of 2009 in: the USA Today. (Excepts in
`the preceding section)
`
`Exhibit 2 attests to not only the ear!y commercialization of the pr: sent invention but also media
`recognition that the invention was both novel and unobvious. The article was published in February
`2002 in Front Range Tech Biz, a Denver-based technology pUblication. E:cerpts below:
`
`PAGE 17/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM (Eastern Daylight Time} * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-4/34 " DNIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621499 " DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Page 14 of 17
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 611
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 611
`
`

`

`2010-08-31
`
`05:10pm
`
`From-Coremetrics
`
`6507621499-
`
`T-915
`
`P.018/034
`
`F-123
`
`09/991,324
`Appl. No.
`8/31/2010
`Response dated
`Reply to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendmentof 3/31/2010
`
`“Sacko.com members can download their photosforfree and then name the peaplein the
`
`pictures. [Emphasis added] For each person named in the pictur:, Sacko.com sends an e-mail to
`
`the named person, asking ifhe or she wouldlike to be anew memo. New members download
`
`their pictures, and so on. “
`
`"The search function allows usersto click through any picture |! moving their cursor to the
`
`tmage ofanather member's head. (Emphasis added] Therefore, .::victure ofDanny's college
`
`graduation can lead to Danny's sister Susie'spictures ofher Spring Break trip to Mexico, which,
`
`in turn, can lead to Danny's sister Susie'sfriend Karen's pictures 9fSusie's 21st birthday party."
`
`“Get the picture?" "There is a social elementto it," [Emphasis av ced) said Brian Heil, a
`
`Sacko.com member andinvestment banker who became acquaint:<! with Frigon in New York.
`
`“I've tried some othersites, and they don't seem to have the searciuziility."
`
`Exhibit 3 further attests to the commercialsuccess of Applicants einbodiment. The article publish
`
`in February 2003 in CNET’s Computer Shopper magazine's under the co-«:r story "50 Must-See Web
`
`Sites” and the article titled "The Best Tech Sites". Excerpts below:
`
`“Ufprinting and sharing imagesfrom yourdigital camera is your first priority, think of Ofote as
`
`an online Photomat. " "Sacko takesthis idea to the next level by 9xing beyond simply sharing
`
`your photos to allowing you to network and archive photos." [Eripasis Added] "You can even
`
`fade in and 200m out on specific people, then link them to other elevantphotos." {Emphasis
`
`Added]
`
`Exhibit 4 attests to the continued commercial success and continued novelty of Applicant's
`
`embodimentofthe present invention. The article was published in the Wail Street Journal on September
`
`13,2003 entitled “The Best Way To......Display and Develop Photos". Excerpt below:
`
`PAGE 18/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daylight Time) * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:65076214$9 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Page 15 of 17
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 612
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 612
`
`

`

`2010-08-31
`
`05:10pm
`
`—-From-Corenetrics
`
`6507621499
`
`T-915
`
` P.019/034
`
`F-123
`
`09/99 1,324
`Appi. No.
`Response dated &/31/20/0
`Reply to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendmentof 3/31/20/0
`
`"Ofthe smaller new Web sites aut there, some offer even more interestingfeatures. For instance,
`Sacko.com, a photostart-up based in New York, touts a uniquef:cture that allowsyou to label
`the people whoareillyourpictures by name. After you've done .io, you can immediatelyfind
`every picturefeaturing, say, your bestfriend Andrew by simply ci.ching your curser on a picture
`that has him in it. It can be cumbersome to manually identify every person in everypicture, but
`the service is handy ifyou keep hundreds or thousands ofpictur; online and wantthe ability
`to easily and quickly search and organize them. " [Emphasis Acld2d]
`
`Exhibit 5 attests to the continued novelty of Applicants embodir:nt of the presentinvention,
`Thearticle was published in the March 2004 PC Magazine.Thearticle ent.tled "Manage, Share, Print-
`\
`Digital Photography for Everyone" was a review of online photo services. E.:cerpt below:
`
`"Weareparticularly impressed by thefeature that lets you select and labelfacesin pictures,
`(Emphasis Added] First you definefriends in a list, and then you witach identities tofaces (or
`figures) in photos,"
`
`Summary
`
`Applicant respectfully submits that Manolis, neither alone norin c-) ribination with Shneiderman
`teaches, suggests or disclases independent claim 118. Claims 119, 120, 12: , and 122 are dependent upon
`claim 118, and are therefore allowable overthecited art for at least the rea‘.cris stated above.
`
`Applicantrespectfully submits that Manolis, neither alone nor in csmbination with Shneiderman
`teaches, suggests or discloses independent claim 123. Claims 124, 125, 12::, and 127 are dependent upon
`claim 123, and are therefore allowable over the cited art for at least the rea:ions stated above.
`
`:20-28
`.
`.
`*
`.
`.
`a
`i
`PAGE 19/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daylight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34°DNIS:2733300*CSID:6507821499*DURATION (mm-ss)
`
`Page 16 of 17
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 613
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 613
`
`

`

`2010-08-31 =P.020/034=F-12305:11pm From-Coremetrics 6507621489 T-915
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`09/99 1,324
`Appl. No.
`8/31/2010
`Response dated
`Reply to Notice of Non-Compliant Amendmentof 3/31/2010
`
`Conclusion
`
`Forat least the reasons stated herein, Applicant respectfully submits the claims as presented
`
`herein are patentable overthe cited prior art and are therefore in condition for allowance. Should
`
`Examineragree that the present invention is patentable material, but doe: not feel that the present claims
`
`are technically adequate, Applicant gratefully requests that the Examiner verite acceptable claims pursuant
`
`to MPEP 707.070). Applicant respectfully requests a timely Notice of Allcwance for the claimsin this
`case.
`
`Respecifslly submitted,
`
`Mark Frigon
`
`P: 415-5°"2-8520
`
`PAGE 20/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daylight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621490 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Page 17 of 17
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 614
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 614
`
`

`

`2010-08-31 -P.021/034=F-12305:11pm From-Coremetrics 6507621499 . T-915
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Appl. No.
`09/991,324
`Response dated 1GRE09 F/B [10
`Reply to Office Action of 05/26/09
`
`Published in: USA Today
`Author: Jefferson Graham
`Publish date: September 23", 2009
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2009-09-22-facebook- hoto-s!:aring-tagging N.htm
`
`Facebook's 'tagging' option is a big hit with photo sharing
`
`By Jefferson Graham, USA TODAY
`PALO ALTO,Calif. — For over a decade, photosites such as Shut.z:fly, Kodak Gallery and
`Snapfish duked it out for dominance in online photo sharing.
`' But over the last 12 months, Facebook has surpassed themall, with 1 little photo application that
`lets you simply "tag" and share snapshots. Some2billion photos a ritonth — or nearly 70 million
`a day — are uploaded to Facebook. By comparison, Yahoo's populaphoto site Flickr gets 3
`maillion uploads a day.
`Scott Marlette, the Facebook engineer who oversees the application, thinks tagging is the reason
`photos are so popular on the social network. When youpost a photo or: Facebook and tag,or
`identify, the people in it, the picture automatically ends up in your own, profile and theirs, too,
`eliminating the need to send them an invitation to view it.
`“Being able to tag your friends in a photo and have it show up some vhere else was really
`powerful," Marlette says. "Andit turned out to be something that teiul'y differentiated the way
`people used photos on Facebookvs.other sites.”
`Chris Chute, an analyst at market tracker IDC, says tagging, and the general speed ofgetting
`pictures out to your Facebook contacts, means, "There's less effort posting photos on Facebook
`than anywhereelse."
`Therest ofthe online photoindustryis scrambling to come up with . response.
`“What Facebook did was people-centric, not photo-centric, and that ‘sas the hugeshift,” says
`James Joaquin, a co-founder of what is now Kodak Gallery (formerl” ()foto). "It's not just about
`the photo, but the people you care about. Facebook is a communicat.ontool that solved a bigger
`problem — howtoeffortlessly share information and photos."
`If you can't beat them, join them
`Now,photo sites that range from print sellers Shutterfly and Kodak 1.3 storage specialists such as
`Phanfare are encouraging customers to share photos on Facebook.
`Even Photobucket, owned by the same unit ofNews Corp. that owns social network MySpace,
`offers a Facebook sharing button.
`
`PAGE 21/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daylight Time) * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621499 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Gere
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 615
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 615
`
`

`

`2010-08-31 P.022/034=F-12305:12pm From-Coremetrics 6507621499 T-915
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`09/991,324
`Appl. No.
`12/3-2009. af>f[1©
`Response dated
`Reply to Office Action of 05/26/09
`
`That's helping drive Facebook's photo numbers. Facebook's photo taffic in August grew to 43.3
`million visitors from 26.5 million the year before, according to mea:mirement service ComScore
`Media Metrix. Once-dominant Photobucket wasflat at roughly 25 ruillion.
`Kodak Gallery, which dropped 43% in visitors year over year in Au 3ust, according to
`ComScore,will introducea site upgrade in coming weeksthatwill «low membersto upload
`pictures first on Kodak, and then share them on Facebook.
`"It's an acknowledgmenton our part that we're not an island," says Iadhav Mehra, a Kodak
`Gallery vice president. "We wantto be the first destination for their images, and then they can
`take them elsewhere."
`
`When photosare uploaded to Facebook, they are transcodedintotir.y, 100-kilobyte files to open
`swiftly. The files are so small that the image quality is very low.
`Premium photo site Phanfare, which charges $49.99 a year for ad-frve, high-resolution
`presentation of photos, sees an opportunity in that. For months,it hz.s urged its membersto share
`on Facebook, both via the Web and Phanfare's iPhone app.
`CEO Andrew Erlichsonsaysfolks uploading full-resolution photos 1.<: Phanfare can “keep their
`originals intact, and(still) let their friends see their pictures instantl-. '
`Tamping a tempest
`A controversy erupted briefly this summer when Facebook member:. found personal photos
`they'd shared being used in ads on Facebook without their approval.
`Cheryl Smith, a social media consultant in Lynchburg, Va., says hei image popped up in a
`singles ad in her husband's Facebook news feed with the tagline, "Hi:Peter, hot singles are
`waiting for you!"
`It was the talk of the photo blogosphere unti] Facebook took action. Vlarlette says it was a
`mistake that won't happen again. Twothird-party application develcs2rs grabbedthe photos for
`ads — and Facebook has dumped the undisclosed companiesfrom tlie site. "We're really
`concerned with the users' privacy and anythreat that could be percei ved," Marlette says.
`Smith is satisfied; she continues to post pictures on Facebook, and uses the photo application
`daily.
`“With any new form of technology, you don't wantto throw the bab; out with the bath water
`because somebodyused it poorly," she says. "Facebookisstill a fab.lous way to communicate,
`and I believe Facebook has taken really good measures to make sure what happened to us won't
`happen again."
`
`PAGE 22/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:45:51 PM [Eastem Daylight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621499 * DURATION (mnrss):20-28
`
`mien
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 616
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 616
`
`

`

`2010-08-31 P.023/034=F-12305:12pm Frow-Coremetrics 6507621499 T-915
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`09/99 1,324
`Appl. No.
`Response dated 1262609 Y/3 Ht oO
`Reply to Office Action of 05/26/09
`
`EXHIBIT 2°
`
`Publication: Computer Shopper Magazine
`Author:
`Dan Costa
`Publish date: February 2003
`
`PAGE 23/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daytight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CS1D:6507621499 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`egy
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 617
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 617
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`2010-08-31 P.024/034=F-12305:13pm Fron-Coremetrics 6507621499 T-915
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`De ostoePiSedSeer nana 9O DN
`
`|
`@® GannWSF;
`yee)ray=Ta5
`February 2003
`eieacra - The Best Tecli Sites
`
`|
`
`By Dan Costa
`
`;
`
`“If printing and sharing
`_ imagesfrom your digital
`camera is:youz-firstpri-
`.) Ority,: thinkof:-Ofoto as
`oan online’ Phitomat...
`Sacko takes this idea
`ps to the next level by go-
`2c. ing beyond siznply shar-.
`wearin
`S| lass ,
`= 3. J lowing you -o network
`commerP |ing your photos to, al-
`< You've NeverSeen> |B
`= «:. and archive zhotos.
`= You caneveci:fade. in
`and zoom’ out on specif-
`“ic people, thee: linkthem
`to other:rele‘vant:-pho-
`
`tos.”
`
`=
`
`Reribetamar anil
`
`
`
`PAGE 24/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daylight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * ONIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621499 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 618
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 618
`
`

`

`2010-08-31
`
`05:13pm
`
`From-Coremetrics
`
`6507621499
`
`T-915
`
`P.025/034
`
`F-123
`
`Appt No.
`09/99 1,324
`Response dated 1aa2009 P/2 ff1d
`Reply to Office Action of 05/26/09
`
`Publication: Mobile PC Magazine
`Author:
`Dylan Tweney.
`Publish date: March 2004
`
`EXHIBIT 3
`
`PAGE 25134 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastem Daylight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621499 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`&
`
`=
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 619
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 619
`
`

`

`T-915
`F-123
`
`
`2010-08-31=05:14pm From-Coremetrics 6507621499 P.026/034
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`teetrtry
`
`An Tred.
`storage.
`x
`Bo
`SendBOY
`
`
`Specs: Unlimitedfile size and resolution;
`
`Includes basic tools forrotating, adjusting
`
`cofor balance, removing red-eye,and
`
`adding simple special effects
`
`
`www.sackd.com: |
`
`
`SHUTTERFLY
`Shutterfly is primarily a tool for organizing
`yourpictures;it’s only secondarily a
`sharing service. Thesite includes basic
`tools for cropping, enhancing, and adding
`special effects to your pictures. And
`orderingprints is easy, with an order
`button on nearly every page. If you want
`to share photos, Shutterfly will e-mail
`your friends a tink to the album you
`select; otherwise, there are no sitewide
`search or community features. Shutterfly
`also lacks a version optimized for viewing
`on mobile devices.
`
`"
`pe
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Speca: No fimit on file sizes or resotutlons;
`includes tools far crapping, enhancing,
`removing red-eye,rotating, and adding
`special effects and borders
`.
`“Www.shutterfy.com, <0},
`
`-
`
`OFOTO
`Ofate (owned by Kodakj Is one of the
`oldest online photo services,offering
`straightforward image- and album-
`managementtools, with the emphasis
`on personal management and photo
`printing rather than sharing. Ofoto
`has the best image-cropping and
`enhancementtools of the services we
`tested, plus a variety of special effects
`and borders. [f you wantto share
`an album, Ofoto will send a link to
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inc to's taals for crapping aud editinp
`|b atos are the best of the bunch.
`
`it ‘via ¢-mail to anyone you like. For
`tnabile users, Ofoto offers a WAP site
`|wvsw.kmobile.com), and you can add
`pEqtos from camera phones by sending
`1h 2in to a special e-mail address.
`treew
`
`|Cis . Reqnchae28cent
`
`
`
`
`Specs: Untimitedfile size and resolution;
`ir cludes tools for cropping, enhancing,removing
`rad-eye, rotating, and adding special effects
`and borders
`wiw.ofeto:com
`
`‘WEBSHOTS
`‘Webshots aims to be a complete resource
`Jat people wie just love looking at
`}-hatos. Judging bythesite’s most popular
`“owniloads, that means arty stock
`}:halos of sunsets, cityscapes, and nature
`12:88. You use a Windows application
`(22413 download) to manage uploads
`410. downloads orto set your desktop
`ve llpaper. Por handling your own photos.
`lio wever, Webshots has someserious
`£xtcomings, The free version limits you
`lit'ust 10 albums with 24 photos each,
`21 the terms-of-service agresment
`(lives Webshots an unlimitedTightto slice,
`clice, and redistribute your pictures asit
`£3€8 fit Albumsare public by default, and
`£0100 Users Clearly haven't figured out
`hiato make them private. The site is also
`}1ag2edwith bannerads.If you want to
`sh) the world how hot your motorcycle-
`tit.ng girlfriend is, Webshotsis for you;
`1:03! others will wantto steer clear,
`~-D7lan Tweney
`
`“hrweSeLevy
`
`store geforup-to'240 photos;
`)
`
`emitum beryice ls $30 per yearCost
`‘ofeach 4x6-Inch print; 39cents ~
`‘ipecer Free version aflows storage of upto 10
`nile. me with 24 photoc cach, for-foo version
`f'ors storage of50 albumswith 60 photos each.
`IoJudes tools for ratating and flipping images
`invuwvebshots.com
`
`metegore
`
`Photo-Sharing Death Match:
`Ofoto, Sacko.com,Shutterfly, and Webshots
`YOU'VE SNAPPED THE SHOTS, NOW SHARE THEM WITH THE WORLD
` album. You have the option of keeping
`
`your albums private if you don’t like this,
`
`Ordering prints is easy, but note that the
`49-centprice for 4 x 6-inch prints is
`high. Sackois well optimized for mobile
`devices, although on our color Nokia it
`reduced color depth to onebit, rendering
`ourphotosillegible. For general photo
`sharing, however, Sacko is our top pick,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`edical researchers haveyetto
`identify the syndromeaf photo
`paralysis, but anyone with a digital
`camera ts familiar with it: A few months
`after purchasing your camera, you find
`yourself unable to take another shot. The
`Teason? 437 digital photossitting on your
`hard drive that have never been printed,
`categorized, or seen by anyone but
`you.It seems pointless to take another
`photo unless you first spend a weekend
`organizing this digital shoebox.
`Fortunately for photo pack rats, a
`plethora of vendors on the Webara eager
`ta help us organize, share, and print those
`pics, and thereby put the joy back into
`digital photography. The bestof these
`services are opthmized for display on a
`wide variety of devices, so once you've
`uploaded shots of your baby, you can view
`them on many Internet-capable PDAs and
`phones, not to mention your computer.
`The services reviewed hereare all
`free to usa; they charge only to order
`prints. Note that most of them — with the
`exception of Webshots ~ wan'tlet you
`download full-resolution images: theyre
`strictly upload-and-print. If you don't mind
`spending $30 to $100 peryear, check out
`Smugmug (www.smugmug.com), a much
`more elegant gallery service for serious
`photographers,
`
`
`
`
`
`SACKO.COM
`Sacko.com hastheslickest interface
`of the photo-sharing services we
`tested, with fast and simple browsing
`and zoom controls. After entering your
`friends’ names (and, optionally, e-mail
`addresses), you can teg photos with
`names from your contact list, mark whore
`€ach friend's face is, and optionally add
`Pop-up captions. It sounds silly, but
`the payoff comes later: It takes just one
`or twoclicks to bring up every picture
`containing a certain person — evenif
`that person is
`in someone
`else's photo
`
`With Sacke, you
`can highlight
`friends’ faces
`and even
`add pop-up
`
`captions,
`
`PAGE 26/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Easter Daytignt Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621499 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`:
`
`119
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 620
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 620
`
`

`

`
`
`2010-08-31 T-915=P.027/034=F-12305:15pm From-Coremetrics 6507621499
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`09/991,324
`Appl. No.
`avaeinhOD B/BI h.
`Response dated
`Reply to Office Action of 05/26/09
`
`The Wall Street Journal
`Publication:
`Yochi J, Dreazen
`Author:
`Publish date: September 15, 2003
`
`EXHIBIT 4
`
`PAGE 27/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Eastern Daylight Time) * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-5/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621499 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`apo
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 621
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 621
`
`

`

`2010-08-31=05:15pm T-915=P.028/034=F-123From-Coremetrics 6507621499
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 1
`
`LexisNexis”
`
`2 of 2 DOCUMENTS
`
`Copyright 2003 Factiva, a Dow Jones and Reuters Company
`.
`All Rights Reserved
`Dow Jones Factiva
`
`(Copyright (c) 2003, Dow Jones & Company,Inc.)
`THE WALL STREETJOURNAL.
`The Wall Street Journal
`
`September 15. 2003 Monday
`
`SECTION: Pg. R11
`
`LENGTH:1761 words
`
`HEADLINE:Technology (A Special Report) --- The Best Way To... ...Display and ]:« velop Photos
`
`BYLINE:By Yochi J. Dreazen
`
`BODY:
`
`IT'S THE QUESTIONfacing the ownersofall of today's high-tech digital camera: Once you've taken the perfect
`digital picture, what's the best way to develop or share it?
`
`With the spread of digital photography, there's been an exploston of developmen: ctions likely to please even the
`mostfinicky of photographers. In general, it depends on how you balance speed and :93!, and how high a priority you
`put on being able to share your images with others.
`
`Is the convenience and flexibility of printing at home worth ptetures that may no’. be quite as good as thase
`developed professionally? Then consider home photo printers that connect to your coin auter or directly ta your camera.
`If speed and quality are more important, then freestanding klosks at several big photo- processing centers and retailers
`are the best bet. Do you wantto share photos with a wide groupoffriends and family: ‘/eb sites where you can post
`your pictures for others to see -- and buy -- are what you need.
`a
`With those questions in mind,here's a look at the most popular methods for develaaing, printing or sharing
`pictures.
`
`WEBSITES
`
`Ofoto.com, Snapfish.com and Shutterfly.com, Redwood Shores, Calif., were amun3 the first successful Websites
`to tap the digital-photo market. And they have become only more accessible and easit:* x5 use. The three have well over
`10 million users among them, according.to the companies’estimates, with Ofoto, owr-2tl by Eastman Kodak Co..
`
`PAGE 28/34 * RCVD AT 8/31/2010 8:46:51 PM [Easter Daylight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-$/34 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:6507621498 * DURATION (mm-ss):20-28
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 622
`
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`Exhibit 1034
`Page 622
`
`

`

`2010-08-31
`
`05:16pm
`
`From-Coremetrics
`
`6507621499
`
`T-915
`
`P.029/034
`
`F-123
`
`Page 2
`Technology (A Special Report} --- The Best Way To... ...Display and Develop l’trtos The Wall Street Journal
`September 15, 2003 Monday
`
`Rochester, N.Y., the market leader. Snapfish is owned by District Photo In