DETAILED ACTION
This is a final office action on the merits. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the Office) has received claims 1–3 in application number 18048175.
Claims 1–3 are currently amended.
Claims 1–3 are pending and have been examined on the merits.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 16 March 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
IN GENERAL—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2. Marked up amended claim 2 recites:
The wherein the smart contract
Thus, claim 2 has been amended to recite that the smart contract “includes a proof-of-stake smart contract” rather than the stricken “proof-of-work blockchain certificate” includes that proof-of-stake smart contract. Applicant’s specification at 0120 describes:
The computerized method above further comprises generating a proof-of-work blockchain certificate for the creative project wherein the proof-of-work blockchain certificate includes a proof-of-stake smart contract containing intellectual property and payment information.
This language supports only the previous version of claim 2 as there is no description in applicant’s specification for one smart contract comprising another smart contract let alone the specific “proof-of-stake smart contract” now recited in claim 2. As a result, one of skill in the art would not have understood applicant as being in possession of the invention now claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 101
35 U.S.C. § 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1–3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding claims 1–3. In the present application, claims 1–3 are directed to a method (i.e., process). Thus, the eligibility analysis proceeds to Step 2A.1.
The limitations of independent claim 1 have been denoted with letters by the Examiner for easy reference. The judicial exceptions recited in claim 1 are identified in bold below:
(Currently Amended) A method for leveraging digital blockchain technology to manage development and distribution of a creative project, the method comprising:
storing, to non-transitory electronic storage media, user profiles corresponding to users, the individual user profiles including user information associated with the corresponding individual users, the user information for the individual users including blockchain addresses belonging to the individual users, the user profiles including a first user profile corresponding to a first user, a second user profile corresponding to a second user, and a third user profile corresponding to a third user, wherein the first user profile includes a first blockchain address that belongs to the first user, the second user profile includes a second blockchain address that belongs to the second user, and the third user profile includes a third blockchain address that belongs to the third user accepting inputs from a first user to establish a creator profile;
receiving inputs from the first user which characterize a creative project to be created in collaboration with one or more other ones of the users, wherein the inputs identify users which are collaborators for the creative project, including identification of the second user as a collaborator for the creative project, and wherein the inputs identify users which are investors for the creative project, including identification of the third user as a collaborator for the creative project;
writing a smart contract to a distributed blockchain for the creative project, wherein the smart contract facilitates payment of consideration on the blockchain to the collaborators for the creative project via the blockchain addresses that belong to the collaborators in response to inputs from the first user, and wherein the smart contract automatically makes payment of consideration on the blockchain to the investors of the creative project from consideration received to the smart contract for access to the creative project;
receiving inputs from the first user to cause one or more payments to one or more of the collaborators for contribution to the creative project prior to completion of the creative project, the one or more payments including a first payment to the second user; and
transmit instructions to the smart contract to which effectuate payment of consideration to the one or more of the collaborators for the creative project in accordance with the received inputs such that the first payment is made to the second blockchain address corresponding to the second user.
The limitation of A through F under the broadest reasonable interpretation covers a business arrangement among several parties to manage and then distribute payment for creation of a creative project. More specifically the claim recites storing profile and address information for several users [B], one user identifying other users as collaborators [C], writing a contract to establish consideration/payment for access to the creative project [D], receiving payment instructions for the creative project [E], and then transmitting payment for the project [F]. The broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitations taken as a whole covers an abstract idea consistent with examples under certain methods of organizing human activity such as agreements in the form of contracts, business relations between collaborators, and managing relationships or interactions between people. Accordingly, claim 1 recites an abstract idea and the analysis proceed to Step 2A.2.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements in bold below:
(Currently Amended) A method for leveraging digital blockchain technology to manage development and distribution of a creative project, the method comprising:
storing, to non-transitory electronic storage media, user profiles corresponding to users, the individual user profiles including user information associated with the corresponding individual users, the user information for the individual users including blockchain addresses belonging to the individual users, the user profiles including a first user profile corresponding to a first user, a second user profile corresponding to a second user, and a third user profile corresponding to a third user, wherein the first user profile includes a first blockchain address that belongs to the first user, the second user profile includes a second blockchain address that belongs to the second user, and the third user profile includes a third blockchain address that belongs to the third user accepting inputs from a first user to establish a creator profile;
receiving inputs from the first user which characterize a creative project to be created in collaboration with one or more other ones of the users, wherein the inputs identify users which are collaborators for the creative project, including identification of the second user as a collaborator for the creative project, and wherein the inputs identify users which are investors for the creative project, including identification of the third user as a collaborator for the creative project;
writing a smart contract to a distributed blockchain for the creative project, wherein the smart contract facilitates payment of consideration on the blockchain to the collaborators for the creative project via the blockchain addresses that belong to the collaborators in response to inputs from the first user, and wherein the smart contract automatically makes payment of consideration on the blockchain to the investors of the creative project from consideration received to the smart contract for access to the creative project;
receiving inputs from the first user to cause one or more payments to one or more of the collaborators for contribution to the creative project prior to completion of the creative project, the one or more payments including a first payment to the second user; and
transmit instructions to the smart contract to which effectuate payment of consideration to the one or more of the collaborators for the creative project in accordance with the received inputs such that the first payment is made to the second blockchain address corresponding to the second user.
The additional element(s) in bold above the intended use “for leveraging blockchain technology” [A], the generically recited “non-transitory electronic storage media” [B], the role of the “blockchain” as an environment of use [B, D, E, F], and the “smart” contract that mimics the relationships and obligations of a typical contractual obligation [D, E, F]. The individual elements allude to an environment of use of the abstract idea and in combination do not amount to more than instructions to implement the abstract idea in a general technological environment. Accordingly, the additional element(s) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and the claim is directed to an abstract idea and the analysis proceeds to Step 2B.
The additional elements, both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when the Step 2A, prong 2 considerations are reevaluated, there is nothing in the additional element(s) that is significantly more than the abstract idea or enough to provide an inventive concept. The preamble of the claim captures the conclusion here which is that the claim as a whole is instructions to perform the recited abstract idea while “leveraging [existing] digital blockchain technology” in a generic way without improvement to that technology itself. Therefore, claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Dependent claim 2 further recites the method of claim 1 wherein the smart contract includes a proof-of-stake smart contract containing intellectual property and payment information. As discussed above, the nature of the contract from a legal standpoint is part of the abstract idea. The further recitation of the additional element “smart” contract as generically comprising a “proof-of-stake” smart contract again provides only a general link to the technological environment. Accordingly, under further analysis of Step 2A, prong 2 and 2B, the claim is ineligible.
Dependent claim 3 further recites the method of claim 2 wherein the smart contract is associated with a blockchain address to facilitate management of digital rights associated with the creative project. Like dependent claim 2, the elaboration on the additional elements in claim 3 is generic only and does not provide more than a general link to the technological environment, so claim 3 is also ineligible for the same reasons as claim 2.
In summary, the dependent claims considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The claims do not recite an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or provide meaningful limitations beyond generally linking an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldston (US 2021/0248214 A1) in view of Rayat (US 2021/0142415 A1).
Regarding claim 1. Goldston—which like the present invention is directed to managing collaboratively created content through NFTs and smart contracts—teaches:
A method for leveraging digital blockchain technology to manage development and distribution of a creative project, the method comprising: [technology, systems and methods may be implemented to create, manage and share one or more content items (0008); Embodiments may be implemented to allow media content owners who own some or all of the rights associated with a media content item managed in the vault (directly, or via or an agent acting on behalf of an owner) to divest those rights to others and track the divestiture such as, for example, via … NFT … The NFT memorializes the sale (e.g., based on a smart contract) of the rights and can be recorded against a distributed ledger such as a blockchain. (0010)]
storing, to non-transitory electronic storage media, user profiles corresponding to users, the individual user profiles including user information associated with the corresponding individual users, the user information for the individual users including […] addresses belonging to the individual users, the user profiles including a first user profile corresponding to a first user, a second user profile corresponding to a second user, and a third user profile corresponding to a third user, wherein the first user profile includes a first […] address that belongs to the first user, the second user profile includes a second […] address that belongs to the second user, and the third user profile includes a third […] address that belongs to the third user accepting inputs from a first user to establish a creator profile; [The account management module 210 is for creating accounts (i.e., addresses) with the digital vault (i.e., non-transitory electronic storage media) for plural owners. (0080); The digital vault, such as through the management module 260 (FIG. 2) may automatically create and store as metadata for each media item a length of the media item[,] … album name, performing artist names, producer name, arranger name, recording engineer name, recording studio name, recording date and time, author name, lyrics author name, genre and sub-genre. (0092)]
receiving inputs from the first user which characterize a creative project to be created in collaboration with one or more other ones of the users, wherein the inputs identify users which are collaborators for the creative project, including identification of the second user as a collaborator for the creative project, and […]; [FIG. 17 illustrates an example scenario of hybrid music creation in which multiple creators 610 create content in a cloud-based environment and another collaborator performs content creation in a local environment. … For example, the system may send a recipient a link or other designation to access the container stored in data store 622. (0155–156);
writing a smart contract to a distributed blockchain for the creative project, wherein the smart contract facilitates payment of consideration on the blockchain to the collaborators for the creative project via the blockchain addresses that belong to the collaborators in response to inputs from the first user, and [The system may also be configured to accept an English language or other human readable form of terms and conditions from the seller and to compile those into the machine-readable contract automatically such at the smart contract can be created from a human generated term sheet. (0122);
wherein the smart contract automatically makes payment of consideration on the blockchain to the [co-owners or other contributors] of the creative project from consideration received to the smart contract for access to the creative project; [With a token transaction, the smart contract can define the parameters of the transaction this can include, for example, terms such as purchase price; agent/broker commissions; royalties or residuals for the seller, co-owners or other contributors; limitations or conditions on rights; and so on. (0215)]
receiving inputs from the first user to cause one or more payments to one or more of the collaborators for contribution to the creative project […], the one or more payments including a first payment to the second user; and [Different 'splits' may be specified for different forms of rights in the content (e.g., rights to perform, reproduce, display, distribute, create derivative works, etc.). Similar to or in conformance with this, the NFT (e.g., via a smart contract or otherwise) can specify parties who are to receive payment associated with the content being transferred and the splits or distributions they are to receive. For example, a smart contract associated with the transaction may specify how payment for the transfer is to be distributed upon receipt, or who is to be paid what amounts. Where royalty payments, payments for future transfers of the rights or other future payments are contemplated, the smart contract may specify how such future payments are to be distributed or paid among the various rights holders. (0215)]
transmit instructions to the smart contract to which effectuate payment of consideration to the one or more of the collaborators for the creative project in accordance with the received inputs such that the first payment is made to the second blockchain address corresponding to the second user. [the content management system collects the payments and conducts the distributions associated with a sale, future sales, royalties or other payments that come due. Payments may be distributed as specified in the smart contract for the subject NFT and the content metadata can be updated to reflect the payment distribution rules. The content management system can also be configured to act as an escrow agent for such transactions. (0216)]
Goldston teaches participants sending a link or other designation to access the container stored in a data store as a way to collaborate. Goldston implies that the participants have addresses to which the links can be sent, and that NFTs are used to manage content (0084) and memorialize asset sales via smart contracts on a blockchain (0010).
However, Goldston does not expressly teach (in italics):
that the addresses belonging to each user are blockchain addresses;
wherein the inputs identify users which are investors for the creative project, including identification of the third user as a collaborator for the creative project
wherein the smart contract automatically makes payment of consideration on the blockchain to the investors of the creative project.
receiving inputs from the first user to cause one or more payments to one or more of the collaborators for contribution to the creative project prior to completion of the creative project, the one or more payments including a first payment to the second user.
Nonetheless, Rayat—which like the present invention is directed to collaborative creation of projects using blockchain technology to establish and record relationships between parties—teaches:
wherein the inputs identify users which are investors for the creative project, including identification of the third user as a collaborator for the creative project; [Pitch events are venues where ideas or products/services are pitched to audiences usually comprising entrepreneurs, experts, investors, customers, service providers, and others with a general interest in such events. Pitch events find applications in various fields such as pitching ideas for ventures (startups), ideas and/or scripts for movies or shows, business plan presentations and intra- and intercollegiate business plan/new-venture competitions, and intra-organizational ideas for new products/projects and/or innovations to existing products/projects. (0018); Game participants who have invested in a particular startup-that is, its investors-may receive updates and notifications from the startup … the update or an ask that is posted by the startup is sent to its investor-group, and only when the individual investors in that group engage with that post such as by liking it, sharing it, or replying to it, that the startup may be able to identify them as its investors. (0038)]
wherein the smart contract automatically makes payment of consideration on the blockchain to the investors of the creative project. [A game participant playing the role of investor can receive virtual money in a plurality of ways including but not limited to buying it with real money, receiving virtual money upon joining a pitch competition, upon rating another participant's pitch, upon creating a new account, by referring new users to the gamified startup ecosystem, earning gains via profitable return on investments in other participants such as startups and Funds, (0023); blockchain is used to record transactions on the gamified startup ecosystem and track the cap table to keep immutable records; it may also have an option to convert the cap table into a token; and updating ownership records may occur in the blockchain-based cap tables when trades are settled via smart contracts. (0060); Although the gamified startup ecosystem may run on virtual money and virtual shares, users may be able to use real money including cryptocurrency to buy virtual money, and convert virtual money into real money including cryptocurrency when certain conditions may be met. (0069)]
receiving inputs from the first user to cause one or more payments to one or more of the collaborators for contribution to the creative project prior to completion of the creative project, the one or more payments including a first payment to the second user. [In one aspect of the invention, game participants can play the role of service providers that include but are not limited to accountants, lawyers, graphic designers, web developers, artists, coders, investment analysts, wealth advisors, recruiters, and coaches. … Startups can pay for their services in part or full from the virtual money raised from game participants who play the role of investors. (0044)]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roles of and payouts to collaborators in the creative project taught by Goldston to include investors and service providers as taught by Rayat because “[w]hen taking their innovations to the market, entrepreneurs experience many struggles, with one of them being lack of resources to develop their products, test their ideas, find product-market fit, promote their products, and fundraise.” (Rayat, 0002). Thus, by accommodating the ability for investors to support the creative project in Goldston, Rayat allows start up to pay collaborators who provide services needed prior to completion of the project, such as coaching, legal advice, accounting, etc., and thereby addresses a recognized need in the area of creative or start up projects, which is that artists or entrepreneurs often lack the capital and/or specific skills to bring their vision to reality.
Claims 2–3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldston in view of Rayat as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cella (US 2021/0342836 A1).
Regarding claim 2. The combination of Goldston in view of Rayat teaches the limitations of claim 1 above. Goldston expressly describes applicability to projects that can be covered by copyright (Goldston 0082) while Rayat mentions projects that fall under intellectual property-intensive industries like movies (Rayat 0018). However, the combination of Goldston in view of Rayat does not specifically teach wherein the smart contract includes a proof-of-stake smart contract containing intellectual property and payment information.
Nonetheless, Cella—which like the present invention is directed to managing rights related to digital content—teaches:
wherein the smart contract includes a proof-of-stake smart contract containing intellectual property and payment information. [In some embodiments, the distributed ledger 16808 may store smart contracts 16840 configured to facilitate licensing of one or more intellectual property rights corresponding to an instance of digital knowledge, such as know-how, patented material, trademarks, works of authorship (e.g., copyrights), and/or trade secrets. (0902); Operations on blockchains, such as ones using cryptocurrency, increasingly require energy-intensive computing operations, such as calculating very large hash functions on growing chains of blocks. Systems using proof-of-work, proof-of-stake, and the like have led to "mining" operations by which computer processing power is applied at a large scale in order to perform calculations that support collective trust in transactions that are recorded in blockchains. (0019)]
Note: Claim 2 does not recite a further method step nor does the recited content of the smart contract impact any positively recited method step. Therefore, claim 2 does not distinguish the claim from the prior art. Specifically, nothing about the nature of the smart contract as a “proof-of-stake” or the contents thereof impacts how a recited method step is performed; this is non-functional descriptive material. Nonetheless, the examiner has cited prior art to teach claim 2 and support compact prosecution.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the smart contract on a blockchain for managing intellectual property assets as taught by the combination of Goldston in view of Rayat, to incorporate smart contracts that leverage proof-of-work or proof-of-stake mechanisms as taught by Cella to provide greater security and validation in the event of a dispute (Cella 1162) which one of skill in the art would recognize to be a common occurrence in copyright-intensive industries.
Dependent claim 3. The combination of Goldston in view of Rayat in view of Cella teaches the limitations of claim 2 above. Goldston further teaches:
wherein the smart contract is associated with a blockchain address to facilitate management of digital rights associated with the creative project. [For example, embodiments may be configured to allow a content owner (i.e., him or herself or via an agent) to sell an NFT, which embodies the ownership or other rights to the asset to be divested. The NFT memorializes the sale (e.g., based on a smart contract) of the rights and can be recorded against a distributed ledger such as a blockchain. (0010)]
Note: Claim 3 does not recite a further method step nor does the recited content of the smart contract impact any positively recited method step. Therefore, claim 2 does not distinguish the claim from the prior art. Nonetheless, the examiner has cited prior art to teach claim 3 and support compact prosecution.
Response to Remarks
Applicant’s amendment to claim 2 has overcome the previous objection.
On pages 5–6, applicant argues that the amended claims overcome the 101 rejection because “the amendments include specific details regarding the implementation of distributed blockchain technology to achieve the effect of the abstract idea. … claim 1 recites details of the specific technology environment (e.g., a distributed blockchain) for the claimed invention.”
The examiner has considered the remarks and respectfully disagrees. The claim does not recite a specific technology environment. Rather, the recitation of distributed blockchain technology is only generically recited in the claim, and the abstract idea is only generally linked to this environment. As shown in the updated rejection above, the majority of the claim recites the abstract idea, with only superficial connection to a distributed ledger through labeling the contract as a “smart” contract and the user addresses as “blockchain” addresses. The additional elements here do almost nothing to specifically tie the abstract idea to a technological environment beyond providing instruction to “apply” the abstract idea in that environment.
Regarding remarks on pages 7–8, the examiner notes that the claims are heavily amended and the remarks rely solely on the new claim language. Because the amendments have necessitated new grounds of rejection for each of the claims, the remarks are not ripe as they do not address the evidence provided in the updated grounds of rejection. Therefore, the remarks are not persuasive. Nonetheless, the examiner responds to applicant’s remarks regarding Goldston and Cella, as they are relied upon in the current rejection.
On page 7, applicant states that “Goldston fails to disclose being able to compensate collaborators to a creative project prior to completion of the creative project.” This is incorrect. Goldston discloses payment of royalty fees for use of the digital asset (e.g., 0122) and payments to the rightsholders (e.g., 0051). These are just two examples, but there are many throughout Goldston. Therefore, Goldston does disclose “being able to compensate” the rightsholders in a creative, collaborative project by collecting royalty payments for use of that project and distributing those funds back to the creators/owners of the asset.
On pages 7–8, applicant further states that, “There is no discussion in Goldston whatsoever of actually compensating collaborators prior to completion and distribution or sale of the creative project.” Notwithstanding applicant’s remarks, the examiner notes that the concept of paying collaborators prior to completion of the project is taught by Rayat in the rejection above. Applicant’s remarks pertaining to Goldston alone fail to show the claimed invention would not have been obvious over the combination of Goldston in view of Rayat.
On page 8 applicant provides only a general assertion that amended claims 2 and 3 are patentable over Goldston in view of Cella. As the remarks are based on the amended claims and do not address the updated rejection over Goldston in view of Rayat in view of Cella, they are not persuasive.
Relevant Prior Art Not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. The additional cited art, including but not limited to the excerpts below, further establishes the state of the art at the time of Applicant’s invention and shows the following was known:
A platform system for creating collaborative project data where a project collaborators create projects and content by inputting project information on a platform and recording the project information on a public or private blockchain. A plurality of data researchers collect data from various entities based upon the project information and then record the collected data on the blockchain. Collected data is selected based on criteria and payment made to the data researcher. (Hein)
In embodiments, method 300 may be programmed to progress from step 318 to step 320, at which point the originator and the co-collaborators may pull an initial payment from the platform. For example, distributed computer system 110 may execute programmed instructions to interface with client computing device 120 or app 122 to receive digital input specifying a desire to retrieve monies or cryptocurrency earned through online auction or sale of a collaborative NFT on the platform. In an embodiment, when the auction concludes, the payment or an equivalently valued amount of cryptocurrency may be deposited in a smart contract associated with the collaborative NFT, the smart contract existing on the same blockchain as the collaborative NFT. The platform may programmatically set aside a pre-determined amount of the payment as a commission to the platform, which may be 5% or another amount. The originator and co-collaborators may then pull the proceeds from the smart contract to their respective cryptocurrency wallets, corresponding to the amount of authorship shares held by the respective content creator in the smart contract, for example, after being prompted to do so by distributed computer system 110 executing instructions formatted to cause a prompt to be displayed on client computing device 120 or app 122. An operator of the platform may pull the commission to a platform wallet, or it may be done automatically by the platform by distributed computer system 110 executing instructions. (Barbashin)
encryption key pairs used for encrypting transactions within the consortium blockchain network can be referred to as service keys (i.e., private-public key pair). In some examples, service keys are derived in units of service types. Each service key has a different participant, and a participant can have multiple service keys within the consortium blockchain network. For example, service keys can correspond to transactions between participants within the consortium blockchain network. By way of non-limiting example, a first participant and a second participant can have respective service keys that enable private transactions to be conducted between the first participant and the second participant within the consortium blockchain network. The first participant and a third participant can have respective service keys that enable private transactions to be conducted between the first participant and the third participant within the consortium blockchain network. In this example, the first participant has a set of service keys, one for transactions with the second participant, and another for transaction with the third participant. (Zhang)
The node 105 includes a bus 130 or other communication mechanism for communicating information, and a processor 135 coupled with the bus 130 for processing information. The node 105 also includes a memory 140, such as a random-access memory (RAM) or other dynamic storage device, coupled to the bus 130 for storing information and instructions to be executed by the processor 135. The memory 140 can be used for storing temporary variables or other intermediate information during execution of instructions to be executed by the processor 135. The node 105 further includes a read only memory (ROM) 145 or other static storage device coupled to bus 130 for storing static information and instructions for processor 135. A storage unit 150, such as a magnetic disk or optical disk, is provided and coupled to the bus 130. The storage unit 150 may also include a digital ledger 155 for storing timestamped records of online transactions between the creator 112 and the investor 117 on the online transaction platform 125 provided by the node 105. In some embodiments, the node 105 may store the timestamped records of the online transactions in the digital ledger 155 corresponding to one or more actions performed by the creator 112 using the creator device 110 and/or the investor 117 using the investor device 115. Examples of the actions include, but are not limited, creating a digital smart contract, uploading digital assets, and offering services or products for sale. The timestamped records may include information such as, but not limited to, date and time of the creation of the digital smart contract, date and time of updates made to the digital smart contract, name of the creator 112 and/or the investor 117 involved in the digital smart contract, financial details corresponding to the digital smart contract, payment made by the investor 117, and date and time of payments made by the investor 117 and/or received by the creator 112. (Anderson)
At step 808, the smart contract may process the payment via the distributed ledger. For instance, an object licensing system of the digital object marketplace may transmit a payment request to a payment processing system of the digital object marketplace for processing and distribution of the user's payment to the content creator and the DAO investors according to the terms specified in the smart contract. … For instance, the smart contract may transfer portions of the payment to the digital wallets of the content creators associated with the digital object and to the DAO investors according to the defined distribution schema. (Apollo)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patrick McAtee whose telephone number is (571)272-7575. The examiner can normally be reached Weekdays 8:30am - 4:30pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tariq Hafiz can be reached at (571) 272-5350. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Patrick McAtee
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3698
/PATRICK MCATEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3698