DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s correspondence filed on 2/25/26.
The Examiner notes that citations to United States Patent Application Publication paragraphs are formatted as [####], #### representing the paragraph number.
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.
Status of Claims
Claims 2-7, 9-11, 13-21 are currently pending.
Claims 2-7, 9-11, 13-21 are rejected as set forth below.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 2, 13, 21 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The rejection (and corresponding rejections to its dependent claims, if applicable) is maintained.
Applicant contends Block fails to teach or suggest a token enabling anonymous transfer of the digital media right by the first user. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, Block teaches ownership data/content access metadata 250, i.e. a token, that represents the digital media right to the digital content ([0050], [0054]-[0056]). Second, under broadest reasonable interpretation, the term enable is interpreted as to make possible1. Any token that does not explicitly preclude an anonymous transfer allows the possibility for an anonymous transfer. Furthermore, the claims do not explicitly require that the transfer is anonymous.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 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.
Claims 2-7, 11, 13-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. 20130060661 to Block in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 20070265932 to Im and United States Patent Application Publication No. 20110225236 to Kim.
As per claim(s) 2, 13, 21, Block teaches:
receiving, by a processor of a rights coordinator computing system via a network from a first user device of a first user, an indication to transfer a digital media right of the first user for a digital content; ([0054], “At step 330, the particular entity receives transfer request data that indicates a request for authorized access to the digital content item to be transferred from the first user to a second user that is different than the first user”; [0071]-[0075], “Jeff then notifies intermediary 120 about his digital book and the new prospective owner, Sally, which notification may include a content identifier that identifies the digital book and a transferee identifier that identifies Sally, one of her devices, or one of her accounts (e.g., established and maintained by intermediary 120).”)
responsive to the receiving of the indication, verifying, by a verification module of the rights coordinator computing system, authenticity of a digital certificate for the digital content; in response to verifying the authenticity of the digital certificate, generating, by the rights coordinator computing system, a token describing the digital media right to the digital content owned by the first user, the token enabling anonymous transfer of the digital media right by the first user ([0050], “Instead of transferring an instance of the digital data item 204 to device 240, the content access metadata 250 that indicates that digital content item 204 is owned by end-user 130 may be updated to indicate that (a) end-user 140 is authorized to access digital content item 204, and (b) end-user 130 no longer is authorized to access digital content item 204. Any mechanism for indicating who is authorized (or not) to access the digital content item may be used. Based on the updated content access metadata 250, intermediary 120 prevents end-user 130 from further accessing digital content item 204 after the transfer has been completed.”; [0054]-[0056], "At step 330, the particular entity receives transfer request data that indicates a request for authorized access to the digital content item to be transferred from the first user to a second user that is different than the first user. The second user is not authorized to access the digital content item prior to the particular entity granting the request. At step 340, the particular entity, in response to receiving the transfer request data, determines whether the one or more conditions are satisfied. At step 350, the particular entity, in response to determining that the one or more conditions are satisfied, stores second ownership data that (a) authorizes the second user to access the digital content item and (b) revokes authorization of the first user to access the digital content item. The second ownership data may be data within content access metadata 250 that is associated with the digital content item.”; It is noted that a token that enables, or to make possible2, anonymous transfer of a digital media right does not result in the anonymous transfer being explicitly performed. This is supported by the following transfer of the digital media right not being claimed as being an anonymous transfer.)
based on an agreement to transfer the digital media right, transferring, by a transfer module of the rights coordinator computing system, the digital media right of the digital content from the first user to a second user. ([0057], "At step 360, the particular entity, based on the second ownership data, prevents the first user from further accessing the digital content item. As noted below, one example of preventing the first user from accessing a digital content item is to cause each copy of the digital content item on all of the first user's devices (e.g., devices 230 and 232) to be deleted.")
in responsive to the generating of the token, disabling, by a block module of the rights coordinator computing system, authorization of the first user to the digital content; ([0054]-[0056], “At step 350, the particular entity, in response to determining that the one or more conditions are satisfied, stores second ownership data that (a) authorizes the second user to access the digital content item and (b) revokes authorization of the first user to access the digital content item.”)
As an alternative rejection, Im teaches:
receiving an indication to transfer digital media rights; ([0034]-[0035], "First, a protected content is transmitted to the rights acquisition agent that is a DRM agent through the transmission/reception unit 120. Thereafter, if a request for a token for rights resale is received from the rights acquisition agent through the transmission/reception unit 120, a token for rights resale is generated by the token generation unit 130, with reference to a rights object provided from the storage unit 110.")
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Im to the known invention of Block would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved invention. It would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such digital rights management features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the invention to include the step of receiving an indication to transfer digital media rights results in an improved invention because applying said technique ensures that the invention supports the secure transfer of content while preventing illegal duplicates, thus improving the overall security of the invention.
Block as modified does not explicitly teach, but Kim teaches:
transferring content based on a content voucher; ([0069], “The first client 40 requests the second server 42 to transmit the application or the content, which has been purchased in step 420, based on the application voucher or the content voucher, which has been received in step 450. At this time, the first client 40 may transmit the application voucher or the content voucher, which has been received in step 450, to the second server 42.")
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Kim to the known invention of Block as modified would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved invention. It would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such digital rights management features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the invention to include the step of transferring content based on a content voucher results in an improved invention because applying said technique ensures that the invention supports the secure transfer of content while preventing illegal duplicates, thus improving the overall security of the invention.
As per claim(s) 3, 14, Im teaches:
wherein the transferring the digital media right comprises the first user device obtaining and transferring the token to a second user device of the second user. ([0054]-[0056], "Then, the rights acquisition agent requests the rights object to the rights issuer using the token for rights resale at step (S320). Thereafter, the rights acquisition agent receives the rights object from the rights issuer at step (S330). Then, the rights acquisition agent releases the locking state of the protected content using the received rights object, and then plays the content of which the locking state has been released according to the use information included in the token for rights resale at step (S340).")
As per claim(s) 4, 15, Im teaches:
wherein the transferring comprises transferring, by the rights coordinator system, the token directly from the rights coordinator system to a second user device of the second user. ([0054]-[0056])
As per claim(s) 5, Im teaches:
wherein generating the token comprises extracting the digital media rights from an account of the first user. ([0040]-[0041], "The rights resale agent transmits the protected content received from the content provider to the rights acquisition agent at step (S210). Then, the rights resale agent generates a token for rights resale with reference to its own rights object at step (S220). Here, step (S210) and step (S220) may be successively performed as shown, or may be performed in parallel.")
As per claim(s) 6, 16, Kim teaches:
receiving a request from a second user device of the user to associate the token with an account of the second user; ([0080], "The first client 50 accesses the second server 52 to request the purchased application or content. At this time, the first client 50 may access the second client 53 by using the same account as used in step 510 by the second client 5 3 to access the second server 52. When the first client 50 accesses the second server 52, the first client 50 may transmit device information of the first client 50 to the second server 52.")
in response to the request, associating the digital media right with the account of the second user. ([0087], "The server generates an application by compiling a source or intermediate code of the application according to the transmitted device information so that the application can be installed in and driven by the client 10, 30, 40, or 50 and transmits the generated application to the application/content management unit 620. The application may be an application package including a file for executing the application. Alternatively, if content is purchased, the server may re-encode the purchased content so that the content may be reproduced by the client 10, 30, 40, or 50 and may transmit the re-encoded content to the application/content management unit 620.")
As per claim(s) 7, 17, Kim teaches:
in response to associating the digital media right with the account of the second user, invalidating the token at the rights coordinator system. ([0105], The purchase voucher is used only to retrieve the purchased content.)
As per claim(s) 11, 19, Block teaches:
determining that the first user owns the digital certificate; and identifying a scope of the digital media right that is transferable. ([0054]- [0056], "At step 330, the particular entity receives transfer request data that indicates a request for authorized access to the digital content item to be transferred from the first user to a second user that is different than the first user. The second user is not authorized to access the digital content item prior to the particular entity granting the request. At step 340, the particular entity, in response to receiving the transfer request data, determines whether the one or more conditions are satisfied At step 350, the particular entity, in response to determining that the one or more conditions are satisfied, stores second ownership data that (a) authorizes the second user to access the digital content item and (b) revokes authorization of the first user to access the digital content item. The second ownership data may be data within content access metadata 250 that is associated with the digital content item.")
As per claim(s) 18, Block teaches:
in responsive to the generating of the token, disabling, by a block module of the rights coordinator computing system, authorization of the first user to the digital content; ([0054]-[0056], “At step 350, the particular entity, in response to determining that the one or more conditions are satisfied, stores second ownership data that (a) authorizes the second user to access the digital content item and (b) revokes authorization of the first user to access the digital content item.”)
As per claim(s) 20, Im teaches:
wherein the token describes the digital media rights associated with the digital content without identifying the seller. ([0054]-[0056], "Then, the rights acquisition agent requests the rights object to the rights issuer using the token for rights resale at step (S320). Thereafter, the rights acquisition agent receives the rights object from the rights issuer at step (S330). Then, the rights acquisition agent releases the locking state of the protected content using the received rights object, and then plays the content of which the locking state has been released according to the use information included in the token for rights resale at step (S340).")
Claims 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. 20130060661 to Block in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 20070265932 to Im and United States Patent Application Publication No. 20110022536 to Kim, and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 20130174223 to Dykeman.
As per claim(s) 9, Block as modified does not explicitly teach, but Dykeman teaches:
wherein the disabling comprising sending, to the first user device, a request to remove a license to the digital media right for the digital content at the first user device. ([0210], "In some embodiments, control circuitry 304 of the second user device may update second content authorization information to remove the access right as described above in reference to step 1380, and/or disable access to the corresponding content asset for the second user. In some implementations, the second user device may continue to access the content asset after expiration of the temporary access right or termination of the content sharing relationship for a duration that corresponds to the length of the content asset or at least long enough to complete access of the content asset. As an example, a user may have been granted a temporary access right for four hours. At the end of four hours, the temporary access right expires. However, if the second user device is still accessing the content asset when the temporary access right expires, the second user device may continue to access the content asset until access of the content asset is complete. For example, control circuitry 304 of a second user device may determine that a temporary access right has expired, and that the content asset is still being accessed for playback. Control circuitry 304 of the second user device may continue to access the content asset until play back is complete. Once access of the content asset is completed, and the temporary access right has expired, control circuitry of the second may disable access to the content asset and update second content authorization information to remove the temporary access right.”)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Dykeman to the known invention of Block as modified would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved invention. It would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such digital rights management features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the disabling to include the step of sending, to the first user device, a request to remove a license to the digital media right for the digital content at the first user device results in an improved invention because applying said technique ensures that any local copies of the digital media right stored on the first user device is removed, thus improving the overall security of the invention.
As per claim(s) 10, Block as modified does not explicitly teach, but Dykeman teaches:
unblocking access to the digital content for the first user based on the digital media right not transferring after a specified time period. ([0133], "Control circuitry 304 of the web server may also determine whether a temporary access right assigned from a first to a second user has expired, and in response to determining that the access right has expired, update first and second content authorization information, and disable access of the access right for the second user.")
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Dykeman to the known invention of Block as modified would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved invention. It would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such digital rights management features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the invention to include the step of unblocking access to the digital content for the first user based on the digital media right not transferring after a specified time period results in an improved invention because applying said technique ensures that the first user’s access to the digital content is automatically restored in case the transfer fails, thus improving the overall user experience of the invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
United States Patent Application Publication No. 20040003270 to Bourne discloses an invention in which content is encrypted according to a content key (CK) ((CK(content))), (CK) is protected according to a license server public key (PU-DRM), and rights data associated with the content is protected according to (PU-DRM). The protected items are submitted as a rights label to the license server for signing. The license server validates the rights label and, if valid, digitally signs based on the protected rights data to result in a signed rights label (SRL), and returns same. The SRL is concatenated with (CK(content)) and both are distributed to a user. To render the content, the user submits the SRL to the license server to request a license. The license server verifies the SRL signature and reviews the SRL protected rights data to determine whether the user is entitled to the license, and if so issues the license, including (CK) in a protected form accessible to the user.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JAY HUANG whose telephone number is (408)918-9799. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00a - 5:30p PT.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at (571) 270-3614. 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.
/JAY HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
1 “Enable.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/enable. Accessed 27 Aug. 2026.
2 “Enable.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/enable. Accessed 27 Aug. 2026.
Prosecution Insights