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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/01/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 10, 19, 20 and 21 are amended. Claim 11 is canceled. Claims 1-10 and 12-26 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Examiner’s remarks - 35 USC § 103
The examiner notes that applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10 and 12-26 have been considered but are now moot in view of the new ground of rejection(s) of JACOBSON (WO 2023004159), Chen (WO-2020197547) and PRABHU et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2019/0028780).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(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 the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 21 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant’s newly amended claim feature of, “thereby embedding the digital signature of the speaker's statements into the visual environment such that authenticity of a recording of the speaker is verifiable by extracting words from the recording using speech recognition and comparing the extracted words to the time-indexed representation”, lacks explicit support from applicant’s original disclosure.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 12-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JACOBSON (WO 2023004159) in view of Chen (WO-2020197547) and further in view PRABHU et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2019/0028780 and PRABHU hereinafter).
As to claim 1, JACOBSON teaches a content authenticity mobile device, comprising:
a sensor configured to record a media signal originated from a speaker who is expressing verbal information in a language (i.e., …figure 2a, fig. element 202 states that the speaker wears a “TrueBadege” that receives the audio);
a display (i.e., …figure 2a, fig. element 203 and 204 …States that the “TrueBadge” displays encoded timestamped audio slices and records a portion of the audio);
and a processor configured to: generate visual content by signing the media signal with a key and a recording time of the media signal (i.e., …figure 2a, fig. element 203 and 204 …States that the “TrueBadge” displays encoded timestamped audio slices and records a portion of the audio…figure 2a fig. element 204 states that the audio is signed with a key);
and instruct the display to render the visual content (i.e., …teaches in par. 0063 the following: “0063] For example, the Senator could use the TrueBadge to display encrypted, signed audio and post the public keys anywhere without any cloud or blockchain service, even DeepAuthentic’s cloud system. … the Senator could opt to buy, but not register the TrueBadge, set the badge to display signed audio and related encrypted meta-data including the device serial number, but post the decoding public key(s) anywhere or withhold them.”. …figure 2a fig. element 205 discloses display the audio signature).
JACOBSON does not expressly teach:
thereby digitally signing the content that visually documents the speaker expressing the verbal information.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CEN.
CHEN teaches in par. 0026 the following: “the digitally signed information may be displayed in the form of images or audio so as to be captured by the camera. Thus, when watching the captured video, a viewer can verify the authenticity of the speech in the video using the signed information included in the video.”. CHEN teaches in par. 0035 the following: “speech recognition may be performed on the video to obtain sentences spoken by the speaker while the video is being played, those sentences automatically compared with the sentences in the signatures, and an indication displayed as to whether there is a match with the signature information (whether the video has been forged/altered)”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON with the teachings of CHEN by having their system comprise an enhanced audio forgery detection process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further secure audio data, wherein the enhanced audio forgery detection process helps to prevent audio signal forgery and makes it easier to ensure audio data integrity.
The system of JACOBSON and CHEN does not expressly:
generate visual content by signing the media signal with a key and a recording time of the media signal, the extracted verbal information,
wherein the visual content comprises a time-indexed representation of words recognized from the media signal via speech recognition,
is configured such that when captured in a recording of the speaker,
authenticity of the recording is verifiable by extracting words from the recording using the speech recognition and the visual content from the recording,
determining whether the words extracted from the recording corresponds to the time-indexed representation of the recognized words.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference PRABHU.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “generate visual content by signing the media signal with a key and a recording time of the media signal the extracted verbal information”, teaches in the abstract the following: “audio-video sequence within a time index range of the sequence”. Teaches in par. 0029 the following: “annotation information for the sequence and time index … time indices in the time index range for the sequence”. Teaches in par. 0030 the following: “performs speech transcription against a subrange of the audio component”. Teaches in their abstract the following: “obtain speech text for at least one speaker.”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “wherein the visual content comprises a time-indexed representation of words recognized from the media signal via speech recognition”, teaches in their abstract the following: “time index range of the sequence containing the CPP, the facility performs automatic image recognition against the video component to obtain identifying information identifying at least one person, object, or location”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “is configured such that when captured in a recording of the speaker”, teaches in their abstract the following: “the facility performs automatic voice transcription against the audio component to obtain speech text for at least one speaker. For a second portion of the time index range of the sequence containing the CPP, the facility performs automatic image recognition against the video component to obtain identifying information identifying at least one person, object, or location.”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “authenticity of the recording is verifiable by extracting words from the recording using the speech recognition and (ii) the visual content from the recording”, teaches in their abstract the following: “the facility performs automatic voice transcription against the audio component to obtain speech text for at least one speaker. For a second portion of the time index range of the sequence containing the CPP, the facility performs automatic image recognition against the video component to obtain identifying information identifying at least one person, object, or location.”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “determining whether the words extracted from the recording corresponds to the time-indexed representation of the recognized words”, teaches in their abstract the following: “a time-indexed video sequence is synchronized with a corresponding time-indexed audio sequence”. Teaches in par. 0036 the following: “transcribed speech 762, and an identification 761 of the corresponding speaker,”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON and Chen with the teachings of PRABHU by having their system comprise an enhanced media comparison process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further process audio and video data, wherein the enhanced media comparison process helps to detect audio signal forgery and makes it easier to ensure data security.
As to claim 2, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 1 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a content authenticity mobile device of claim 1, further comprising a network interface configured to acquire the timestamped key via a network (i.e., …teaches in par. 0029 the following: “time signals (from clocks or GPS)”).
As to claim 3, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 1 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a content authenticity mobile device of claim 1, wherein the processor generates the visual content also based on geographic coordinates of the environment (i.e., …teaches in par. 0077 the following: “Meta-Data displaying an arbitrary session name amended with GMT start time or GPS location, or only be a file name including GMT or a GMT+GPS location time-place stamp.”).
As to claim 4, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 1 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a content authenticity mobile device of claim 3, wherein the geographic coordinates are received as a one-time code from a location module (i.e., …teaches in par. 0077 the following: “Meta-Data displaying an arbitrary session name amended with GMT start time or GPS location, or only be a file name including GMT or a GMT+GPS location time-place stamp.”).
As to claim 5, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 1 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a content authenticity mobile device of claim 1, wherein the sensor is a microphone and the media signal is an audio signal (i.e. …teaches in par. 0070 the following: “a TrueBadge may receive ambient audio via a microphone 402”).
As to claim 6, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 1 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a content authenticity mobile device of claim 1, wherein the sensor is a camera and the media signal is a video signal documenting lips movement of the speaker (i.e., …teaches in par. 0073 the following: “captured by video recording devices”).
As to claim 7, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 1 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a content authenticity mobile device of claim 1, further comprising an movement sensor configured to record movement of the speaker while the speaker expresses the verbal information (i.e., …teaches in par. 0029 the following: “accelerometer data”); wherein the visual content is generated based on the movement of the speaker (i.e. …teaches in par. 0114 the following: “feedback from a 3D accelerometer or even devices which monitor the movement”).
As to claim 8, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 1 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a content authenticity mobile device of claim 1, wherein the movement sensor is selected from a group consisting of an accelerometer, an inertial measurement unit (IMU), a magnetometer, and a gyroscope (i.e. …teaches in par. 0114 the following: “accelerometer”. … teaches in par. 0114 the following: “feedback from a 3D accelerometer or even devices which monitor the movement)
As to claim 9, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 1 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a content authenticity mobile device of claim 1, wherein the content authenticity mobile device is a smartphone device (i.e., …teaches in par. 0045 the following: “a smart watch running”).
As to claims 10 and 19, JACOBSON teaches a method for authenticating media content, comprising:
receiving a recording imaging a speaker and a content authenticity mobile device in proximity to the speaker and a recording time of the recording (i.e., …teaches in par. 0048 the following: “saving a signed canonical recording, uploading live environment stamped recordings, contemporaneous radio broadcasting of the information in the visual display, dynamic illumination of the Senator or his background, and other protections”);
extracting from the recording: verbal information expressed by the speaker in a language, authenticity mobile device (i.e., …teaches in par. 0047 the following: “since the decoder can extract all the speech audio encoded in the TrueBadge display frames along with ordering, session time, elapsed time information, identification and authenticating signatures. TrueBadge may include a SEDW device that allows anyone in the world to inspect and verify the veracity of the scene the recorded media purports to show. Because anyone can do it and the check does not require mediation through a human authority; it is ultimately democratic and objective.”);
decoding the media content based on the recording time (i.e., …teaches in par. 0047 the following: “since the decoder can extract all the speech audio encoded in the TrueBadge display frames along with ordering, session time, elapsed time information, identification and authenticating signatures. TrueBadge may include a SEDW device that allows anyone in the world to inspect and verify the veracity of the scene the recorded media purports to show.”).
JACOBSON does not expressly teach:
speech recognition.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CEN.
CHEN teaches in par. 0030 the following: “when a viewer watches the video or listens to the audio using a client device, the client device may decode the associated signals to reconstruct the sentences spoken by the speaker at the time when the video was captured and compare those sentences with the sentences spoken by the speaker in the video content. Thus, whether the speaker did say sentences that appear in the watched video when video was captured can be verified.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON with the teachings of CHEN by having their system comprise an enhanced audio forgery detection process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further secure audio data, wherein the enhanced audio forgery detection process helps to prevent audio signal forgery and makes it easier to ensure audio data integrity.
The system of JACOBSON and CHEN does not expressly teach:
wherein the displayed media content comprises a time-associated representation of words previously recognized,
using speech recognition performed by the content authenticity mobile device, from speech expressed by the speaker,
authenticating the recording by comparing the extracted verbal information from the recording to the time-associated representation in the decoded media content displayed on the content authenticity mobile device.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference PRABHU.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “wherein the displayed media content comprises a time-associated representation of words previously recognized, PRABHU teaches in par. 0030 the following: “In some cases, this subrange extends past the time index by at least a few seconds. Performing the speech transcription results in transcribed text strings for each of one or more speakers who speech is heard in the subrange of the audio component.”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “using speech recognition performed by the content authenticity mobile device, from speech expressed by the speaker”, PRABHU teaches in their abstract the following: “transcription against the audio component to obtain speech text for at least one speaker.”. Teaches in par. 001 the following: “a time-indexed video sequence is synchronized with a corresponding time-indexed audio sequence.”. Teaches in par. 0003 the following: “voice transcription against the audio component to obtain speech text for at least one speaker.”. Teaches in par. 0019 the following: “the facility recognizes people by performing speaker recognition against a time range in the audio sequence”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “authenticating the recording by comparing the extracted verbal information from the recording to the time-associated representation in the decoded media content displayed on the content authenticity mobile device”, teaches in par. 0019 the following: “the facility recognizes people by performing speaker recognition against a time range in the audio sequence”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON and Chen with the teachings of PRABHU by having their system comprise an enhanced media comparison process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further process audio and video data, wherein the enhanced media comparison process helps to detect audio signal forgery and makes it easier to ensure data security.
As to claim 11, (canceled).
As to claim 12, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 10 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a method of claim 10, wherein the extracting comprises applying speech recognition to convert the media signal to Mel-Frequency cepstral coefficients (MCCC) with time slices corresponding a human speech.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CEN.
CHEN teaches in par. 0035 the following: “speech recognition may be performed on the video to obtain sentences spoken by the speaker while the video is being played, those sentences automatically compared with the sentences in the signatures, and an indication displayed as to whether there is a match with the signature information (whether the video has been forged/altered)”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON with the teachings of CHEN by having their system comprise an enhanced audio analysis process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide simple and effective means to further analyze audio data, wherein the enhanced audio analysis process helps to prevent audio misinterpretation and makes it easier to ensure audio data security.
As to claim 13, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 10 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a method of claim 10, wherein the speech recognition is based on perceptual Linear Prediction (PLP).
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CEN.
CHEN teaches in par. 0035 the following: “speech recognition may be performed on the video to obtain sentences spoken by the speaker while the video is being played, those sentences automatically compared with the sentences in the signatures, and an indication displayed as to whether there is a match with the signature information (whether the video has been forged/altered)”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON with the teachings of CHEN by having their system comprise an enhanced audio analysis process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide simple and effective means to further analyze audio data, wherein the enhanced audio analysis process helps to prevent audio misinterpretation and makes it easier to ensure audio data security.
As to claim 14, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 10 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a method of claim 10, wherein the verbal information is extracted from the recording by audio analysis (i.e. …teaches in par. 0047 the following: “the decoder can extract all the speech audio”).
As to claim 15, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 10 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a method of claim 10, wherein the verbal information is extracted from the recording by image analysis (i.e. …teaches in par. 0049 the following: “After extracting data…”).
As to claim 16, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 10 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a method of claim 10, further comprising using the recording time to acquire a timestamped key (i.e., …figure 2a, fig. element 203 and 204 …States that the “TrueBadge” displays encoded timestamped audio slices and records a portion of the audio…figure 2a fig. element 204 states that the audio is signed with a key).
As to claim 17, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 10 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a method of claim 16, wherein the timestamped key is used for decoding the displayed media content (i.e., …teaches in par. 0050 the following: “If an individual attempts to doctor the video recordings of Senator Alex, the TrueBadge would not verify the authenticity of the doctored media. Spliced or reordered video snippets could not be authenticated by the session ID, start and elapsed time information, and display frames with overlapping audio information”).
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JACOBSON and CHEN in view of PRABHU as applied to claim 10 above and further in view of Nichols et al. (US Patent No. 12,001,536 and Nichols hereinafter).
As to claim 18, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 10 above teaches voice authentication, specifically neither JACOBSON nor CHEN expressly teaches a method of claim 10, further comprising:
analyzing the recording in discrete time increments;
for each time increment, comparing the verbal information extracted from the recording with the decoded media content displayed on the content authenticity mobile device;
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference PRABHU.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “analyzing the recording in discrete time increments”, PRABHU teaches in par. 0030 the following: “performs speech transcription against a subrange of the audio component of the sequence near the time index, such as the 5 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 10 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 15 seconds of the audio component the end of the time index, etc”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “for each time increment, comparing the verbal information extracted from the recording with the decoded media content displayed on the content authenticity mobile device”, PRABHU teaches in par. 0030 the following: “In some cases, this subrange extends past the time index by at least a few seconds. Performing the speech transcription results in transcribed text strings for each of one or more speakers who speech is heard in the subrange of the audio component.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON and Chen with the teachings of PRABHU by having their system comprise an enhanced media comparison process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further process audio and video data, wherein the enhanced media comparison process helps to detect audio signal forgery and makes it easier to ensure data security.
The system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU does not expressly teach:
identifying one or more specific time increments where there is a mismatch between the extracted verbal information and the decoded media content;
and generating an authentication report indicating the overall authenticity of the recording and flagging the specific time increments where mismatches were identified as potentially inauthentic.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Nichols.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “identifying one or more specific time increments where there is a mismatch between the extracted verbal information and the decoded media content”, teaches in col. 12 lines 4-8 the following: “If the unknown ambient voice has been detected more than the threshold number of times,”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “and generating an authentication report indicating the overall authenticity of the recording and flagging the specific time increments where mismatches were identified as potentially inauthentic”, teaches in col. 11 lines 55-67 & col. 12 lines 1-5 the following: “If the unknown ambient voice has not been detected more than the threshold number of times, the privacy tool may, at operation 506, write a record of the detection of the unknown ambient voice. If the unknown ambient voice has not been previously detected, this may include writing a description of the unknown ambient voice, an indication that it was detected, and, in some examples, a date and them when the detection occurred.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU with the teachings of Nichols by having their system comprise an enhanced audio/video analysis process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further detect fake audio, wherein the enhanced audio/video analysis process helps to prevent system misinformation and makes it easier to ensure audio data security.
Claim(s) 20-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JACOBSON in view of Chen.
As to claim 20, JACOBSON teaches a method for digitally signing content using a content authenticity mobile device, the method comprising:
recording, by a sensor of the content authenticity mobile device, a media signal originated from a speaker who is expressing verbal information in a language (i.e., …figure 2a, fig. element 202 states that the speaker wears a “TrueBadege” that receives the audio …figure 2a, fig. element 203 and 204 …States that the “TrueBadge” displays encoded timestamped audio slices and records a portion of the audio…figure 2a fig. element 204 states that the audio is signed with a key);
instructing, by the processor, a display of the content authenticity mobile device to render the visual content (i.e., …teaches in par. 0063 the following: “0063] For example, the Senator could use the TrueBadge to display encrypted, signed audio and post the public keys anywhere without any cloud or blockchain service, even DeepAuthentic’s cloud system. … the Senator could opt to buy, but not register the TrueBadge, set the badge to display signed audio and related encrypted meta-data including the device serial number, but post the decoding public key(s) anywhere or withhold them.”. …figure 2a fig. element 205 discloses display the audio signature).
JACOBSON does not expressly teach:
thereby digitally signing content that visually documents the speaker expressing the verbal information and the display.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CEN.
CHEN teaches in par. 0026 the following: “the digitally signed information may be displayed in the form of images or audio so as to be captured by the camera. Thus, when watching the captured video, a viewer can verify the authenticity of the speech in the video using the signed information included in the video.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON with the teachings of CHEN by having their system comprise an enhanced audio forgery detection process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further secure audio data, wherein the enhanced audio forgery detection process helps to prevent audio signal forgery and makes it easier to ensure audio data integrity.
The system of JACOBSON does not expressly teach:
extracting, by a processor of the content authenticity mobile device, from the media signal, words expressed by the speaker using speech recognition;
generating, by the processor, visual content by signing with a recording time of the media signal, the extracted words,
wherein the visual content comprises a time- indexed representation of the extracted.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference PRABHU.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “extracting, by a processor of the content authenticity mobile device, from the media signal, words expressed by the speaker using speech recognition”, teaches in par. 0030 the following: “speech transcription against a subrange of the audio component of the sequence near the time index, such as the 5 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 10 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 15 seconds of the audio component the end of the time index, etc. In some cases, this subrange extends past the time index by at least a few seconds. Performing the speech transcription results in transcribed text strings for each of one or more speakers who speech is heard in the subrange of the audio component.”. Teaches in par. 0036 the following: “transcribed speech 762, and an identification 761 of the corresponding speaker,”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “generating, by the processor, visual content by signing with a recording time of the media signal, the extracted words”, teaches in par. 0003 the following: “displayed one or more annotations each based upon (a) at least a portion of the obtained speech text”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “wherein the visual content comprises a time- indexed representation of the extracted”, teaches in par. 0030 the following: “speech transcription against a subrange of the audio component of the sequence near the time index, such as the 5 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 10 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 15 seconds of the audio component the end of the time index, etc. In some cases, this subrange extends past the time index by at least a few seconds. Performing the speech transcription results in transcribed text strings for each of one or more speakers who speech is heard in the subrange of the audio component.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON and CHEN with the teachings of PRABHU by having their system comprise an enhanced audio/video analysis process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further detect fake audio, wherein the enhanced audio/video analysis process helps to prevent system misinformation and makes it easier to ensure audio data security.
As to claim 21, JACOBSON teaches a digital signature system for authenticating a speaker's statements at a venue, comprising:
a recording unit which comprises at least one of a microphone and a camera that captures verbal information expressed by the speaker (i.e., …teaches in par. 0063 the following: “0063] For example, the Senator could use the TrueBadge to display encrypted, signed audio and post the public keys anywhere without any cloud or blockchain service, even DeepAuthentic’s cloud system. … the Senator could opt to buy, but not register the TrueBadge, set the badge to display signed audio and related encrypted meta-data including the device serial number, but post the decoding public key(s) anywhere or withhold them.”. …figure 2a fig. element 205 discloses display the audio signature);
a processing unit which includes at least one processor configured to: extract the verbal information from the captured audio signal (i.e., …teaches in par. 0047 the following: “since the decoder can extract all the speech audio encoded in the TrueBadge display frames along with ordering, session time, elapsed time information, identification and authenticating signatures. TrueBadge may include a SEDW device that allows anyone in the world to inspect and verify the veracity of the scene the recorded media purports to show. Because anyone can do it and the check does not require mediation through a human authority; it is ultimately democratic and objective.”);
and a projection mechanism that projects the generated visual content onto the speaker's body or clothing (i.e., …teaches in par. 0063 the following: “0063] For example, the Senator could use the TrueBadge to display encrypted, signed audio and post the public keys anywhere without any cloud or blockchain service, even DeepAuthentic’s cloud system. … the Senator could opt to buy, but not register the TrueBadge, set the badge to display signed audio and related encrypted meta-data including the device serial number, but post the decoding public key(s) anywhere or withhold them.”. …figure 2a fig. element 205 discloses display the audio signature).
JACOBSON does not expressly teach:
thereby embedding the digital signature of the speaker's statements into the visual environment.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CEN.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “thereby embedding the digital signature of the speaker's statements into the visual environment”, CHEN teaches in par. 0026 the following: “the digitally signed information may be displayed in the form of images or audio so as to be captured by the camera. Thus, when watching the captured video, a viewer can verify the authenticity of the speech in the video using the signed information included in the video.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON with the teachings of CHEN by having their system comprise an enhanced audio forgery detection process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further secure audio data, wherein the enhanced audio forgery detection process helps to prevent audio signal forgery and makes it easier to ensure audio data integrity.
The system of JACOBSON and CHEN do not expressly teach:
extract the verbal information from the captured audio signal using speech recognition,
generate visual content by integrating, with a digital signature associated with the venue, a time-indexed representation of the extracted verbal information,
such that authenticity of a recording of the speaker is verifiable by extracting words from the recording using speech recognition and comparing the extracted words to the time-indexed representation.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference PRABHU.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “extract the verbal information from the captured audio signal using speech recognition”, teaches in par. 0030 the following: “speech transcription against a subrange of the audio component of the sequence near the time index, such as the 5 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 10 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 15 seconds of the audio component the end of the time index, etc. In some cases, this subrange extends past the time index by at least a few seconds. Performing the speech transcription results in transcribed text strings for each of one or more speakers who speech is heard in the subrange of the audio component.”. Teaches in par. 0036 the following: “transcribed speech 762, and an identification 761 of the corresponding speaker,”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “generate visual content by integrating, with a digital signature associated with the venue, a time-indexed representation of the extracted verbal information”, teaches in par. 0003 the following: “displayed one or more annotations each based upon (a) at least a portion of the obtained speech text”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “such that authenticity of a recording of the speaker is verifiable by extracting words from the recording using speech recognition and comparing the extracted words to the time-indexed representation”, teaches in par. 0030 the following: “speech transcription against a subrange of the audio component of the sequence near the time index, such as the 5 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 10 seconds of the audio component that end at the time index, the 15 seconds of the audio component the end of the time index, etc. In some cases, this subrange extends past the time index by at least a few seconds. Performing the speech transcription results in transcribed text strings for each of one or more speakers who speech is heard in the subrange of the audio component.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teaching of JACOBSON and CHEN with the teachings of PRABHU by having their system comprise an enhanced audio/video analysis process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to further detect fake audio, wherein the enhanced audio/video analysis process helps to prevent system misinformation and makes it easier to ensure audio data security.
As to claim 22, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 21 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a digital signature system of claim 21, wherein the digital signature is created using a private key associated with the venue's public key infrastructure (PKI) (i.e., …figure 2a, fig. element 203 and 204 …States that the “TrueBadge” displays encoded timestamped audio slices and records a portion of the audio…figure 2a fig. element 204 states that the audio is signed with a key).
As to claim 23, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 21 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a digital signature system of claim 21, wherein the visual content comprises at least one of QR codes or time-modulated signals (i.e., …figure 2a, fig. element 203 and 204 …States that the “TrueBadge” displays encoded timestamped audio slices and records a portion of the audio…figure 2a fig. element 204 states that the audio is signed with a key …teaches in par. 0046 QR codes).
As to claim 24, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 21 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a digital signature system of claim 21, wherein the processing unit is further configured to incorporate additional authentication data into the visual content, the additional authentication data comprising at least one of timestamps, location information, or event-specific identifiers (i.e., …figure 2a, fig. element 203 and 204 …States that the “TrueBadge” displays encoded timestamped audio slices and records a portion of the audio…figure 2a fig. element 204 states that the audio is signed with a key).
As to claim 25, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 21 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a digital signature system of claim 21, further comprising a verification system configured to: receive captured video or images containing the projected visual content, extract the digital signature from the visual content, and validate the digital signature using a public key associated with the venue (i.e., …teaches in par. 0038” decodes the TrueBadge encoded audio using a public key, and compares the hashed portion to the decoded audio to determine if the video is authentic”).
As to claim 26, the system of JACOBSON, CHEN and PRABHU as applied to claim 21 above teaches voice authentication, specifically JACOBSON teaches a digital signature system of claim 25, wherein the verification system is further configured to confirm the authenticity of the speaker's statements if the digital signature is valid (i.e. …teaches in par. 0071 the following: “TrueBadge encoded audio is then hashed 415, the images produced in the media each have a unique signature that is decrypted using the media provider’s public key 416, and the decrypted signature is compared with hashed audio portion 417 to determine if there is a match 418, and if so, the authentication may be displayed 419 on the user’s mobile device”).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN F WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3826.
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, Eleni Shiferaw can be reached on (571)272-3867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRYAN F WRIGHT/ Examiner, Art Unit 2497
