DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-23 are pending under this Office action.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: Claims 5-6 are objected because the term “the uploaded digital content” and “in response to the upload of the digital content” do not have proper antecedent basis.
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 1-4, 11-13, 20, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gagne-Keats, etc. (US 20230237483 A1) in view of Goeringer, etc. (US 20170337534 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Gagne-Keats teaches that a content management method (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 3-4, and [0041], “FIG. 3 is a flowchart that illustrates a method for managing digital non-fungible assets in persistent virtual environments linked to non-fungible physical assets. At 302, the system 300 generates an NFT that represents a unique identifier of a real asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset). At 304, the NFT is stored on a blockchain. The NFT can be stored on the blockchain as public evidence of ownership of the non-fungible physical asset. In one example, accompanying data (e.g., metadata) can be stored along with the NFT on the blockchain. The NFT-related data (NFT and metadata) enables verifying ownership of the non-fungible physical asset in a metaverse. At 306, the metaverse allows a display of a virtual object indicative of the non-fungible physical asset. The virtual object is linked to the NFT that represents the non-fungible physical asset such that the virtual object in the metaverse is anchored to the non-fungible physical object in the real world. At 306, a user can verify whether another user owns the non-fungible physical asset in the metaverse based on the NFT showing ownership”; and [0045], “FIG. 4 is a block diagram that illustrates an example of a computer system 400 in which at least some operations described herein can be implemented. As shown, the computer system 400 can include: one or more processors 402, main memory 406, non-volatile memory 410, a network interface device 412, video display device 418, an input/output device 420, a control device 422 (e.g., keyboard and pointing device), a drive unit 424 that includes a storage medium 426, and a signal generation device 430 that are communicatively connected to a bus 416. The bus 416 represents one or more physical buses and/or point-to-point connections that are connected by appropriate bridges, adapters, or controllers. Various common components (e.g., cache memory) are omitted from FIG. 4 for brevity. Instead, the computer system 400 is intended to illustrate a hardware device on which components illustrated or described relative to the examples of the figures and any other components described in this specification can be implemented”),
in particular location-based, preferably decentralized, content management method, at least for managing digital contents within a metaverse linked to a distributed ledger technology (DLT), such as a blockchain or a tangle (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 3-4, and [0016], “A blockchain can store the NFTs and associated transactions in records, copies of which are distributed and maintained among nodes of a computer network. The entries are stored in blocks of the distributed ledger that are cryptographically related. A public blockchain is a common example of a distributed ledger that can record data or transactions between parties in a verifiable and permanent way. Specifically, a blockchain system has a decentralized, distributed database where a ledger is maintained by peer nodes. Hence, an intermediary is not required to maintain a blockchain. The data are typically authenticated with cryptographic hashing and mining techniques”),
wherein a virtual space defined by the metaverse is divided into a number of segments, in particular volume segments, arranged at least one of next to one another and above one another (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 3-4, and [0011], “As used herein, a “metaverse” can refer to a network of virtual worlds focused on social connection. A metaverse incorporates many aspects of social media into a persistent three-dimensional world with the user represented as an avatar. Social functions are often an integral feature in many massively multi-user environments. The term often describes an iteration of the Internet as a single, universal virtual world that is facilitated by the use of virtual and augmented reality headsets. Several components of metaverse technologies can be implemented within modern internet-enabled platforms. Various metaverses have been developed for popular use such as virtual world platforms. The disclosed technology relates to a metaverse that integrates virtual and real spaces. Access points for metaverses include general-purpose computers and smartphones, in addition to augmented reality (AR), mixed reality, virtual reality (VR), and virtual world technologies. Current hardware development is focused on overcoming limitations of VR headsets, sensors, and increasing immersion with haptic technology”; [0012], “The disclosed technology encompasses linking digital non-fungible assets as proof of ownership over any real assets such as a non-fungible physical object that is uniquely identifiable, particularly among other physical objects of the same kind or type and using a unique identifier. Examples include a vehicle identification number (VIN) of an automobile or a parcel number or physical address for real property. As such, the NFT or other unique digital asset can represent ownership over a scarce or unique non-fungible physical asset”; and [0017], “The blockchain is analogous to a distributed database on a distributed computing system that maintains a continuously growing list of ordered records called blocks. A block of a blockchain includes records of transaction(s) or other recorded data (e.g., NFTs). Each block contains at least one timestamp, and a block links to a previous block to thus form a chain of blocks. Blockchains are inherently resistant to modification of their recorded data. That is, once recorded, the data in a block cannot be altered retroactively. Through a peer network and distributed timestamping, a blockchain is managed in an autonomous manner”. Note that the navigable metaverse is a 3D virtual space, implied segment division into parcel, and it is mapped to the 3D space), and
wherein digital contents are assigned to individual segments (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 2-4, and [0024], “FIG. 2 is a block diagram that illustrates a system that can manage NFTs that anchor virtual assets in the metaverse to non-fungible physical assets in the real world. The system 200 includes a non-fungible physical asset 202 (e.g., a car) that is linked to an NFT 203, which can be communicated over one or more networks 204 via network access nodes 206-1 and 206-2 (referred to collectively as network access nodes 206) for storage at a blockchain 208. A manager node 210 can retrieve the NFT 203 to verify ownership of the non-fungible physical asset 202 to a participant of the metaverse via the metaverse access point 212. For example, a first user at the metaverse access point 212 that engages with an avatar of a second user in the metaverse can verify whether the second user owns the non-fungible physical asset 202 via the NFT 203. For example, the first user can click on a graphical representation of the non-fungible physical asset 202 in the metaverse to present whether the graphical representation of the non-fungible physical asset 202 is linked to the NFT 203. If so, the first user can verify that the second user indeed owns the non-fungible physical asset 202 in the real world. If not, the first user determines that the second user is faking ownership over the non-fungible physical asset. As such, the technology anchors the virtual world to the real world”. Note that the NFTs (digital assets) are linked to specific virtual representation tied to rea; parcel address, and this is mapped to the individual segments),
wherein a decentralized autonomous organization (VolumeDAO) set up on the DLT is assigned to at least one of the segments.
However, Gagne-Keats fails to explicitly disclose that wherein a decentralized autonomous organization (VolumeDAO) set up on the DLT is assigned to at least one of the segments.
However, Goeringer teaches that wherein a decentralized autonomous organization (VolumeDAO) set up on the DLT is assigned to at least one of the segments (See Goeringer: Figs. 21-24, and [0167], “FIG. 23 is a schematic illustration of the lifecycle 2300 of an exemplary blockchain 2202 of blockchain forest 2200, depicted in FIG. 22. Blockchain 2202 includes a genesis block 2302 processed to confirm a genesis transaction 2304. As described herein, genesis transaction 2304 indicates a first submission of a digital asset that can create a new distributed ledger, and genesis block 2302 confirms genesis transaction 2304, thereby becoming the root of trust for the ledger through, for example, a Merkle process. Blockchain forest 2200 utilizes these genesis components to implement consensus participation protocols, for example, as well as ledger aging and deletion processes for blockchain 2202, as described further below. In an exemplary embodiment, the ledger aging and deletion processes include an archiving subprocess”; [0169], “In an embodiment, blockchain 2202 is created, managed, and terminated for blockchain forest 2200 according to lifecycle 2300, which may include one or more of the following steps. (1) A user (not shown) defines a new asset that will become the basis for a series of related transactions, and then compiles and submits the defined asset as genesis transaction 2304 to a blockchain network. (2) Genesis transaction 2304 propagates through the blockchain network by an implementation similar to the propagation implementations used in conventional in blockchain networks such as Ethereum or Bitcoin. (3) Once received by one or more blockchain processors P (sometimes referred to as “miners” in Bitcoin processing), blockchain processors P will initiate a consensus participation negotiation that solicits additional processors to participate in a new chain. In some embodiments, multiple processors P independently receive genesis transaction 2304 to solve for glare. (4) Using information extracted from genesis transaction 2304, blockchain processors P negotiate a minimal sized (e.g., forest consensus pool size 2206, FIG. 22) consensus pool and key characteristics necessary to create the pool for the defined security requirements. In an exemplary embodiment, the key characteristics include, without limitation, one or more of a transaction payload size, a block size, a processing interval (period of work), a cryptographic algorithm selection, and ledger aging and deletion terms. Once the consensus pool is established, blockchain processors P within the pool negotiate a start time to start blockchain processing of transactions”; and [0170], “(5) Blockchain transaction processing begins with genesis block 2302 (at time t), which confirms genesis transaction 2304, and renders the asset available to subsequent blocks 2306 be spent by subsequent transactions 2308. (6) After each block 2306 is processed, and pending transactions 2308 are confirmed, the ledger aging and deletion terms are consulted. The ledger aging and deletion terms include, without limitation, time (duration or an absolute time), period between transactions (reflecting interest in the asset), and number of unspent transactions 2310 currently valid on the ledger. If the ledger deletion terms are met, blockchain processors will execute the blockchain participation protocol to negotiate termination of the ledger, as described in greater detail further below. The termination of the ledger results in deletion of the ledger from the consensus pool. In some embodiments, where deemed appropriate, the ledger is further archived of to “offline” resources after termination”. Note that in the life cycle management, the observer broker nodes for governance-like control per virtualized blockchain (segment) are managed and processed decentralized and autonomous, so it is mapped to the VolumeDAO).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify Gagne-Keats to have wherein a decentralized autonomous organization (VolumeDAO) set up on the DLT is assigned to at least one of the segments as taught by Goeringer in order to improve the measurability and traceability of how media flows through the network (See Goeringer: Fig. 1, and [0047], “These blockchaining techniques are further useful in measurement and isolation of content and bandwidth piracy. In addition to CAC transactions, the present embodiments also significantly increase transactional security in areas of, without limitation: enhanced content protection, by improving measurability and traceability of how media flows through networks; digital rights management (DRM); secure imaging; distributed denial of service (DDoS) mitigation and/or attacks; scalable Internet of Things (IoT) security solutions; supply chain integrity; device registration, and enhanced DRM and data over cable service interface specification (DOCSIS) security; enhanced content protection; connectivity negotiation; dynamic service creation or provisioning; service authentication; virtualization orchestration; and billing transformation”). Gagne-Keats teaches a method and system that may link virtual assets and physical assets through non-fungible tokens (NFTs) in a metaverse by anchoring a metaverse to the real world and limiting ownership or rendering of certain virtual assets in the metaverse to only those who actually own physical assets based on NFTs stored on a blockchain so that only those who actually own a physical asset in the real world are associated with the virtual asset (or related representation) in the metaverse; while Goeringer teaches a visualized blockchain forest that may include a plurality of individual blockchains, each with a blockchain height, a genesis block, and at least one additional block, and include a plurality of participating processors that make up a consensus pool, with a blockchain forest height having a time-sequenced start-to-finish length of blocks among the collective plurality of individual blockchains so that the blockchains are organized in decentralized autonomous structures to improve the measurability and traceability of the digital assets. Therefore, it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gagne-Keats by Goeringer to organize the blockchains are in decentralized autonomous structures. The motivation to modify Gagne-Keats by Goeringer is “Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way”.
Regarding claim 2, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats teaches that the content management method according to claim 1, further comprising the method steps: receiving a new digital content uploaded into or from one of the segments, in particular by the DLT, or receiving information that a digital content has been uploaded into or from a segment (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 1-4, and [0014], “NFTs function like cryptographic tokens, but, unlike cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin or Ethereum, NFTs are not mutually interchangeable, hence not fungible. While all bitcoins are equal, each NFT may represent a different underlying asset and thus may have a different value. NFTs are created when blockchains string records of cryptographic hash (a set of characters identifying a set of data) onto records therefore creating a chain of identifiable data blocks. This cryptographic transaction process ensures the authentication of each digital file by providing a digital signature that is used to track NFT ownership”; and [0033], “The system may generate an NFT that represents a non-fungible physical asset. In particular, system 200 may generate NFT 203 that represents non-fungible physical asset 202. In some embodiments, system 200 may receive an asset identifier corresponding to the non-fungible physical asset. System 200 may determine a device identifier associated with a user device. System 200 may generate, using an on-chain program, the NFT (e.g., NFT 203) assigned to the device identifier. The NFT (e.g., NFT 203) may include metadata including the asset identifier. The asset identifier may include a unique identifier corresponding to the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202). The asset identifier may verify the ownership of the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202)”) and
checking whether a VolumeDAO assigned to the segment and set up on the DLT already exists (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 1-4, and [0037], “The system may verify ownership of the non-fungible physical asset in the metaverse. In particular, system 200 may verify ownership of non-fungible physical asset 202 to a user at the metaverse access point 212 based on NFT 203 being linked to the virtual object. In some embodiments, system 200 may receive a request to verify the NFT (e.g., NFT 203) is linked to the virtual object. The request may include an NFT identifier corresponding to the NFT (e.g., NFT 203). In some embodiments, system 200 may receive the NFT identifier. System 200 may determine, based on the NFT identifier, an address of a cryptography-based storage application that stores the NFT (e.g., NFT 203). System 200 may receive an asset identifier corresponding to the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202). System 200 may validate, based on the asset identifier, ownership of the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202)”) and
creating a new VolumeDAO for the segment within the DLT, in the case that no VolumeDAO assigned to the segment already exists (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 1-4, and [0035], “The system may store the NFT and accompanying metadata on a blockchain thereby creating a link between the NFT and the non-fungible physical asset in a metaverse. In particular, system 200 may store NFT 203 and accompanying metadata on blockchain 208. In some embodiments, accompanying metadata may include a timestamp when a user acquired the non-fungible physical asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset 202)”; and [0042], “The NFT is a tradable asset that provides a linkage between digital and physical objects and can act as an authentication factor in the metaverse. That is, the NFT can act as an authentication factor used for verifying who owns an asset in the real world. Thus, the technology can create scarcity in the metaverse if only owners of assets in the real world can display graphical representations of those assets or indications thereof in the metaverse. The digital representation in the metaverse does not necessarily have to depict the real-world appearance of the asset. Instead, for example, the representation in the metaverse can be a function or depiction of something else that signals the same scarcity. For example, the owner of a Lamborghini automobile can own an NFT generated based on a vehicle identification number (VIN) of the Lamborghini. A Lamborghini used by an avatar of a user in a metaverse can be a virtual object linked to the NFT, which indicates ownership over the Lamborghini by the user in the real world”).
Regarding claim 3, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats teaches that the content management method according to claim 1, wherein the virtual space is superimposed on the real existing space (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 1-4, and [0011], “As used herein, a “metaverse” can refer to a network of virtual worlds focused on social connection. A metaverse incorporates many aspects of social media into a persistent three-dimensional world with the user represented as an avatar. Social functions are often an integral feature in many massively multi-user environments. The term often describes an iteration of the Internet as a single, universal virtual world that is facilitated by the use of virtual and augmented reality headsets. Several components of metaverse technologies can be implemented within modern internet-enabled platforms. Various metaverses have been developed for popular use such as virtual world platforms. The disclosed technology relates to a metaverse that integrates virtual and real spaces. Access points for metaverses include general-purpose computers and smartphones, in addition to augmented reality (AR), mixed reality, virtual reality (VR), and virtual world technologies. Current hardware development is focused on overcoming limitations of VR headsets, sensors, and increasing immersion with haptic technology”).
Regarding claim 4, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 3 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats teaches that the content management method according to claim 3, wherein the virtual space at least spans the globe (See Gagne-Keats: Fig. 1, and [0019], “FIG. 1 illustrates a network 100 of interconnected peer nodes 102-1 through 102-6 (also referred to collectively as peer nodes 102 and individually as peer node 102). The peer nodes 102 can be distributed across various geographic locations including regions all over the world. The network 100 can include a combination of private, public, wired, or wireless portions. Data communicated over the network 100 can be encrypted or unencrypted at various locations or portions of the network 100. Each peer node 102 can include combinations of hardware and/or software to process data, perform functions, communicate over the network 100, and the like”).
Regarding claim 11, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 3 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats teaches that the content management method at least according to claim 3, wherein the segments, in particular the digital contents assigned to segments, can be searched remotely (See Gagne-Keats: Fig. 2, and [0029], “The system 200 depicts different types of wireless access nodes 206 to illustrate that the non-fungible physical asset 202, NFT 203, or metaverse access point 212 can access different types of networks through different types of network access nodes. For example, a base station (e.g., the network access node 206-1) can provide access to a cellular telecommunications system of the network(s) 204. An access point (e.g., the network access node 206-2) is a transceiver that provides access to a computer system of the network(s) 204”. Note that remote access to the node is mapped to searchable remotely).
Regarding claim 12, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats teaches that the content management method according to claim 1, wherein a user is assigned as follower to at least one of the segments (See Gagne-Keats: Fig. 2, and [0024], “FIG. 2 is a block diagram that illustrates a system that can manage NFTs that anchor virtual assets in the metaverse to non-fungible physical assets in the real world. The system 200 includes a non-fungible physical asset 202 (e.g., a car) that is linked to an NFT 203, which can be communicated over one or more networks 204 via network access nodes 206-1 and 206-2 (referred to collectively as network access nodes 206) for storage at a blockchain 208. A manager node 210 can retrieve the NFT 203 to verify ownership of the non-fungible physical asset 202 to a participant of the metaverse via the metaverse access point 212. For example, a first user at the metaverse access point 212 that engages with an avatar of a second user in the metaverse can verify whether the second user owns the non-fungible physical asset 202 via the NFT 203. For example, the first user can click on a graphical representation of the non-fungible physical asset 202 in the metaverse to present whether the graphical representation of the non-fungible physical asset 202 is linked to the NFT 203. If so, the first user can verify that the second user indeed owns the non-fungible physical asset 202 in the real world. If not, the first user determines that the second user is faking ownership over the non-fungible physical asset. As such, the technology anchors the virtual world to the real world”. Note that the ownership of the user to a specific digital content is mapped to the follower to at least one segment).
Regarding claim 13, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach that the content management method according to claim 1, further comprising the method steps:
receiving a registration of a new follower for one of the segments (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 1-4, and [0015], “The NFT can represent a non-fungible physical asset decoupled from an owner. Whoever owns the NFT can register the NFT on a website for a metaverse, manufacturer, or distributor. Examples of a non-fungible physical asset include an electronic device, a vehicle, clothing, jewelry, or any other object that has a perceived value in the real world. For example, an entity (e.g., person) who purchases a McLaren automobile can be issued an NFT that links ownership of the McLaren to the owner. In another example, the person who purchases an Apple product can be issued an NFT that links ownership of the Apple product to the owner”),
checking whether a VolumeDAO assigned to the segment and set up on the DLT already exists (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 1-4, and [0021], “The network 100 can implement a blockchain that allows for the secure management of a shared ledger, where NFTs are verified and stored on the network 100 without a governing central authority. Blockchains can be implemented in different configurations, ranging from public, open-source networks, to private blockchains that require explicit permission to read or write transactions. Central to a blockchain are cryptographic hash functions that secure the network 100, in addition to enabling transactions, to protect a blockchain's integrity and anonymity”) and
creating a new VolumeDAO for the segment within the DLT, in the case that no VolumeDAO assigned to the segment already exists(See Goeringer: Fig. 10, and [0108], “In step S1026, blockchain 1006 notifies that a new block (i.e., block 1012) has been created for the particular node associated with the new block. In step S1028, blockchain 1006 utilizes the configurable consensus mode in order to determine and achieve network agreement as to which block is to be accepted as the next block in blockchain 1006. Such network agreement may be achieved, for example, by utilization of algorithms including, without limitation, a calculation of the most transactions in a block, a voting operation between the nodes, a fiat from a central evaluation source, the maximization of values of weighted attributes of transactions, or by combinations of one or more of these algorithms. In step S1030, blockchain 1006 generates a notification for observers of the achieved agreement, and transmits a notification to distributor 1010 in step S1032”) .
Regarding claim 20, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach that the content management system (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 3-4, and [0041], “FIG. 3 is a flowchart that illustrates a method for managing digital non-fungible assets in persistent virtual environments linked to non-fungible physical assets. At 302, the system 300 generates an NFT that represents a unique identifier of a real asset (e.g., non-fungible physical asset). At 304, the NFT is stored on a blockchain. The NFT can be stored on the blockchain as public evidence of ownership of the non-fungible physical asset. In one example, accompanying data (e.g., metadata) can be stored along with the NFT on the blockchain. The NFT-related data (NFT and metadata) enables verifying ownership of the non-fungible physical asset in a metaverse. At 306, the metaverse allows a display of a virtual object indicative of the non-fungible physical asset. The virtual object is linked to the NFT that represents the non-fungible physical asset such that the virtual object in the metaverse is anchored to the non-fungible physical object in the real world. At 306, a user can verify whether another user owns the non-fungible physical asset in the metaverse based on the NFT showing ownership”; and [0045], “FIG. 4 is a block diagram that illustrates an example of a computer system 400 in which at least some operations described herein can be implemented. As shown, the computer system 400 can include: one or more processors 402, main memory 406, non-volatile memory 410, a network interface device 412, video display device 418, an input/output device 420, a control device 422 (e.g., keyboard and pointing device), a drive unit 424 that includes a storage medium 426, and a signal generation device 430 that are communicatively connected to a bus 416. The bus 416 represents one or more physical buses and/or point-to-point connections that are connected by appropriate bridges, adapters, or controllers. Various common components (e.g., cache memory) are omitted from FIG. 4 for brevity. Instead, the computer system 400 is intended to illustrate a hardware device on which components illustrated or described relative to the examples of the figures and any other components described in this specification can be implemented”),
in particular location-based, preferably decentralized, content management system, at least for managing digital contents within a metaverse linked to a distributed ledger technology (DLT), such as a blockchain or a tangle, in particular by means of a content management method according to claim 1 (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 3-4, and [0016], “A blockchain can store the NFTs and associated transactions in records, copies of which are distributed and maintained among nodes of a computer network. The entries are stored in blocks of the distributed ledger that are cryptographically related. A public blockchain is a common example of a distributed ledger that can record data or transactions between parties in a verifiable and permanent way. Specifically, a blockchain system has a decentralized, distributed database where a ledger is maintained by peer nodes. Hence, an intermediary is not required to maintain a blockchain. The data are typically authenticated with cryptographic hashing and mining techniques”),
wherein a virtual space defined by the metaverse is divided into a number of segments, in particular volume segments, arranged at least one of next to one another and above one another (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 3-4, and [0011], “As used herein, a “metaverse” can refer to a network of virtual worlds focused on social connection. A metaverse incorporates many aspects of social media into a persistent three-dimensional world with the user represented as an avatar. Social functions are often an integral feature in many massively multi-user environments. The term often describes an iteration of the Internet as a single, universal virtual world that is facilitated by the use of virtual and augmented reality headsets. Several components of metaverse technologies can be implemented within modern internet-enabled platforms. Various metaverses have been developed for popular use such as virtual world platforms. The disclosed technology relates to a metaverse that integrates virtual and real spaces. Access points for metaverses include general-purpose computers and smartphones, in addition to augmented reality (AR), mixed reality, virtual reality (VR), and virtual world technologies. Current hardware development is focused on overcoming limitations of VR headsets, sensors, and increasing immersion with haptic technology”; [0012], “The disclosed technology encompasses linking digital non-fungible assets as proof of ownership over any real assets such as a non-fungible physical object that is uniquely identifiable, particularly among other physical objects of the same kind or type and using a unique identifier. Examples include a vehicle identification number (VIN) of an automobile or a parcel number or physical address for real property. As such, the NFT or other unique digital asset can represent ownership over a scarce or unique non-fungible physical asset”; and [0017], “The blockchain is analogous to a distributed database on a distributed computing system that maintains a continuously growing list of ordered records called blocks. A block of a blockchain includes records of transaction(s) or other recorded data (e.g., NFTs). Each block contains at least one timestamp, and a block links to a previous block to thus form a chain of blocks. Blockchains are inherently resistant to modification of their recorded data. That is, once recorded, the data in a block cannot be altered retroactively. Through a peer network and distributed timestamping, a blockchain is managed in an autonomous manner”. Note that the navigable metaverse is a 3D virtual space, implied segment division into parcel, and it is mapped to the 3D space), and
wherein digital contents are assigned to individual segments (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 2-4, and [0024], “FIG. 2 is a block diagram that illustrates a system that can manage NFTs that anchor virtual assets in the metaverse to non-fungible physical assets in the real world. The system 200 includes a non-fungible physical asset 202 (e.g., a car) that is linked to an NFT 203, which can be communicated over one or more networks 204 via network access nodes 206-1 and 206-2 (referred to collectively as network access nodes 206) for storage at a blockchain 208. A manager node 210 can retrieve the NFT 203 to verify ownership of the non-fungible physical asset 202 to a participant of the metaverse via the metaverse access point 212. For example, a first user at the metaverse access point 212 that engages with an avatar of a second user in the metaverse can verify whether the second user owns the non-fungible physical asset 202 via the NFT 203. For example, the first user can click on a graphical representation of the non-fungible physical asset 202 in the metaverse to present whether the graphical representation of the non-fungible physical asset 202 is linked to the NFT 203. If so, the first user can verify that the second user indeed owns the non-fungible physical asset 202 in the real world. If not, the first user determines that the second user is faking ownership over the non-fungible physical asset. As such, the technology anchors the virtual world to the real world”. Note that the NFTs (digital assets) are linked to specific virtual representation tied to rea; parcel address, and this is mapped to the individual segments),
wherein a decentralized autonomous organization (VolumeDAO) set up on the DLT is assigned to at least one of the segments (See Goeringer: Figs. 21-24, and [0167], “FIG. 23 is a schematic illustration of the lifecycle 2300 of an exemplary blockchain 2202 of blockchain forest 2200, depicted in FIG. 22. Blockchain 2202 includes a genesis block 2302 processed to confirm a genesis transaction 2304. As described herein, genesis transaction 2304 indicates a first submission of a digital asset that can create a new distributed ledger, and genesis block 2302 confirms genesis transaction 2304, thereby becoming the root of trust for the ledger through, for example, a Merkle process. Blockchain forest 2200 utilizes these genesis components to implement consensus participation protocols, for example, as well as ledger aging and deletion processes for blockchain 2202, as described further below. In an exemplary embodiment, the ledger aging and deletion processes include an archiving subprocess”; [0169], “In an embodiment, blockchain 2202 is created, managed, and terminated for blockchain forest 2200 according to lifecycle 2300, which may include one or more of the following steps. (1) A user (not shown) defines a new asset that will become the basis for a series of related transactions, and then compiles and submits the defined asset as genesis transaction 2304 to a blockchain network. (2) Genesis transaction 2304 propagates through the blockchain network by an implementation similar to the propagation implementations used in conventional in blockchain networks such as Ethereum or Bitcoin. (3) Once received by one or more blockchain processors P (sometimes referred to as “miners” in Bitcoin processing), blockchain processors P will initiate a consensus participation negotiation that solicits additional processors to participate in a new chain. In some embodiments, multiple processors P independently receive genesis transaction 2304 to solve for glare. (4) Using information extracted from genesis transaction 2304, blockchain processors P negotiate a minimal sized (e.g., forest consensus pool size 2206, FIG. 22) consensus pool and key characteristics necessary to create the pool for the defined security requirements. In an exemplary embodiment, the key characteristics include, without limitation, one or more of a transaction payload size, a block size, a processing interval (period of work), a cryptographic algorithm selection, and ledger aging and deletion terms. Once the consensus pool is established, blockchain processors P within the pool negotiate a start time to start blockchain processing of transactions”; and [0170], “(5) Blockchain transaction processing begins with genesis block 2302 (at time t), which confirms genesis transaction 2304, and renders the asset available to subsequent blocks 2306 be spent by subsequent transactions 2308. (6) After each block 2306 is processed, and pending transactions 2308 are confirmed, the ledger aging and deletion terms are consulted. The ledger aging and deletion terms include, without limitation, time (duration or an absolute time), period between transactions (reflecting interest in the asset), and number of unspent transactions 2310 currently valid on the ledger. If the ledger deletion terms are met, blockchain processors will execute the blockchain participation protocol to negotiate termination of the ledger, as described in greater detail further below. The termination of the ledger results in deletion of the ledger from the consensus pool. In some embodiments, where deemed appropriate, the ledger is further archived of to “offline” resources after termination”. Note that in the life cycle management, the observer broker nodes for governance-like control per virtualized blockchain (segment) are managed and processed decentralized and autonomous, so it is mapped to the VolumeDAO).
Regarding claim 23, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats teaches that the computer program product comprising commands which, when the program is executed by a computer, cause the latter to carry out the steps of the content management method according to claim 1 (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 1-4, and [0050], “In general, the routines executed to implement examples herein can be implemented as part of an operating system or a specific application, component, program, object, module, or sequence of instructions (collectively referred to as “computer programs”). The computer programs typically comprise one or more instructions (e.g., instructions 404, 408, 428) set at various times in various memory and storage devices in computing device(s). When read and executed by the processor 402, the instruction(s) cause the computing system 400 to perform operations to execute elements involving the various aspects of the disclosure”).
Claims 5-10 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gagne-Keats, etc. (US 20230237483 A1) in view of Goeringer, etc. (US 20170337534 A1), further in view of Vantis, etc. (US 20220058636 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 3 as outlined above. However, Gagne-Keats, modified by Goeringer, fails to explicitly disclose that the content management method according to claim 3, wherein upon receiving the uploaded digital content an assignment of the digital content to the respective segment in the virtual space is effected by a localization of at least one of the user initiating the upload and of the interface device in the real existing space superimposed by the virtual space.
However, Vantis teaches that the content management method according to claim 3, wherein upon receiving the uploaded digital content an assignment of the digital content to the respective segment in the virtual space is effected by a localization of at least one of the user initiating the upload and of the interface device in the real existing space superimposed by the virtual space (See Vantis: Fig. 8, and [0943], “In some embodiments, the authentication system 804 presents a portal that allows a user (e.g., a seller or an employee of a facility that holds items) to upload a virtual representation of an item. The user may provide an item classification (e.g., a baseball card, vintage clothing, jewelry, artwork, or the like), and one or more of: one or more high resolution photographs of the virtual item; a 3D representation of the item; dimensions of the item; a weight of the item; and/or the like. The authentication system 804 may allow domain-specific experts to sign up as authenticators/appraisers, such that a domain-specific expert can authenticate and/or appraise items classified in the area of their expertise. For example, sports memorabilia experts may be allowed to authenticate baseball cards and memorabilia, but not jewelry or artwork. In some embodiments, authenticators may be rated within their area of expertise and for sub-domains within their area of expertise (e.g., within the general category of sports memorabilia, an expert can be rated with respect to their knowledge on baseball memorabilia, basketball memorabilia, football memorabilia, and the like). When a new item is entered into the portal, the domain-specific experts can bid on the appraisal/authentication job, whereby the bid indicates the terms (e.g., price) under which the expert will perform the appraisal/authentication job. A user may then select the one or more of the experts based on their respective bids and/or their ratings. Alternatively, the authentication system 804 may select the one or more of the experts based on their respective bids and/or their ratings. Once an expert wins a bid, the expert performs the authentication and/or appraisal based on the information uploaded by the user (e.g., one or more high resolution photographs of the virtual item, a 3D representation of the item, dimensions of the item, a weight of the item, and/or the like). The expert may provide an appraisal value and/or a determination indicating the authenticity of the item. The authentication system 804 may include the expert's appraisal and/or authenticity determination in the virtual representation of the virtual item and, in some embodiments, the authentication system 804 may update the distributed ledger with the expert's appraisal and/or authenticity determination. As can be appreciated, the appraisal and/or the authenticity determination may result in an item being kept on or removed from the platform, or may impact the ability to collateralize a loan using the item”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify Gagne-Keats to have the content management method according to claim 3, wherein upon receiving the uploaded digital content an assignment of the digital content to the respective segment in the virtual space is effected by a localization of at least one of the user initiating the upload and of the interface device in the real existing space superimposed by the virtual space as taught by Vantis in order to enhance the performance of the processor and to facilitate simultaneous operations of the application (See Vantis: Fig. 8, and [0992], “The methods and systems described herein may be deployed in part or in whole through a machine that executes computer software, program codes, and/or instructions on a processor. The present disclosure may be implemented as a method on the machine, as a system or apparatus as part of or in relation to the machine, or as a computer program product embodied in a computer readable medium executing on one or more of the machines. In embodiments, the processor may be part of a server, cloud server, client, network infrastructure, mobile computing platform, stationary computing platform, or other computing platforms. A processor may be any kind of computational or processing device capable of executing program instructions, codes, binary instructions and the like. The processor may be or may include a signal processor, digital processor, embedded processor, microprocessor or any variant such as a co-processor (math co-processor, graphic co-processor, communication co-processor and the like) and the like that may directly or indirectly facilitate execution of program code or program instructions stored thereon. In addition, the processor may enable execution of multiple programs, threads, and codes. The threads may be executed simultaneously to enhance the performance of the processor and to facilitate simultaneous operations of the application. By way of implementation, methods, program codes, program instructions and the like described herein may be implemented in one or more thread. The thread may spawn other threads that may have assigned priorities associated with them; the processor may execute these threads based on priority or any other order based on instructions provided in the program code. The processor, or any machine utilizing one, may include non-transitory memory that stores methods, codes, instructions and programs as described herein and elsewhere. The processor may access a non-transitory storage medium through an interface that may store methods, codes, and instructions as described herein and elsewhere. The storage medium associated with the processor for storing methods, programs, codes, program instructions or other type of instructions capable of being executed by the computing or processing device may include but may not be limited to one or more of a CD-ROM, DVD, memory, hard disk, flash drive, RAM, ROM, cache and the like”). Gagne-Keats teaches a method and system that may link virtual assets and physical assets through non-fungible tokens (NFTs) in a metaverse by anchoring a metaverse to the real world and limiting ownership or rendering of certain virtual assets in the metaverse to only those who actually own physical assets based on NFTs stored on a blockchain so that only those who actually own a physical asset in the real world are associated with the virtual asset (or related representation) in the metaverse; while Vantis teaches a system and method that may include a tokenization system that generates a digital token that corresponds to the item that is cryptographically linked to the virtual representation thereof with the capability to upload the virtual representation of the item in order to enhance the performance of the processor and to facilitate simultaneous operations of the application. Therefore, it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gagne-Keats by Vantis to upload digital content an assignment of the digital content to the respective segment in the virtual space. The motivation to modify Gagne-Keats by Vantis is “Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way”.
Regarding claim 6, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Further, Vantis teaches that the content management method according to claim 1, wherein in response to the upload of the digital content from the segment (See Vantis: Fig. 8, and [0943], “In some embodiments, the authentication system 804 presents a portal that allows a user (e.g., a seller or an employee of a facility that holds items) to upload a virtual representation of an item. The user may provide an item classification (e.g., a baseball card, vintage clothing, jewelry, artwork, or the like), and one or more of: one or more high resolution photographs of the virtual item; a 3D representation of the item; dimensions of the item; a weight of the item; and/or the like. The authentication system 804 may allow domain-specific experts to sign up as authenticators/appraisers, such that a domain-specific expert can authenticate and/or appraise items classified in the area of their expertise. For example, sports memorabilia experts may be allowed to authenticate baseball cards and memorabilia, but not jewelry or artwork. In some embodiments, authenticators may be rated within their area of expertise and for sub-domains within their area of expertise (e.g., within the general category of sports memorabilia, an expert can be rated with respect to their knowledge on baseball memorabilia, basketball memorabilia, football memorabilia, and the like). When a new item is entered into the portal, the domain-specific experts can bid on the appraisal/authentication job, whereby the bid indicates the terms (e.g., price) under which the expert will perform the appraisal/authentication job. A user may then select the one or more of the experts based on their respective bids and/or their ratings. Alternatively, the authentication system 804 may select the one or more of the experts based on their respective bids and/or their ratings. Once an expert wins a bid, the expert performs the authentication and/or appraisal based on the information uploaded by the user (e.g., one or more high resolution photographs of the virtual item, a 3D representation of the item, dimensions of the item, a weight of the item, and/or the like). The expert may provide an appraisal value and/or a determination indicating the authenticity of the item. The authentication system 804 may include the expert's appraisal and/or authenticity determination in the virtual representation of the virtual item and, in some embodiments, the authentication system 804 may update the distributed ledger with the expert's appraisal and/or authenticity determination. As can be appreciated, the appraisal and/or the authenticity determination may result in an item being kept on or removed from the platform, or may impact the ability to collateralize a loan using the item”) a Creator Non-Fungible Token (CreatorNFT) is generated within the DLT (See Vantis: Fig. 1, and [0856], “In embodiments, the platform 100 includes an API system 106 that manages one or more application programming interfaces (APIs) of the platform, so as to expose the APIs to one or more related applications (e.g., native and/or web applications provided by the platform 100 provider), third party systems that are supported by or otherwise interact with the platform 100, and smart contracts that are configured to interface with the platform 100. The API system 106 may expose one or more APIs, such that the API system 106 may receive API calls from requesting devices or systems and/or may push data to subscribing devices or systems. The API system 106 may implement any suitable types of APIs, including REST, SOAP, and the like. In embodiments, the API system 106 may include a smart contract API that allows smart contracts to interface with the platform, a utility API, a merchant API that allows merchants to create tokens corresponding to virtual representations of items, and any other suitable APIs. In embodiments, the platform 100 may implement a micro services architecture such that services may be accessed by clients, such as by APIs and/or software development kits (SDKs). The services abstract away the complexities of blockchain creation, object handling, ownership transfers, data integration, identity management, and the like, so that platform users can easily build, deliver and/or consume platform capabilities. In embodiments, SDK types include, but are not limited to: an Android SDK, an iOS SDK, a Windows SDK, a JavaScript SDK, a PHP SDK, a Python SDK, a Swift SDK, a Ruby SDK, and the like”).
Regarding claim 7, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Vantis teach all the features with respect to claim 6 as outlined above. Further, Vantis teaches that the content management method according to claim 6, wherein the digital content is linked to the CreatorNFT (See Vantis: Fig. 1, and [0604], “According to some embodiments of the present disclosure, a system for handling a set of secure digital tokens, each of which uniquely represents a real-world object, includes an interface configured to handle a unique identifier for a unique unit of a real-world object a cryptographic token generation system that generates a unique digital token that has a set of digital attributes that correspond to the set of real-world object attributes, wherein the unique digital token is cryptographically secure, a cryptographic linking system configured to generate a cryptographically secure, one-to-at-least-one link between the unique digital token generated by the cryptographic token generation system and the unique identifier for the unique unit of the real-world object, such that the unique digital token provides a unique digital representation of the unique unit of the real-world object, and a user interface enabling a set of workflows configured to redeem the unique digital token for the real-world object”).
Regarding claim 8, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Vantis teach all the features with respect to claim 6 as outlined above. Further, Vantis teaches that the content management method according to claim 6, wherein the CreatorNFT forms a Governance Token of the VolumeDAO (See Vantis: Fig. 4, and [0917], “In some embodiments, the ledger bridging system 416 may instantiate (or request the instantiation of) a smart contract corresponding to the tokenized token as part of the minting process. In these embodiments, the smart contract may define one or more base functionalities that govern the tokenized token lifecycle mechanisms such as ownership transfer and/or redemption logic. The base functionalities may include the ability to change ownership of the tokenized token, the types of transactions in which the tokenized token may be used (e.g., to make purchases, to gift, to exchange, to redeem for cash, etc.), and the like. Upon a new tokenized token being minted, the ledger bridging system 416 may instantiate an instance of the smart contract corresponding to the newly minted tokenized token. The instance of the smart contract may execute each time the tokenized token is involved in a transfer (e.g., exchanged, gifted, or redeemed). For example, each time an owner of the tokenized token requests to transfer the tokenized token, the instance of the smart contract may be implicated by the request and the instance of the smart contract can either disallow or facilitate the transfer depending on the contents of the request and the smart contract”).
Regarding claim 9, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Vantis teach all the features with respect to claim 6 as outlined above. Further, Vantis teaches that the content management method according to claim 6, wherein the created CreatorNFT is sent to a DLT address of the DLT which is assigned to a user who has uploaded the respective digital content (See Vantis: Fig. 8, and [0472], “According to some embodiments of the present disclosure, a method includes receiving, by a processing system, a request to tokenize an item, receiving, by the processing system, one or more photographs of the item, receiving, by the processing system, item information corresponding to the item includes a description of the item, generating, by the processing system, a virtual representation of the item based on the one or more photographs and the item information, requesting, by the processing system, an authentication of the item via a portal that is accessible by subject-matter authentication experts, wherein the portal displays the virtual representation of the item in the portal, receiving, by the processing system, an authentication report from a subject-matter authentication expert includes an opinion indicating whether the subject-matter authentication expert deemed the item authentic or not-authentic and one or more reasons for the opinion, and in response to an opinion indicating that the item is deemed authentic, generating a digital token based on a virtual representation of the item and assigning an ownership of the token to an owner of the item”).
Regarding claim 10, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Vantis teach all the features with respect to claim 6 as outlined above. Further, Goeringer teaches that the content management method according to claim 6, wherein for each further digital content uploaded within the segment a further CreatorNFT is generated within the DLT, which in particular is linked to the respective further digital content, and which in particular likewise forms a Governance Token of the VolumeDAO (See Goeringer: Fig. 21, and [0157], “In an exemplary embodiment, computational complexity 2108 may be achieved through one or more of a variety of cryptographic techniques that are linked block-to-block. Consensus pool size 2106 achieves particular benefits through Byzantine Fault Tolerance, assuming, of course, that the several participants in blockchain 2100 are sufficiently decoupled to reduce the likelihood of collusion between the parties, to a sufficient acceptable degree”).
Regarding claim 14, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 12 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Vantis teach that the content management method at least according to claim 12,
wherein the virtual space is superimposed on the real existing space (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 1-4, and [0011], “As used herein, a “metaverse” can refer to a network of virtual worlds focused on social connection. A metaverse incorporates many aspects of social media into a persistent three-dimensional world with the user represented as an avatar. Social functions are often an integral feature in many massively multi-user environments. The term often describes an iteration of the Internet as a single, universal virtual world that is facilitated by the use of virtual and augmented reality headsets. Several components of metaverse technologies can be implemented within modern internet-enabled platforms. Various metaverses have been developed for popular use such as virtual world platforms. The disclosed technology relates to a metaverse that integrates virtual and real spaces. Access points for metaverses include general-purpose computers and smartphones, in addition to augmented reality (AR), mixed reality, virtual reality (VR), and virtual world technologies. Current hardware development is focused on overcoming limitations of VR headsets, sensors, and increasing immersion with haptic technology”) and
wherein upon a detection of a stay of a follower of the segment at a location in the real existing space (See Goeringer: Figs. 25-26, and [0190], “In step S2610, broker 2406 decides to accept the join request and, in step S2612, advises observer 2414, e.g., by a BCObserver message, of the acceptance. In an exemplary embodiment, the acceptance message includes one or more of the BCID, the included processors, and user requested features for each joined blockchain 2428. Observer 2414, in step S2614, updates participating second processors 2422(2), and in step S2616, joining first processor 2422(1) of the join by, for example, a BCUpdate message. In step S2618, joining first processor 2422(1) notifies participating second processors 2422(2), e.g., by a CopyBC message, to receive the entirety of current blockchain 2428 to which it has joined. Second processors 2422(2), in step S2620, request a copy of the current block chain 2428 and, in step S2622, receive a copy. In step S2624, first processor 2422(1) receives a download of the entirety of joined blockchain 2428 and, once the download is complete, first processor 2422(1) may begin processing blockchain transactions 2424 from user(s) 2404. Join process 2600 and then process additional transactions and blocks similarly to step S2522 et seq., FIG. 25”. Note that the observer with update message is mapped to the detection of a stay of a follower of the segment at a location in the real existing space),
which is superimposed on this segment in the virtual space, a Follower Non-Fungible Token (FollowerNFT) is generated within the DLT (See Vanis: Fig. 1, and [0218], “According to some embodiments of the present disclosure, a method for facilitating transactions via a tokenization platform includes maintaining a ledger, providing a digital marketplace, receiving a request to participate in a transaction for an instance of an item represented by a virtual representation of the plurality of virtual representations from a user device of a transacting user, in response to verifying the request to participate in the transaction, associating a specific token corresponding to the virtual representation with an account of the transacting user, receiving a transfer request to transfer the specific token to a different user, wherein the transfer request includes a digital-token identifier that identifies the specific token and a public address of the different user, validating the specific token based on the digital-token identifier and the ledger, verifying that the different user has a valid account on the tokenization platform based on the public address of the user and the ledger, in response to validating the specific token and verifying the different user, updating the ledger with a block that includes ownership data that indicates that the specific token corresponding to the virtual representation is owned by the different user, receiving a redemption request to redeem the digital token from a user device of the different user, and in response to receiving the redemption request, executing a workflow to satisfy the transaction for the instance of the item corresponding to the token”; [0236], “According to some embodiments of the present disclosure, a system for tokenizing a token, includes an interface configured to handle a unique identifier for a respective one of a set of first digital tokens, wherein each first digital token is associated with a respective cryptocurrency, a cryptographic token generation system that generates a set of second digital tokens corresponding to respective first digital tokens within the set of first digital tokens, wherein each second digital token represents a defined quantity of the cryptocurrency represented by the first digital token, wherein the second digital token is unique and cryptographically secure, a linking system that generates a one-to-at-least-one link between each second digital token generated by the cryptographic token generation system and the respective first digital token, such that the second digital token provides a unique digital tokenization of the first digital token, wherein the one-to-at-least-one link is cryptographically secure, and a user interface that enables a workflow for transfer of a plurality of second digital tokens within the set of second digital tokens, each of the plurality of second digital tokens representing a respective cryptocurrency type”; and [0819], “The present disclosure relates to a tokenization platform that enables the creation of virtual representations of merchandised items, such as goods, services, and/or experiences”. Note that the location verification, item linking mechanism, and the virtual representation creation, is mapped to a Follower Non-Fungible Token (FollowerNFT) is generated within the DLT).
Regarding claim 15, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Vantis teach all the features with respect to claim 14 as outlined above. Further, Vantis teaches that the content management method according to claim 14, wherein the created FollowerNFT is sent to a DLT address of the DLT which is assigned to the follower who has proved his stay within the segment (See Vanis: Fig. 1, and [0841], “In embodiments, the platform 100 interfaces with various user devices 190. User devices 190 can refer to any computing device with which a user (e.g., consumer, merchant, manufacturer, provider and the like) can access the platform. Examples of user devices include, but are not limited to, smartphones, tablet computer devices, laptop computing devices, personal computing devices, smart televisions, gaming consoles, and the like. A user device may access the platform 100 via a website, a web application, a native application, or the like. In embodiments, the platform 100 may provide a first graphical user interface to user devices 190 associated with a seller and a second graphical user interface to a user device 190 associated with an end user. The first graphical user interface may allow a user associated with a seller to offer items for sale and to create new virtual representations corresponding to the items for sale. The second user interface may allow users to purchase tokens corresponding to items for sale, to transfer tokens, and/or redeem tokens. In some embodiments, the platform 100 may support a digital wallet that stores the tokens of a user. The digital wallet may be a client application that is provided and/or supported by the platform 100. In embodiments, the digital wallet stores any tokens that are owned by the user associated with the digital wallet and provides an interface that allows the user to redeem, transfer, sell, exchange, or otherwise participate in transactions involving the token”).
Regarding claim 16, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Vantis teach all the features with respect to claim 15 as outlined above. Further, Vantis teaches that the content management method according to claim 15, wherein the FollowerNFT forms an, in particular further, Governance Token of the VolumeDAO (See Vanis: Fig. 4, and [0915], “In some of these embodiments, the ledger bridging system 416 tokenizes a specified amount of currency by minting a tokenized token that “wraps” the certain amount of currency. A tokenized token may refer to a non-fungible token that has attributes that define the type of currency and an amount of currency represented by the coin (e.g., an amount of bitcoin, ethereum, dollars, pounds, or the like). In some of these embodiments, a tokenized token may refer to a non-fungible token that has a set of attributes defining characteristics of such token in addition to having a set of fungible and/or non-fungible tokens representing digital currency balance(s) enclosed within a tokenized token and/or other digital item(s). In addition, tokenized token can contain business rules governing redemption, transfer and other tokenized token lifecycle mechanisms. In some embodiments, the ledger bridging system 416 mints the new token by requesting the generation of a new token by the token generation system 302. The ledger bridging system 416 may provide the type of currency, the amount of currency, and ownership data (e.g., the account to which the new tokenized token will belong) to the token generation system 302. In response, the token generation system 302 generates a tokenized token, for example, in the manner described above. In this way, the token generation system 302 treats the currency as an “item.” In this way, a tokenized token may be exchanged (e.g., for other tokenized tokens or tokenized items), gifted, and/or redeemed. In some embodiments, the types of transactions that a tokenized token may participate in may be restricted. For example, tokenized tokens representing unstable currencies may be restricted from being exchanged, but may be redeemed or gifted”. Note that the rule enforcement feature of the token is mapped to the Governance Token of the VolumeDAO).
Regarding claim 17, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Further, Gagne-Keats and Vanis teach that the content management method according to claim 1, wherein a, in particular higher-level (See Vanis: Fig. 1, and [0654], “In embodiments, the digital attributes of the unique digital token include a data structure that represents the physical attributes of the real-world object”; and Fig. 9, and [0964], “At 904, one or more digital tokens are generated. In embodiments, the digital tokens are unique digital tokens. Each unique digital token may include a set of digital attributes that correspond to the set of item attributes. In embodiments, N digital tokens are generated and linked to an item or virtual representation thereof. In embodiments, a token generation system generates the one or more digital token”. Note that in high level the NFT is linked the virtual representation to the physical attributes of the physical items), Volume Non-Fungible Token (VolumeNFT) of the DLT is assigned to each of the segments of the virtual space forming the metaverse, which comprises spatial (real) coordinates (See Gagne-Keats: Fig. 1, and [0019], “FIG. 1 illustrates a network 100 of interconnected peer nodes 102-1 through 102-6 (also referred to collectively as peer nodes 102 and individually as peer node 102). The peer nodes 102 can be distributed across various geographic locations including regions all over the world. The network 100 can include a combination of private, public, wired, or wireless portions. Data communicated over the network 100 can be encrypted or unencrypted at various locations or portions of the network 100. Each peer node 102 can include combinations of hardware and/or software to process data, perform functions, communicate over the network 100, and the like”) which define the respective segment and link the respective segment to the real existing space (See Gagne-Keats: Figs. 1-4, and [0012], “The disclosed technology encompasses linking digital non-fungible assets as proof of ownership over any real assets such as a non-fungible physical object that is uniquely identifiable, particularly among other physical objects of the same kind or type and using a unique identifier. Examples include a vehicle identification number (VIN) of an automobile or a parcel number or physical address for real property. As such, the NFT or other unique digital asset can represent ownership over a scarce or unique non-fungible physical asset”).
Regarding claim 18, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Vantis teach all the features with respect to claim 17 as outlined above. Further, Vanis teaches that the content management method according to claim 17, wherein the VolumeNFT does not form a Governance Token of the VolumeDAO (See Vanis: Figs. 1-8, and [0041], “In embodiments, the unique digital token is redeemable for a right to possess the item”; [0043], “In embodiments, the item is a gift card and the unique digital token represents a right to redeem the gift card”; and [0955], “In embodiments, the tokenization platform 100 includes a video game integration system 808. The video game integration system 808 allows video game makers to place tokens in video games, such that games playing a video game may be able to find, buy, trade, or otherwise interact with tokens in the video game. In embodiments, a video game maker may access an API of the tokenization platform 100 via the API system 108, such that instances of a video game may request certain tokens or types of tokens from the tokenization platform 100. In response to the request, the video game integration system 808 may serve a token to the instance of the video game. The tokens may be fungible or non-fungible. In the latter case, a token may be obtained, purchased, or otherwise transacted for by multiple video games. In the case of a non-fungible token, the first user to transact for the token is the owner of the token. In response to a user transacting for a token, the video game integration system 808 may update the distributed ledger to reflect the new ownership of the token”. Note that some NFT represents a right not a Governance Token).
Regarding claim 19, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Vantis teach all the features with respect to claim 8 as outlined above. Further, Vantis teaches that the content management method according to claim 8, wherein the Governance Token can be transferred, in particular freely, between DLT addresses of the DLT (See Vantis: Fig. 1, and [0838], “In some embodiments, the seller of an item (or any other suitable user) may access the platform 100 to define a virtual representation of the item that the seller is offering for transaction. The virtual representation of the item may include information that identifies the item (e.g., a serial number corresponding to the item, a model number of the item, and the like), information relating to the item (e.g., a classification of the item, textual descriptions, images, audio, video, virtual reality data, augmented reality data, and the like), and/or code that may be used to facilitate or verify transactions involving the item (e.g., smart contracts). In some embodiments, the platform may “tokenize” an item on behalf of a seller of the item by generating a set of tokens based on the virtual representation of the item and storing the tokens and associated metadata in a cryptographically secure distributed ledger, thereby making the tokens (and the virtual representation) verifiable, transferable, and trackable”).
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gagne-Keats, etc. (US 20230237483 A1) in view of Goeringer, etc. (US 20170337534 A1), further in view of Henry, etc. (US 20220070816 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Gagne-Keats and Goeringer teach all the features with respect to claim 20 as outlined above. However, Gagne-Keats. Modified by Goeringer, fails to explicitly disclose that the content management system according to claim 20, comprising a localization device which is configured for determining an instantaneous position of the user via a communication with locally located anchor stations, wherein at least one of the anchor stations is configured to locally store digital contents with local reference, in particular redundantly, and to provide them to the locally present user for retrieval, for example by UWB, Bluetooth, WLAN or the like.
However, Henry teaches that the content management system according to claim 20, comprising a localization device which is configured for determining an instantaneous position of the user via a communication with locally located anchor stations (See Henry: Fig. 1, and [0018], “Moreover, UWB protocols generally require all UWB anchors and mobile devices to be on the same channel. Determining which UWB anchor is associated to which mobile device can be important to avoid channel saturation. This is true both for UWB anchors (which may detect transmissions from many mobile devices but may suffer from collisions with mobile devices ranging against neighboring UWB anchors) and for mobile devices (which may encounter channel saturation and be prevented from engaging in the ranging exchanges they need for accurate location)”; and Fig. 16, and [0082], “In at least one embodiment, bus 1620 can be configured as an interface that enables one or more elements of computing device 1600 to communicate in order to exchange information and/or data. Bus 1620 can be implemented with any architecture designed for passing control, data and/or information between processors, memory elements/storage, peripheral devices, and/or any other hardware and/or software components that may be configured for computing device 1600. In at least one embodiment, bus 1620 may be implemented as a fast kernel-hosted interconnect, potentially using shared memory between processes (e.g., logic), which can enable efficient communication paths between the processes”. Note that the edge-like handling of information and ranging exchange is mapped to the instantaneous localization),
wherein at least one of the anchor stations is configured to locally store digital contents with local reference, in particular redundantly, and to provide them to the locally present user for retrieval (See Henry: Fig. 1, and [0019], “In an example embodiment, a location server is configured to identify an optimal set of UWB anchors against which a mobile device should range. For example, the location server can be configured to assign an initial set of UWB anchors for client ranging when a mobile device first enters a space serviced by the UWB anchors. The location server also may be configured to dynamically change the UWB anchor assignment if, and as, the mobile device moves within the space”), for example by UWB, Bluetooth, WLAN or the like (See Henry: Fig. 1, and [0026], “Each of the radio devices 105 can communicate with (i.e., send transmissions to, and/or receive transmission from) one or more of the mobile devices 140 using a relatively short-range wireless local area communication technology, such as (but not limited to) Wi-Fi WLAN, BLE, and/or UWB. For example, radio device 105(1) includes built-in/integrated Wi-Fi functionality for communicating with one or more of the mobile devices 140 over Wi-Fi WLAN, BLE functionality for communicating with one or more of the mobile devices 140 over BLE, and UWB functionality for communicating with one or more of the mobile devices 140 over UWB. Radio device 105(2) includes built-in/integrated Wi-Fi functionality and BLE functionality but not UWB functionality. However, radio device 105(2) is configured to achieve UWB functionality via a separate, peripheral UWB anchor device 115 connected to radio device 105(2). For example, the UWB anchor device 115 can be embodied in a peripheral device connected to radio device 105(2) via a universal serial bus (USB) dongle, a time-synchronized network (TSN) connection, or another connection technology now known or hereinafter developed. Radio device 105(n) also does not include built-in/integrated UWB functionality, and is not connected to any peripheral UWB anchor device. Therefore, radio device 105(n) is not configured to achieve UWB functionality”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify Gagne-Keats to have the content management system according to claim 20, comprising a localization device which is configured for determining an instantaneous position of the user via a communication with locally located anchor stations, wherein at least one of the anchor stations is configured to locally store digital contents with local reference, in particular redundantly, and to provide them to the locally present user for retrieval, for example by UWB, Bluetooth, WLAN or the like as taught by Henry in order to effectively determine the location of the mobile device within the mobile networking environment in a simple manner (See Henry: Fig. 1, and [0036], “The location server 190 can be configured to coordinate client ranging procedures involving any of a variety of different localization techniques. In an example embodiment, the location server 190 can be configured to coordinate client ranging procedures involving one or more UWB localization techniques, such as ToF, ToA, TDoA, RSSI, or another technique involving analysis of UWB transmissions, and/or one or more non-UWB localization techniques, such as lateration, AoA, or another technique that does not involve UWB transmissions. For example, the location server 190 can estimate a coarse location for a mobile device 140 using a non-UWB localization technique, select an optimal set of UWB anchor points for UWB ranging based on the coarse location, and use the selected UWB anchor points to determine more precise location information for the mobile device 140 using one or more UWB localization techniques. Thus, the location server may limit UWB ranging to selected UWB anchor points, potentially reducing a likelihood of channel saturation and/or signal collisions relative to a configuration in which UWB ranging involves all available or nearby UWB anchor points”). Gagne-Keats teaches a method and system that may link virtual assets and physical assets through non-fungible tokens (NFTs) in a metaverse by anchoring a metaverse to the real world and limiting ownership or rendering of certain virtual assets in the metaverse to only those who actually own physical assets based on NFTs stored on a blockchain so that only those who actually own a physical asset in the real world are associated with the virtual asset (or related representation) in the metaverse; while Henry teaches a system and techniques for assigning Ultra-Wideband (UWB) anchors for client ranging that may handle local data exchange and ranging, and can support local processing and storing for content delivery to the proximate users with the effective location determination using anchors. Therefore, it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Gagne-Keats by Henry to combine the metaverse DLT overlay system and the blockchain ecosystem with the UWB anchor infrastructures for precise local positioning. The motivation to modify Gagne-Keats by Henry is “Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way”.
Regarding claim 22, Gagne-Keats, Goeringer, and Henry teach all the features with respect to claim 21 as outlined above. Further, Goeringer teaches that the metaverse, in particular of a content management system according to claim 21, further comprising a plurality of sub-metaverses which are each formed by a segment of the virtual space defining the metaverse and which are each managed decentrally by a decentralized autonomous organization (VolumeDAO) set up on a distributed ledger technology (DLT) such as a blockchain or a tangle (See Goeringer: Figs. 21-22, and [0100], “FIG. 22 is schematic illustration of an exemplary blockchain forest 2200 having the plurality of participating processors P, as depicted in FIG. 21. Blockchain forest 2200 includes a plurality of individual blockchains 2102 that collectively have a blockchain forest height 2204 and a forest consensus pool size 2206 for a plurality of participating processors P.sub.1, P.sub.2, . . . P.sub.10. As illustrated in FIG. 22, for ease of explanation, ten processors P are shown, and each individual block chain 2202 (each having, in this example, a genesis block g, described further below with respect to FIG. 23) is shown to utilize three processors each. Nevertheless, a person of ordinary skill in the art will, in light of the present disclosure and accompanying figures, understand that blockchain forest 2200 may implement more or less than ten processors P, and more or less than seven blockchains 2202, without departing from the scope of the application”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GORDON G LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-0382. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, Devona E Faulk can be reached at 571-272-7515. 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.
/GORDON G LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2618
Prosecution Insights