DETAILED ACTION
In an amendment filed April 20, 2026, the Applicant amended claims 1-6, 10, 13-15, and 17-20 and canceled claims 8, 9, 11, 12, and 16. Claims 1-7, 10, 13-15, and 17-20, are pending in the current application.
Notice of 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 24, 2026, was filed after the mailing date of the application on December 9, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Claims 1, 13, and 14 were objected to for informalities. Examiner thanks the Applicant for amending the claim language and hereby withdraws the objection from the previous Office action.
Applicant’s arguments for claims 1-7, 10, 13-15, and 17-20, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection have been considered and are persuasive. Independent claim 1 (representative of independent claims 13 and 14) recite the following additional elements:
obtaining a first digital asset;
obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying the first digital asset and transformation information representative of at least one transformation method;
applying the at least one transformation method to the first digital asset to obtain a first transformed digital asset, wherein the at least one transformation method reduces an amount of information present in the first transformed digital asset relative to the first digital asset, such that the first transformed digital asset is representative of at least one technical characteristic of the first digital asset;
obtaining a second digital asset;
applying the at least one transformation method to the second digital asset to obtain a second transformed digital asset; and
comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset.
The claims recite a combination of additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the invention as claimed provides technical solutions to technical problems. Specifically, the additional elements recite a specific manner of determining authenticity of underlying digital assets connected to non-fungible tokens. These elements do not amount to the mere requirement to “apply” the abstract idea and does not amount to extra-solution activity, since these steps are integrated into the technical solution itself and since details as to how these elements function to bring forth the technical solution are set forth in the claims. As such, the claims are directed to patent eligible subject matter.
Applicant’s arguments for claims 1-7, 10, 13-15, and 17-20 with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejections have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Objections
Claims 10 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 10, line 7, “fingerprint method the second” should read --fingerprint method to the second--.
Claim 15, line 4, “associated with a second digital asset” should read --associated with the second digital asset--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-7, 10, 13-15, and 17-20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patt et al. (US 2024/0303734 A1), hereinafter Patt, in view of Schauer (US 2022/0337392 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Patt discloses a method for authenticating digital assets, the method comprising:
obtaining a first digital asset (Par. [0011], the first payload can include a first digital resource, the second payload can include a second digital resource, and the first digital resource and the second digital resource can depict a same scene with differing resolutions);
obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT) (Par. [0013], the plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a blockchain. The plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a non-fungible token marketplace; Par. [0037], The systems and methods can include obtaining blockchain data from a blockchain computing system. The systems and methods can determine the blockchain data includes first token data. The first token data can be descriptive of a first non-fungible token associated with a first digital resource (e.g., a first digital asset)), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying the first digital asset (Par. [0092], In particular, the script can reference a specific digital asset that is provided for sale. The digital asset can include image data, text data, video data, latent encoding data, a domain name, a virtual property, an augmented-reality asset, a virtual-reality asset (e.g., a virtual-reality environment and/or a virtual-reality object for interaction in an environment), a smart contract, a physical item authentication, etc.);
obtaining a second digital asset (Par. [0011], the first payload can include a first digital resource, the second payload can include a second digital resource, and the first digital resource and the second digital resource can depict a same scene with differing resolutions); and
comparing the first digital asset to the second digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset (Par. [0053], The first digital asset and the second digital asset can be determined to be a same digital asset. The determination can be based on determining the first digital asset of the first non-fungible token and determining the second digital asset of the second non-fungible token. The first digital asset and the second digital asset can be compared to determine similar and/overlapping data. The determination can include image processing, text processing, audio processing, video processing, and/or latent encoding processing. In some implementations, the determination can include processing the first digital asset and the second digital asset with one or more machine-learned models (e.g., an image classification model, an audio classification model, a video classification model, an object detection model, a feature extractor model, and/or one or more recognition models).
Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein the first NFT comprises information transformation information representative of at least one transformation method; obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying transformation information representative of at least one transformation method; applying the at least one transformation method to the first digital asset to obtain a first transformed digital asset, wherein the at least one transformation method reduces an amount of information present in the first transformed digital asset relative to the first digital asset, such that the first transformed digital asset is representative of at least one technical characteristic of the first digital asset; applying the at least one transformation method to the second digital asset to obtain a second transformed digital asset; and comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset.
Schauer teaches obtaining a first digital asset (Par. [0037], a user 103 may send an original digital asset (or content) 105 created by the user 103 to the automatic digital asset authenticator 101);
obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT) (Par. [0037], The automatic digital asset authenticator 101 is configured to automatically generate an NFT, for the digital asset 105), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying the first digital asset (Par. [0065], if some metadata is also included in each chunk of the media, where the metadata may comprise information associated with what an image in a video frame of the video or live stream media would sum up to, finger print of audio corresponding to the video frame, or the likes) and transformation information representative of at least one transformation method (Par. [0092], the automatic digital asset authenticator 101 uses the encoder 101 a to encode each chunk of the digital asset 105 into, for example, base64 strings);
applying the at least one transformation method to the first digital asset to obtain a first transformed digital asset, wherein the at least one transformation method reduces an amount of information present in the first transformed digital asset relative to the first digital asset, such that the first transformed digital asset is representative of at least one technical characteristic of the first digital asset (Par. [0092], On receiving the digital asset 105, the digital asset 105 may be divided into discrete chunks, where length of each chunk may be predefined. In an example embodiment, length of the chunk is determined in real-time based on the length of the digital asset 105. In an example embodiment, the length of the discrete chunks is between 0.10 seconds and 3 seconds. Further, the automatic digital asset authenticator 101 uses the encoder 101 a to encode each chunk of the digital asset 105 into, for example, base64 strings);
applying the at least one transformation method to the second digital asset to obtain a second transformed digital asset (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings); and
comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings. Thus, unauthorized copies of some asset (pirated assets), or assets where only a portion of the asset's duration is different from what was expected after applying a similar conversion to a known authentic original digital asset (suspected deep fakes) can be found. Thus, it may be determined whether the copy was authentic or a copy or a fake).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 2, Patt and Schauer disclose the method of claim 1. Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein the NFT further comprises the first transformed digital asset. Schauer teaches wherein the NFT further comprises the first transformed digital asset (Par. [0037], The automatic digital asset authenticator 101 automates the generation of a single NFT in real-time for each piece or chunk of the digital asset). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 3, Patt and Schauer disclose the method of claim 1. Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein the NFT further comprises fingerprint information representative of at least one fingerprint method delivering a fingerprint when applied to the first transformed digital asset. Schauer teaches wherein the NFT further comprises fingerprint information representative of at least one fingerprint method delivering a fingerprint when applied to the first transformed digital asset (Par. [0065], if some metadata is also included in each chunk of the media, where the metadata may comprise information associated with what an image in a video frame of the video or live stream media would sum up to, finger print of audio corresponding to the video frame, or the likes). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 4, Patt and Schauer disclose the method of claim 3. Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein the NFT further comprises the fingerprint. Schauer teaches wherein the NFT further comprises the fingerprint (Par. [0065], if some metadata is also included in each chunk of the media, where the metadata may comprise information associated with what an image in a video frame of the video or live stream media would sum up to, finger print of audio corresponding to the video frame, or the likes). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 5, Patt and Schauer disclose the method of claim 1. Patt also discloses wherein the obtaining the NFT comprises: generating the NFT; or retrieving the NFT from a blockchain (Par. [0013], the plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a blockchain. The plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a non-fungible token marketplace; Par. [0037], The systems and methods can include obtaining blockchain data from a blockchain computing system. The systems and methods can determine the blockchain data includes first token data. The first token data can be descriptive of a first non-fungible token associated with a first digital resource (e.g., a first digital asset)).
Regarding claim 6, Patt and Schauer disclose the method of claim 1. Patt discloses further comprising obtaining a second NFT associated with the second digital asset (Par. [0013], the plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a blockchain. The plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a non-fungible token marketplace; Par. [0037], The systems and methods can include obtaining blockchain data from a blockchain computing system).
Regarding claim 7, Patt and Schauer disclose the method of claim 6. Patt discloses wherein the obtaining the second NFT comprises: generating the second NFT; or retrieving, from a blockchain, the second NFT (Par. [0013], the plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a blockchain. The plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a non-fungible token marketplace; Par. [0037], The systems and methods can include obtaining blockchain data from a blockchain computing system).
Regarding claim 10, Patt and Schauer disclose the method of claim 1. Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset comprises: applying a fingerprint method to the first transformed digital asset to obtain a first fingerprint; and applying the fingerprint method the second transformed digital asset to obtain a second fingerprint; wherein the fingerprint method is identified by fingerprint information of the NFT.
Schauer teaches wherein comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset comprises: applying a fingerprint method to the first transformed digital asset to obtain a first fingerprint (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings); and applying the fingerprint method the second transformed digital asset to obtain a second fingerprint (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings); wherein the fingerprint method is identified by fingerprint information of the NFT (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings. Thus, unauthorized copies of some asset (pirated assets), or assets where only a portion of the asset's duration is different from what was expected after applying a similar conversion to a known authentic original digital asset (suspected deep fakes) can be found. Thus, it may be determined whether the copy was authentic or a copy or a fake).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 13, Patt discloses a non-transitory-computer-readable medium (Par. [0081]) comprising program code instructions for implementing a method comprising:
obtaining a first digital asset (Par. [0011], the first payload can include a first digital resource, the second payload can include a second digital resource, and the first digital resource and the second digital resource can depict a same scene with differing resolutions);
obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT) (Par. [0013], the plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a blockchain. The plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a non-fungible token marketplace; Par. [0037], The systems and methods can include obtaining blockchain data from a blockchain computing system. The systems and methods can determine the blockchain data includes first token data. The first token data can be descriptive of a first non-fungible token associated with a first digital resource (e.g., a first digital asset)), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying the first digital asset (Par. [0092], In particular, the script can reference a specific digital asset that is provided for sale. The digital asset can include image data, text data, video data, latent encoding data, a domain name, a virtual property, an augmented-reality asset, a virtual-reality asset (e.g., a virtual-reality environment and/or a virtual-reality object for interaction in an environment), a smart contract, a physical item authentication, etc.);
obtaining a second digital asset (Par. [0011], the first payload can include a first digital resource, the second payload can include a second digital resource, and the first digital resource and the second digital resource can depict a same scene with differing resolutions); and
comparing the first digital asset to the second digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset (Par. [0053], The first digital asset and the second digital asset can be determined to be a same digital asset. The determination can be based on determining the first digital asset of the first non-fungible token and determining the second digital asset of the second non-fungible token. The first digital asset and the second digital asset can be compared to determine similar and/overlapping data. The determination can include image processing, text processing, audio processing, video processing, and/or latent encoding processing. In some implementations, the determination can include processing the first digital asset and the second digital asset with one or more machine-learned models (e.g., an image classification model, an audio classification model, a video classification model, an object detection model, a feature extractor model, and/or one or more recognition models).
Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein the first NFT comprises information transformation information representative of at least one transformation method; obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying transformation information representative of at least one transformation method; applying the at least one transformation method to the first digital asset to obtain a first transformed digital asset, wherein the at least one transformation method reduces an amount of information present in the first transformed digital asset relative to the first digital asset, such that the first transformed digital asset is representative of at least one technical characteristic of the first digital asset; applying the at least one transformation method to the second digital asset to obtain a second transformed digital asset; and comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset.
Schauer teaches obtaining a first digital asset (Par. [0037], a user 103 may send an original digital asset (or content) 105 created by the user 103 to the automatic digital asset authenticator 101);
obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT) (Par. [0037], The automatic digital asset authenticator 101 is configured to automatically generate an NFT, for the digital asset 105), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying the first digital asset (Par. [0065], if some metadata is also included in each chunk of the media, where the metadata may comprise information associated with what an image in a video frame of the video or live stream media would sum up to, finger print of audio corresponding to the video frame, or the likes) and transformation information representative of at least one transformation method (Par. [0092], the automatic digital asset authenticator 101 uses the encoder 101 a to encode each chunk of the digital asset 105 into, for example, base64 strings);
applying the at least one transformation method to the first digital asset to obtain a first transformed digital asset, wherein the at least one transformation method reduces an amount of information present in the first transformed digital asset relative to the first digital asset, such that the first transformed digital asset is representative of at least one technical characteristic of the first digital asset (Par. [0092], On receiving the digital asset 105, the digital asset 105 may be divided into discrete chunks, where length of each chunk may be predefined. In an example embodiment, length of the chunk is determined in real-time based on the length of the digital asset 105. In an example embodiment, the length of the discrete chunks is between 0.10 seconds and 3 seconds. Further, the automatic digital asset authenticator 101 uses the encoder 101 a to encode each chunk of the digital asset 105 into, for example, base64 strings);
applying the at least one transformation method to the second digital asset to obtain a second transformed digital asset (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings); and
comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings. Thus, unauthorized copies of some asset (pirated assets), or assets where only a portion of the asset's duration is different from what was expected after applying a similar conversion to a known authentic original digital asset (suspected deep fakes) can be found. Thus, it may be determined whether the copy was authentic or a copy or a fake).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 14, Patt discloses an electronic device for authenticating a digital assets, the electronic device comprising a processor or a dedicated computing machine (Par. [0081]) configured for:
obtaining a first digital asset (Par. [0011], the first payload can include a first digital resource, the second payload can include a second digital resource, and the first digital resource and the second digital resource can depict a same scene with differing resolutions);
obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT) (Par. [0013], the plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a blockchain. The plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a non-fungible token marketplace; Par. [0037], The systems and methods can include obtaining blockchain data from a blockchain computing system. The systems and methods can determine the blockchain data includes first token data. The first token data can be descriptive of a first non-fungible token associated with a first digital resource (e.g., a first digital asset)), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying the first digital asset (Par. [0092], In particular, the script can reference a specific digital asset that is provided for sale. The digital asset can include image data, text data, video data, latent encoding data, a domain name, a virtual property, an augmented-reality asset, a virtual-reality asset (e.g., a virtual-reality environment and/or a virtual-reality object for interaction in an environment), a smart contract, a physical item authentication, etc.);
obtaining a second digital asset (Par. [0011], the first payload can include a first digital resource, the second payload can include a second digital resource, and the first digital resource and the second digital resource can depict a same scene with differing resolutions); and
comparing the first digital asset to the second digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset (Par. [0053], The first digital asset and the second digital asset can be determined to be a same digital asset. The determination can be based on determining the first digital asset of the first non-fungible token and determining the second digital asset of the second non-fungible token. The first digital asset and the second digital asset can be compared to determine similar and/overlapping data. The determination can include image processing, text processing, audio processing, video processing, and/or latent encoding processing. In some implementations, the determination can include processing the first digital asset and the second digital asset with one or more machine-learned models (e.g., an image classification model, an audio classification model, a video classification model, an object detection model, a feature extractor model, and/or one or more recognition models).
Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein the first NFT comprises information transformation information representative of at least one transformation method; obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying transformation information representative of at least one transformation method; applying the at least one transformation method to the first digital asset to obtain a first transformed digital asset, wherein the at least one transformation method reduces an amount of information present in the first transformed digital asset relative to the first digital asset, such that the first transformed digital asset is representative of at least one technical characteristic of the first digital asset; applying the at least one transformation method to the second digital asset to obtain a second transformed digital asset; and comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset.
Schauer teaches obtaining a first digital asset (Par. [0037], a user 103 may send an original digital asset (or content) 105 created by the user 103 to the automatic digital asset authenticator 101);
obtaining a first non-fungible token (NFT) (Par. [0037], The automatic digital asset authenticator 101 is configured to automatically generate an NFT, for the digital asset 105), wherein the first NFT comprises information identifying the first digital asset (Par. [0065], if some metadata is also included in each chunk of the media, where the metadata may comprise information associated with what an image in a video frame of the video or live stream media would sum up to, finger print of audio corresponding to the video frame, or the likes) and transformation information representative of at least one transformation method (Par. [0092], the automatic digital asset authenticator 101 uses the encoder 101 a to encode each chunk of the digital asset 105 into, for example, base64 strings);
applying the at least one transformation method to the first digital asset to obtain a first transformed digital asset, wherein the at least one transformation method reduces an amount of information present in the first transformed digital asset relative to the first digital asset, such that the first transformed digital asset is representative of at least one technical characteristic of the first digital asset (Par. [0092], On receiving the digital asset 105, the digital asset 105 may be divided into discrete chunks, where length of each chunk may be predefined. In an example embodiment, length of the chunk is determined in real-time based on the length of the digital asset 105. In an example embodiment, the length of the discrete chunks is between 0.10 seconds and 3 seconds. Further, the automatic digital asset authenticator 101 uses the encoder 101 a to encode each chunk of the digital asset 105 into, for example, base64 strings);
applying the at least one transformation method to the second digital asset to obtain a second transformed digital asset (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings); and
comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset to determine whether the second digital asset shares the at least one technical characteristic with the first digital asset (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings. Thus, unauthorized copies of some asset (pirated assets), or assets where only a portion of the asset's duration is different from what was expected after applying a similar conversion to a known authentic original digital asset (suspected deep fakes) can be found. Thus, it may be determined whether the copy was authentic or a copy or a fake).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 15, Patt and Schauer disclose the electronic device of claim 14. Patt discloses further comprising obtaining a second NFT associated with a second digital asset (Par. [0013], the plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a blockchain. The plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a non-fungible token marketplace; Par. [0037], The systems and methods can include obtaining blockchain data from a blockchain computing system).
Regarding claim 17, Patt and Schauer disclose the electronic device of claim 14. Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein the NFT further comprises the first transformed digital asset. Schauer teaches wherein the NFT further comprises the first transformed digital asset (Par. [0037], The automatic digital asset authenticator 101 automates the generation of a single NFT in real-time for each piece or chunk of the digital asset). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 18, Patt and Schauer disclose the electronic device of claim 14. Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein, to compare the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset, the processor or dedicated computing machine is configured for: applying a fingerprint method to the first transformed digital asset to obtain a fingerprint.
Schauer teaches wherein comparing the first transformed digital asset to the second transformed digital asset comprises: applying a fingerprint method to the first transformed digital asset to obtain a first fingerprint (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings); and applying the fingerprint method the second transformed digital asset to obtain a second fingerprint (Par. [0082], it is possible to compare binary data (base64 strings) representing the digital asset found on the platform to binary data (base64 strings) expected for a known authentic original digital asset converted to the same file type, using the same encoding algorithm, and similar quality settings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 19, Patt and Schauer disclose the electronic device of claim 18. Patt does not explicitly disclose wherein the NFT further comprises the fingerprint. Schauer teaches wherein the NFT further comprises the fingerprint (Par. [0065], if some metadata is also included in each chunk of the media, where the metadata may comprise information associated with what an image in a video frame of the video or live stream media would sum up to, finger print of audio corresponding to the video frame, or the likes). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-fungible token system of Patt to include the transformation abilities of Schauer as a need exists to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset (Schauer, Par. [0081]). Such transformation techniques to determine authenticity as taught in Schauer would enable a non-fungible token system as disclosed in Patt to effectively detect and block un-authorized posting or re-posting of any digital asset. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included transformation information in the non-fungible token for comparison in authentication by as in the improvement discussed in Schauer in the system executing the method of Patt. As in Schauer, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to include such non-fungible token information to Patt’s disclosed information contained within each non-fungible token with the predicted result of accurately comparing digital assets as needed in Patt.
Regarding claim 20, Patt and Schauer disclose the electronic device of claim 14. Patt also discloses wherein the obtaining the NFT comprises: generating the NFT; or retrieving the NFT from a blockchain (Par. [0013], the plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a blockchain. The plurality of index entries can include one or more index entries obtained by extracting data from a non-fungible token marketplace; Par. [0037], The systems and methods can include obtaining blockchain data from a blockchain computing system. The systems and methods can determine the blockchain data includes first token data. The first token data can be descriptive of a first non-fungible token associated with a first digital resource (e.g., a first digital asset)).
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Barnes et al. (US 2023/0216658 A1) discloses a system for generating digital and/or cryptographic assets. An initial state of an environment is acquired using sensors that includes a state of each sensor, a region of interest including a 3D body, and a state of light sources. The asset is associated with the 3D body. A plurality of boundary conditions associated with a workflow for capturing the asset is determined. A visualization of a set of boundary conditions is displayed on a display that includes a plurality of visual cues including first and second visual cues. Each respective visual cue provides a visual indication of a state of a corresponding boundary condition in the set of boundary conditions. At least one visual cue is updated when each boundary condition in the set of boundary conditions is satisfied. When satisfied, the workflow at the computer-enabled imaging device is executed, thereby capturing the asset.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patrick Kim whose telephone number is (571)272-8619. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM EST.
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, Lynda Jasmin can be reached at (571)272-6782. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Patrick Kim/Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights