DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Korea on 12/11/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR 10-2023-0178678 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 4, 5, and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, Line 1 reciting, “A DRM content streaming system comprising:” should read “A Digital Authority Management (DRM) content streaming system comprising:”
Claim 1, Line 9 reciting, “at the resolution over a rendered a low-resolution single image” should read “at the resolution over a rendered low-resolution single image”.
Claim 4, Line 5 reciting, “the respective resolutions” should read “the respective resolutions.”
Claim 5, Line 1 reciting, “A DRM content streaming method, the method comprising,” should read “A Digital Authority Management (DRM) content streaming method, the method comprising,”
Claim 10, Line 2 reciting, “. . . a computer to perform a DRM content streaming method on the computer,” should read, “. . . a computer to perform a Digital Authority Management (DRM) content streaming method on the computer,”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 9 recites “A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium characterized by a program. . .” and then Claim 10 recites, “A computer program stored on a computer-readable recording medium that is coupled to a computer to perform . . .”
According to Sequoia Technology, LLC v. Dell, Inc., the Federal Circuit interpreted that "computer-readable recording medium storing instructions" does not reasonably include transitory media. Thus the term of “computer-readable recording medium” is sufficient to refer to non-transitory media without the addition of the words “non-transitory” in the claims or specifications.
Therefore, Examiner will be interpreting Claim 10 as exclusively referring to non-transitory media, even though the claim limitations between Claims 9 and 10 have a difference of terminology. In that, Claim 9 explicitly recites “non-transitory” and Claim 10 does not explicitly recite “non-transitory”.
This interpretation is supported by the applicant’s specification which recites, “Examples of computer-readable recording media include magnetic media, such as hard disks, floppy disks, and magnetic tape; optical media, such as CD-ROMs and DVDs; magneto-optical media, such as floppy disks; and hardware devices specifically configured to store and execute program instructions, such as ROMs, RAM, flash memory, and the like.” The recited examples are exclusively non-transitory.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 3-4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 in Lines 3-4 recites the limitation "provides the client authentication authority to the DRM server using the URL address of the low-resolution image," and in Lines 5-6, “receive a decryption key to decrypt one of the medium-resolution image or the high-resolution image that matches the client authentication authority,”. Claim 3 is dependent upon the base claim of 1, which does not recite or mention a URL address, a medium resolution image, or a high resolution image. Thus, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 4 is dependent upon Claim 3 and thus is also rejected.
Claim 10 in Lines 9-10 recites the limitation, “providing, by a client terminal, client authentication authority to the DRM server using the URL address of the low-resolution image”, in Lines 13-14, “decrypting one of the medium-resolution or high-resolution three-dimensional AR objects with the received decryption key,” and in Lines 15-16, “rendering the decrypted three-dimensional AR objects over the single image rendered at the low-resolution.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
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, 3, 5, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 20120163595 A1) (Hereinafter referred to as Kwon) in view of Jolfaei et al. (“A 3D Object Encryption Scheme Which Maintains Dimensional and Spatial Stability”) (Hereinafter referred to as Jolfaei) and in further view of Jung et al. (US 20220375028 A1) (Hereinafter referred to as Jung).
Regarding Claim 1, Kwon discloses A DRM content streaming system comprising; (See Fig. 2 showing a DRM content streaming system.)
a content server registering a DRM content; (See [0063], “. . . a content issuer, a rights issuer, and a Digital Rights Management (DRM) agent described in the overall specification of the present invention denote server devices, user terminals, or application programs, which provide relevant functions or services.” Also see [0013], “A content issuer 201 functions to encrypt and distribute contents, and is configured to create a protected content 204 and distribute the protected content 204 to a first user terminal 207 on which a first DRM agent 203 is mounted.” In this case, a content issuer corresponds to a “content server” and the content issuer encrypting and creating protected content corresponds to “registering a DRM content”.)
a DRM server packaging media of the registered DRM content with an encryption key, (See [0066], “First, a content issuer 501 encrypts, e.g., a video of scalable media using different keys for respective layers of the scalable media to create a protected content 504. Further, the content issuer 501 registers a set of keys, Content Encryption Keys (CEKs), used to encrypt the content in a rights issuer 502.” Also see [0063] teaching that a content issuer can be a server device, and thus a content issuer would also correspond to “a DRM server”.)
configure the media into a predetermined number of resolutions, and (See Fig. 1 showing a predetermined number of resolutions. Specifically a low resolution, medium resolution, and high resolution for different target devices like a PDA, PC, and HDTV.)
streaming the media of each resolution with segmentation; and (See Fig. 1 showing different content streams with different resolutions that matches to a target device. Specifically a low resolution, medium resolution, and high resolution for different target devices like a PDA, PC, and HDTV. Note that the “with segmentation” limitation is currently being interpreted as each resolution being segmented or separated into different streams.)
a client terminal decrypting the media at a resolution matched with a client authentication authority and (See [0042], “decrypting, at the first user terminal, some layers of the protected content using encryption keys included in a key area of the first right object.” Also see [0007], “An extractor 102 that received the scalable media functions to extract only a required bit stream suitable for the characteristics of a target device and transmit the bit stream to the target device.” Lastly, see Fig. 1. Here, depending on the layers decrypted, the resolution will vary and can be matched according to the encryption keys used.
Further see [0017], “In this connection, since a method of performing authentication between the DRM agents 203 and 206 (or the user terminals 207 and 208) and the rights issuer 202 does not directly pertain to the present invention, a detailed description thereof is omitted.” Although authentication isn’t explicitly described in detail within this inventions, Kwon does make note of its existence being common and well-known for DRM type systems.)
rendering the decrypted media at the resolution over a rendered base layer. (See [0003], “a single base layer, and one or more enhancement layers that can be continuously stacked on the base layer. Each enhancement layer can represent the maximum bit rate, frame rate and spatial resolution that are given to the enhancement layer on the basis of information about a lower layer.”
Also see [0004], “In the present specification, a base layer is represented by a layer 1, and enhancement layers are represented by layers 2, 3, 4, etc. for the sake of description. Taking the resolution as an example, a layer 1 configures a low-resolution codec, a combination of layers 1 and 2 configure a medium-resolution codec, and a combination of layers 1, 2, and 3 configure a high-resolution codec.” Here, Kwon teaches representing media in layers, rendering more layers resulting in higher resolution on the basis of a lower layer.)
However, Kwon fails to explicitly disclose a DRM server packaging a three-dimensional augmented reality (AR) object of the registered DRM content with an encryption key,
reconstructing the three-dimensional AR object into a predetermined number of resolutions, and
streaming the three-dimensional AR object of each reconstructed resolution with segmentation; and
a client terminal decrypting the three-dimensional AR object at a resolution matched with a client authentication authority and
rendering the decrypted three-dimensional AR object at the resolution over a rendered a low-resolution single image.
Jolfaei teaches a DRM server packaging a three-dimensional augmented reality (AR) object of the registered DRM content with an encryption key, (See Abstract, “Due to widespread applications of 3D vision technology, the research into 3D object protection is primarily important. To maintain confidentiality, encryption of 3D objects is essential.” Further see Page 1 Left Column Paragraph 1, “ADVANCES of multimedia computing and networking have unlocked the path for the application of 3D objects in a variety of domains, including virtual reality and augmented reality.” Lastly see Page 1 Right Column Paragraph 1, “This simple and naïve approach has already been used in many Digital Rights Management (DRM) systems [3], [4].”
Here, Jolfaei teaches that encrypting 3D objects, which can be used in fields such as augmented reality (a three-dimensional augmented reality (AR) object), is a known and common technique found in DRM systems. In combination with Kwon [0066] and [0063], the above limitation is taught.)
reconstructing the three-dimensional AR object into a predetermined number of resolutions, and (See Page 3 Left Column Paragraph 3, “In [16], a digital rights enabled graphics processing system was proposed by Shi et al. . . This system renders only 3D objects with multi-resolution representations, which have different levels of detail.” Here, Jolfaei summarizes a known system from a background art that renders 3D objects with multi-resolution representations, which corresponds to “reconstructing the three-dimensional AR object into a predetermined number of resolutions”.)
streaming the three-dimensional AR object of each reconstructed resolution with segmentation; and (See Abstract, Page 1 Left Column Paragraph 1, and Page 1 Right Column Paragraph 1 teaching encrypting three-dimensional AR object in a DRM system. In combination with Kwon Fig. 1 already teaching to stream content with different resolution, the above limitation is taught, as instead of the media content being streamed at different resolutions, it would be the 3D AR object taught by Jolfaei instead.)
a client terminal decrypting the three-dimensional AR object at a resolution matched with a client authentication authority and (Once again, See Abstract, Page 1 Left Column Paragraph 1, and Page 1 Right Column Paragraph 1 teaching encrypting three-dimensional AR object in a DRM system.
See Kwon [0042], [0007], Fig. 1 and [0017] teaching the terminal, decrypting content, and matching corresponding resolutions, and client authentication authority.)
rendering the decrypted three-dimensional AR object at the resolution over a rendered base layer. (Once again, See Abstract, Page 1 Left Column Paragraph 1, and Page 1 Right Column Paragraph 1 teaching encrypting three-dimensional AR object in a DRM system.
In combination with Kwon [0003] and [0004] teaching representing media in layers with a base layer; rendering more layers resulting in higher resolution on the basis of a lower layer, instead of the rendering the media in Kwon, the 3D AR object can be rendered instead.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwon with Jolfaei to include having a three-dimensional AR object in a DRM system.
The motivation to combine Kwon with Jolfaei would have been obvious as both Kwon and Jolfaei are related to DRM systems (See Page 1 Right Column Paragraph 1). Jolfaei simply teaches that it is common to have 3D objects be encrypted into protected content in DRM systems (See Abstract and Page 1 Left Column Paragraph 1). The benefit of including 3D objects in DRM systems is obvious as the usage of 3D objects has become increasingly more common and, thus there would be a need to protect the 3D content. See Jolfaei Abstract, “Due to widespread applications of 3D vision technology, the research into 3D object protection is primarily important. To maintain confidentiality, encryption of 3D objects is essential.”
However, Kwon in view of Jolfaei still fails to explicitly disclose rendering the decrypted three-dimensional AR object at the resolution over a rendered a low-resolution single image.
Jung teaches rendering the decrypted three-dimensional AR object at the resolution over a rendered a low-resolution single image. (See [0043], “For an AR application, the AR application 210 includes a local rendering engine that renders a 3D model of a virtual object overlaid (e.g., superimposed upon, or otherwise displayed in tandem with) on an image or a view of the physical object 104.” Note, since Jung teaches to render the 3D object over “an image”, that image can be can be a low-resolution image since Jung doesn’t limit what kind of image it can be. So in a common scenario, the 3D object would be rendered over a low-resolution image.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwon in view of Jolfaei with Jung to include rendering a 3D AR object over a rendered low-resolution single image.
The motivation to combine Kwon in view of Jolfaei with Jung would have been obvious as both Jolfaei and Jung teach the use of 3D objects in spaces like virtual/augmented reality (See Jung [0043]). Jung simply teaches that it is a common within AR applications to render a 3D model of a virtual object over an image. The benefit of rendering a 3D model of a virtual object over an image is that it allows for easy visualization of the virtual object.
Regarding Claim 3, Kwon in view of Jolfaei and Jung disclose The DRM content streaming system of claim 1, wherein the client terminal is configured to, (See Kwon [0042], “decrypting, at the first user terminal, some layers of the protected content using encryption keys included in a key area of the first right object.”)
provides the client authentication authority to the DRM server using the URL address of the low-resolution image, (See Kwon [0017], “In this connection, since a method of performing authentication between the DRM agents 203 and 206 (or the user terminals 207 and 208) and the rights issuer 202 does not directly pertain to the present invention, a detailed description thereof is omitted.”
See Kwon [0021], “Metadata 302 includes an encryption scheme, the Uniform Resource Locator (URL) of a rights issuer, information about a content provider, etc.”)
receive a decryption key to decrypt one of the medium-resolution image or the high-resolution image that matches the client authentication authority, decrypts one of the medium-resolution or high-resolution three-dimensional AR objects with the received decryption key, (See Kwon [0015], “A rights issuer 202 functions to generate a right object 205 including permission information, condition information, and a content decryption key, which are related to the protected content, and sell the right object 205 to the users of the first and second terminal 207 and 208.”
Also see Kwon [0042], “decrypting, at the first user terminal, some layers of the protected content using encryption keys included in a key area of the first right object.” See Kwon [0007], “An extractor 102 that received the scalable media functions to extract only a required bit stream suitable for the characteristics of a target device and transmit the bit stream to the target device.” Lastly, see Kwon Fig. 1 showing a medium and high resolution stream.)
renders the decrypted three-dimensional AR objects over the single image rendered at the low-resolution. (See Jung [0043], “For an AR application, the AR application 210 includes a local rendering engine that renders a 3D model of a virtual object overlaid (e.g., superimposed upon, or otherwise displayed in tandem with) on an image or a view of the physical object 104.” The motivation to combine would have been similar to that of Claim 1 rejection motivation.)
Regarding Claim 5, Kwon in view of Jolfaei and Jung disclose A DRM content streaming method, the method comprising, (See Kwon [0002], “The present invention relates generally to Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology for multimedia data and, more particularly, to a system and method for providing layered access control . . .”)
packaging a three-dimensional AR object of a registered DRM content with an encryption key; (See Kwon [0066] teaching protected content (registered DRM content) and encryption keys. Also see Jolfaei Abstract, Page 1 Left Column Paragraph 1, and Page 1 Right Column Paragraph 1 teaching encrypting three-dimensional AR object in a DRM system.)
reconstructing the three-dimensional AR object into a predetermined number of resolutions; and (See Kwon Fig. 1 showing predetermined number of resolutions. Specifically a low resolution, medium resolution, and high resolution for different target devices like a PDA, PC, and HDTV. Also see Jolfaei Page 3 Left Column Paragraph 3 teaching to render 3D objects with multi-resolution representations.)
streaming the reconstructed three-dimensional AR objects at each resolution with segmentation. (See Kwon Fig. 1 showing different content streams with different resolutions that matches to a target device. See Jolfaei Abstract, Page 1 Left Column Paragraph 1, and Page 1 Right Column Paragraph 1 teaching the three-dimensional AR object. The motivation to combine would have been similar to that of Claim 1 rejection motivation.)
Regarding Claim 9, Kwon in view of Jolfaei and Jung disclose A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium characterized by a program recorded thereon for executing on the computer the DRM content streaming method of claim 5. (See Kwon [0063], “. . . the present invention denote server devices, user terminals, or application programs, which provide relevant functions or services.” Note, that although Kwon does not explicitly recite a “non-transitory computer-readable recording medium”, since it does teach server devices and user terminals which are commonly considered as computing device, than implicitly, that would include memory and thus “non-transitory computer readable recording medium”. Note that Claim 9 also contains similar limitations as to Claim 5 and therefore is rejected under a similar rationale as that of Claim 5.)
Regarding Claim 10, Kwon in view of Jolfaei and Jung disclose A computer program stored on a computer-readable recording medium that is coupled to a computer to perform a DRM content streaming method on the computer, wherein the DRM content streaming method comprises, (See Kwon [0063], “. . . the present invention denote server devices, user terminals, or application programs, which provide relevant functions or services.” Once again, although Kwon doesn’t not explicitly state a computer-readable recording medium, since it does teach server devices and user terminals which are computing device, then implicitly that would include memory and thus “a computer readable recording medium”.)
packaging a three-dimensional AR object of a registered DRM content with an encryption key and reconstructing the packaged three-dimensional AR object into a predetermined number of resolutions; streaming the reconstructed three-dimensional AR objects at each resolution with segmentation, (The above limitation as similar to those of Claim 5 and is therefore rejected under a similar rationale as that of Claim 5)
providing, by a client terminal, client authentication authority to the DRM server using the URL address of the low-resolution image, receiving a decryption key to decrypt a three-dimensional AR object with a resolution that matches the client authentication authority, decrypting one of the medium-resolution or high-resolution three-dimensional AR objects with the received decryption key, and rendering the decrypted three-dimensional AR objects over the single image rendered at the low-resolution. (The above limitation as similar to those of Claim 3 and is therefore rejected under a similar rationale as that of Claim 3)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4, and 6-8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 2, the cited prior art does not disclose or render obvious the combination of elements cited in the claims as a whole. Specifically, the cited prior art fails to disclose or render obvious the limitations: wherein the DRM server reconstructs the three-dimensional AR object into, a low-resolution image comprising URL information for a three-dimensional AR object of the registered DRM content as a single image, a medium-resolution image comprising a three-dimensional AR object reconstructed at a higher resolution than the low-resolution single image, and a high-resolution image comprising a three-dimensional AR object reconstructed at a higher resolution than the medium-resolution three-dimensional AR object.
Thus Claim 2 contains allowable subject matter.
Regarding Claim 4, the cited prior art does not disclose or render obvious the combination of elements cited in the claims as a whole. Specifically, the cited prior art fails to disclose or render obvious the limitations: wherein the client terminal is configured to, provides, to the DRM server, a retransmission command of a three-dimensional AR object of a streaming index requested by a client among the three-dimensional AR objects of the respective resolutions Thus Claim 4 contains allowable subject matter.
Regarding Claim 6, Claim 6 recites similar limitations as to Claim 2 and therefore also contains allowable subject matter.
Regarding Claim 7, Claim 7 is dependent upon Claim 6 and therefore also contains allowable subject matter
Regarding Claim 8, Claim 8 is dependent upon Claim 7 and therefore also contains allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Reference Huang et al. (EP 3958574 A1) is made of record as an art that teaches rendering virtual environments in AR space (See Abstract), copyrighted contented which is protected and encrypted with digital right management (DRM) systems (See Background), server and client devices (See Fig. 1), and obtaining and rendering 3D content (See Fig. 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANG G HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-5432. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 7:30am-4:30pm EST | Fri 7:30am-11:30am 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, Kee Tung can be reached at (571)272-7794. 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.
/T.G.H./Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/KEE M TUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights