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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-20 are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As indicated above, there are three judicially created exceptions to the broad categories of patent-eligible subject matter in § 101: laws of nature, natural
phenomena, and abstract ideas. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int 7, 134
S. Ct. 2347, 2354 (2014); Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs.,
Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 70-71 (2012). Although an abstract idea, itself, is patent-
ineligible, an application of the abstract idea may be patent-eligible. Alice,
134 S. Ct. at 2355. Thus, consideration is given to “the elements of each claim both
individually and ‘as an ordered combination’ to determine whether the
additional elements ‘transform the nature of the claim’ into a patent-eligible
application.” Id. (citing Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1297—98).
The claim must contain elements or a combination of elements that are “sufficient to ensure that the patent in practice amounts to significantly more than a patent upon
the [abstract idea] itself.” Id. (citing Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294). The Supreme Court set forth a two-part “framework for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts.”
First, whether the claims at issue are directed to one of those patent-ineligible concepts. [Mayo,] 132 S. Ct., at 1296—1297. If so, we then ask, “[w]hat else is there in the claims before us?” Id., at-, 132 S. Ct., at 1297. To answer that question, we consider the elements of each claim both individually and “as an ordered combination” to determine whether the additional elements “transform the nature of the
claim” into a patent-eligible application. Id., at-, 132 S. Ct., at 1298, 1297. We have described step two of this analysis as a search for an “‘inventive concept’”—i.e., an element or combination of elements that is “sufficient to ensure that the patent in practice amounts to significantly more than a patent upon the [ineligible concept] itself.” Id., at-, 132 S. Ct., at 1294. Id.
“The ‘abstract idea’ step of the inquiry requires to determine if the claim's ‘character as a whole’ is directed to excluded subject matter.” Affinity Labs of Tex. v. DirectTV, LLC, 838 F.3d 1253, 1257 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (quoting Elec. Power Grp., LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2016)); see also Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2016). There is no definitive rule to determine what constitutes an “abstract idea.” Rather, the Federal Circuit has explained that “both [it] and the Supreme Court have found it sufficient to compare claims at issue to those claims already found to be directed to an abstract idea in previous cases.” Enfish, 822 F.3d 1327, 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2016); see also Amdocs (Israel) Ltd. v. Openet Telecom, Inc., 841 F.3d 1288, 1294 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (explaining that, in determining whether claims are patent eligible under §101, “the decisional mechanism courts now apply is to examine earlier cases in which a similar or parallel descriptive nature can be seen—what prior cases were about, and which way they were decided”).
Claim 1 recites, “A content providing system wherein a script that is generated by a creator and includes identification information of content and comment information is stored in a predetermined storage medium to be browsable by a user, the content providing system comprising:
processing circuitry configured to read, according to a script selected by the user, content indicated by content identification information included in the script based on a right for listening to the content that the user has already acquired by a contract with the specific service,
generate a comment according to the comment information included in the script,
provide the content to the user and provide the comment to the user at least one of before or after the provision of the content, and
when a request for playlist reproduction is received by the user according to the script selected by the user, not generate the comment according to the comment information included in the script, and read and provide content indicated by the content identification information included in the script to the user.
Examiner’s analysis:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Step 1. It is a method for performing a series of steps , and therefore is a process, which is a statutory category of invention.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Precisely, the steps “read…, generate…, provide…, when a request…” can be done mentally or by writing down on a piece of paper.
As per the recited method, the claim under the BRI reads, for example, as a human deciding to read content mentally based upon a script… based upon a right for listening (e.g., a novel where the purchase allows a user to read or listen to the copyrighted material) and a human deciding to read a comment (e.g., publisher information or a forward by the author) before or after reading the book based upon user preference.
Consistent with the Specification, the steps again falls into the mental process group of abstract ideas… Nothing in the claim precludes the above steps from being practically performed in mind.
Claim 1 furthermore recites, a generic system with a processing circuitry which would not amount to significantly more than the identified abstract idea in 2A prong 2 and could be established as well-known, routine, and conventional in 2B. It is not reasonable or correct by simply adding a processor (i.e., circuitry) or CRM to make the claim eligible.
Step 2A, Prong Two: The abstract idea, as claimed, is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 does not point to a specific improvement in computers in their communication role or provides a specific improvement in the way computers operate. The claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
Step 2B: As explained in Step 2A Prong Two above with emphasis that claim 1 is merely including instructions to implement the abstract idea on a piece of paper or in mind.
Conclusively, claim 1 recites a series of steps or acts to be performed, the claim neither transforms underlying subject matter nor is positively tied to another statutory category that accomplishes the claimed method steps.
The functionality is nearly identical to claim 20 that would not amount to significantly more than the identified abstract idea in 2A prong 2 and could be established as well-known, routine, and conventional in 2B.
Dependent claims 2-19 either recite or inherit the same defects. Overall, other than reciting a system which is a generic/non-specific system, the human mind appears to be one of the generic/non-specific systems, operating to perform the recited steps claimed. Thus, it is not integrated into a practical application. The claim does not point to a specific improvement in computers in their communication role or provides a specific improvement in the way computers operate. The claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
Generic system that amount to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea cannot provide an inventive concept. Moreover, the additional elements do not reflect an improvement to a technology or technical field, or include the use of a particular machine or particular transformation. The additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim, as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05; MPEP 2106.04(d).
Conclusively, claims 1-20 recite a series of steps or acts to be performed, the claim neither transforms underlying subject matter nor is positively tied to another statutory category that accomplishes the claimed method steps. Or simply to reemphasize that claims 2-15 are unpatentable under 35U.S.C. § 101 as directed to patent-ineligible subject matter.
Correction is required.
=========================================================
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 inter alia recites “… when a request for playlist reproduction is received by the user according to the script selected by the user, not generate the comment according to the comment information included in the script, and read and provide content indicated by the content identification information included in the script to the user”.
Claim 20 inter alia recites “…in response to a request for playlist reproduction being received by the user according to the script selected by the user, not generating the comment according to the comment information included in the script, and reading and providing content indicated by the content identification information included in the script to the user”.
Where does exactly in the Specs describe such limitation? Where the claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claims 2-19 either recite or inherit the deficiency.
Correction is required.
=========================================================
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 of the instant application 19/011,673 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent 12,242,533. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as seen by a representative sample of comparative analysis between the instant claim 2 and the issued claim 1.
The instant application: 19/011,673
U.S. Patent 12,242,533
1. A content providing system wherein a script that is generated by a creator and includes identification information of content and comment information is stored in a predetermined storage medium to be browsable by a user, the content providing system comprising: processing circuitry configured to read, according to a script selected by the user, content indicated by content identification information included in the script based on a right for listening to the content that the user has already acquired by a contract with the specific service, generate a comment according to the comment information included in the script, provide the content to the user and provide the comment to the user at least one of before or after the provision of the content, and when a request for playlist reproduction is received by the user according to the script selected by the user, not generate the comment according to the comment information included in the script, and read and provide content indicated by the content identification information included in the script to the user.
1. A content providing system wherein a script that is generated by a creator and includes identification information of content and comment information is stored in a predetermined storage medium to be browsable by a user, the content providing system comprising: processing circuitry configured to execute reading, according to a script selected by the user, content indicated by content identification information included in the script, at a time of distributing the content to a user terminal device, distribute the content identification information so that the content streamed by a specific service is reproduced on the user terminal device based on the content identification information, automatically clear copyright for the content reproduced on the user terminal using the content identification information based on a right for listening to the content that the user has already acquired by a contract with the specific service, analyze comment content indicated by the comment information included in the script before the script generated by the creator is stored in the predetermined storage medium, in a case where it is determined that the comment is not appropriate as a comment regarding the content based on an analysis result, notify the user of the determination, and provide the content to the user, and control to read a comment according to the comment information included in the script and provide the comment to the user at least one of before or after the provision of the content.
From the above evidence, it is clear that the claim limitations of the instant application are covered by the limitations of claimed invention of the issued patent. It would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date to broaden the claim in order to enjoy greater coverage and protection.
===========================================================
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 7 are 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. It is however pending the correction/resolution of the 101 issue.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saeki et al (US 2013/0262118) OR Carrick et al (US 2008/0282870) in view of Ban (US 2010/0107082) and further in view of Leyden et al (US 2004/0028195), Asokan et al (US 2003/0226012), Hansson et al (US 2012/0102124) OR Hansen (US 2006/0180647).
Claims 1 and 20, Saeki or Carrick teaches a content providing system and a method wherein a script that is generated by a creator and includes identification information of content and comment information is stored in a predetermined storage medium to be browsable by a user, the content providing system comprising: processing circuitry configured to read, according to a script selected by the user, content indicated by content identification information included in the script based on a right for listening to the content that the user has already acquired by a contract with the specific service, (Saeki: Each of the script source servers 14 provides the script analysis server 13 with content data for forming topics or segments of a program. The script source server 14 corresponds to, for example, a web server of an information distribution company such as a newspaper or magazine publisher, an SNS providing server, or the like, [0053,0069, 0070]; where content of each of segments or topics constituting a program includes server-generated content generated on the server side (for example, the script analysis server 13), such as news articles on certain websites, and local-generated content generated on the local side, such as today's schedule based on the scheduler in the mobile terminal 11 and music files, [0165-0168] including comment information, [0049]; Carrick: an automated disc jockey comprising: means for accessing a database that models multiple music tracks as linked data objects each music track model comprising a music track data object, at least identifying the music track, linked to a plurality of other data objects that parameterize metadata of the music track, [0004] where content may also include generics facts or a set of facts to be expressed, [0057-0059]),
generate a comment according to the comment information included in the script, (See above);
provide the content to the user and provide the comment to the user at least one of before or after the provision of the content, (Saeki: FIG. 1 is a system which provides a service for distributing to a mobile terminal 11 of a user a program (content) created by combining various kinds of text information which is information provided via text on a website, such as news, weather, and twitter feeds (or tweets), with audio data such as music, [0039, 0043]; Carrick: The commentary 3 may be stored in the memory 12 or on a data carrier, it may be transmitted to the rendering component 6 and it may be rendered in a virtual or audible form by the rendering component 6, For example, the commentary may be displayed on a web page or simple GUI, fed into a Text-To-Speech engine and streamed as voice to the user, delivered as an MP3 file and played to the user or it could be streamed across a screen as text, [0069] where the control component may either send the linking commentaries to the rendering component for insertion between the playing of tracks on the rendering component or the control component can create a single MP3 file including the music tracks and commentaries as a pod cast, [0071]0; and
Saeki and Carrick do not teach “when a request for playlist reproduction is received by the user according to the script selected by the user, not generate the comment according to the comment information included in the script, and read and provide content indicated by the content identification information included in the script to the user.
Ban: The music identification information receiving section 242 of the comment delivery server 2 detects whether or not a comment information delivery request has been received from a terminal device 3 (step S101), [0102-0104, 0124-0127]). Ban further teaches, “[0106] When the comment information has been received and stored in the comment information storage section 37, the music playback section 33 reads the music data stored in the music data storage section 31, plays the read music data, and outputs audio using the audio output section 34 (step S253). … [0108] If, however, in step S255, there are no comments to display (step S255--NO), the comment information receiving section 36 detects whether or not comment data has been received (step S262). If comment data has been received (step S262--YES), the comment information receiving section 36 stores the received comment data as additional data in the comment information storage section 37 (step S263), and the routine moves to step S258. Also see [0125-0130] discussing when there is no comment generated, the content of the input comment, and the comment display method, and saves these as additional comment information in the comment list of the comment information storage section 313 (step S210). The transmitting section 320 then transmits the additionally saved comment information to the comment delivery server 2 (step S211), and the routine moves to step S208.
Ban discusses the right to delete a comment, Ban does not teach the right for listening. Similarly, Saeki and Carrick in view of Ban does not teach the right for listening.
Leyden: [0013] In accordance with another feature of the present invention, and using the same framework for delivering audio broadcasts transmitted via the Internet, the Internet audio device revolutionizes the delivery of music by functioning as an Internet "jukebox." Utilizing The Internet audio device's number system, users choose from a database of thousands of recordings, purchase rights to listen to a song, and have the music delivered in streaming audio format or via file transfer, on demand. This Internet jukebox eliminates the necessity of a user to physically possess a recording, such as a CD or cassette tape, to play the music.
Asokan: [0037] An example of a specific peer-to-peer content transfer is now described. A user of a wireless communicator, such as a mobile telephone, is at a railway station and notices an advertisement for a wireless kiosk selling a new hit song. The user takes out his wireless communicator, and sees that the wireless kiosk is visible in his browser. With a few clicks, he pays for a copy of the song, and downloads a corresponding MP3 file to his communicator. After boarding the train, he (user-1) meets a fellow traveler (user-2) and discovers that she is a music fan. User-1 transfers a copy of the new song to user-2's compliant wireless communicator, along with a voucher embodying user rights including "preview" rights to the song which allows user-2 to listen to the song a predetermined number of times without paying for it. After that, user-2 must commit to pay for the song if she wants the continued ability to listen to it. Assuming she decides to purchase the song, user-2 commits to pay for the song via her mobile communicator, and obtains further rights to listen to the song. Upon exiting the train, user-2 notices another public kiosk where she then pays for the song that she earlier committed to purchase. In this example, both kiosk-user and peer-to-peer content transfers were effected, along with the appropriate vouchers to provide either preview or fill access rights. Advantageously, the vouchers ensured that the kiosk owners, as well as content owners and/or authors, received the payment for the sale of the content. This represents just one representative example of the multitude of distribution possibilities available through the implementation of vouchers and DRM management principles in accordance with the present invention.
Hansson: [0065] The portable electronic equipment 10 may be used to share content information about content, e.g., music, audio content, video content, and so on; and by sharing the content information it may be possible to share the content itself For example, if a user of the portable electronic equipment shares content information with another, e.g., with another person, and that other person uses the content information to identify the content, that other person may acquire the right to use the content, e.g., to play a song, to view a movie, to listen to a book, and so on, by purchasing the content from an authorized vendor. Summarizing one aspect of the features described herein, using the portable electronic equipment 10 a user may select content. A unique identifier of content information relevant to the content and where that content information can be found is obtained, e.g., from a database or memory storage in the portable electronic device, by accessing information from a remote device, e.g., a server, or by some other manner.
Hansen [0184] The RFID information may simply be a collection of information that allows the computer to access data about the user and other information from a centralized server or other centralized source, such that the user says information is simply retrieved off of a central server or other source exterior to be personal computer or terminal. as one particular application, the information on the RFID article may identify a particular user and a list of songs that the user particularly likes. The user may have purchased the rights to listen to the songs previously, and the RFID information allows the user to have access to the songs from the central storage place irrespective of the physical location of the user. As a further example, and RFID reader may be located within an automobile. The RFID reader reads the information on the RFID chip, then access this the users song list from a centralized server external to the car, which then transmits the songs back to the car. The user then listens to their favorite songs the and at the automobile. Or, the RFID information made include a menu that may be visually or audibly displayed to the user, from which the user can choose which songs he or she wants to listen to at a particular moment. This application is of this and not limited to retrieving songs, type of organized information.
Therefore it would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Ban into the teaching of Saeki or Carrick for the purpose of providing a comment delivery system, a terminal device, a comment delivery method, and a recording medium storing a program therefore, which are able to refer to comments relating to music contents or moving picture contents which are being played while playing the contents and also to incorporate the teaching of Leyden, Asokan, Hansson OR Hansen into the teaching of Saeki or Carrick for the purpose of meeting all legal requirements by obtaining all lawful rights and privileges pertaining to the media assets (wherein the purchaser can do things, i.e., listening, reading, viewing the purchased content) without any infringement and/or any potential legal actions, i.e., lawsuit against the purchaser.
Claim 2. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to synthesize, according to the script selected by the user, a voice of a text as the comment information included in the script, and provide the voice to the user.(Saeki: The speech synthesis server 15 is a server that executes speech synthesis processing for converting text information into speech and outputting the speech. When text-to-speech data of a given topic is transmitted from the program playback application 21 of the mobile terminal 11, the speech synthesis server 15 executes speech synthesis processing using the text-to-speech data to produce audio data, and transmits (or returns) the audio data to the program playback application 21, [0054-0056]).
Claim 3. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to access, according to the script selected by the user, link information to voice data as the comment information included in the script, read the voice data, and provide the voice data to the user. (Saeki: Speech output of the topic "Today's Weather" may be provided to allow the user to understand the information from factors other than linguistic factors by switching the (voice tone of the) speaker, BGM, and the like in accordance with the content of the weather, [0144]).
Claim 4. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to read a foreword introducing the content according to the script selected by the user, and provide the foreword to the user, read the content indicated by the content identification information subsequent to the forward and provide the content to the user, and read an afterword according to the script selected by the user and provide the afterword to the user. (Saeki: Each topic may also include audio data and text information such as music and introductory text thereon, [0048, 0201] and Fig. 22).
Claim 5. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry, with a script that is generated by the creator and includes content identification information recognizable by a first service, metadata for searching for content, and comment information being stored in a predetermined storage medium to be browsable by the user, is further configured to when the script is selected by the user who has a contract with a second service different from the first service, specify corresponding content by content managed by the second service by the metadata, and execute reading of the content by using the right that the user has already acquired by the contract with the second service and provide the content to the user. (See the independent claims).
Claim 10. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to analyze content of a comment indicated by the comment information included in the script selected by the user, and according to a result of the analysis, provide advertisement data acquired from an advertisement distribution server to the user before a comment to be provided before provision of the content to the user, or after a comment to be provided after provision of the content to the user. (Asokan: A user of a wireless communicator, such as a mobile telephone, is at a railway station and notices an advertisement for a wireless kiosk selling a new hit song. The user takes out his wireless communicator, and sees that the wireless kiosk is visible in his browser. With a few clicks, he pays for a copy of the song, and downloads a corresponding MP3 file to his communicator, [0037]; Leyden: An instance of the underlying program initiating a function will be when the program plays a streaming audio advertisement before providing the user with their requested streaming audio feed, [0051]).
Claim 11. The content providing system according to claim 10, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to perform synthesis of a voice of a text as the comment information included in the script selected by the user with specific phonemes according to the script and provide the voice to the user, and perform synthesis of the voice of the text as the advertisement data with the specific phonemes and provide the voice to the user. (Saeki: The speech synthesis server 15 is a server that executes speech synthesis processing for converting text information into speech and outputting the speech. When text-to-speech data of a given topic is transmitted from the program playback application 21 of the mobile terminal 11, the speech synthesis server 15 executes speech synthesis processing using the text-to-speech data to produce audio data, and transmits (or returns) the audio data to the program playback application 21, [0054-0056]).
Claim 12. The content providing system according to claim 10, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to analyze content of a text as the comment information included in the script selected by the user. (Ban: Comment details may include the entire comment text, and the name and email address and the like of the user who made the comment, [0118]).
Claim 13. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein master identification information that identifies specific content and content identification information with which each service is capable of recognizing the specific content are managed in association with each other by a management database, and the processing circuitry, with a script that is generated by the creator and includes first content identification information recognizable by a first service and comment information being stored in a predetermined storage medium to be browsable by the user, is further configured to specify, when the script is selected by a user who has a contract with a second service different from the first service, according to the management database, second content identification information that corresponds to the first content identification information and that is recognizable by the second service, specify content corresponding to the second content identification information by content managed by the second service, and execute reading content using a right that the user has already acquired by a contract with the second service and provide the content to the user.(Ban: a contents identification information receiving section which receives the contents identification information transmitted from the terminal device; a comment information reading section which reads from the comment information storage section comment information associated with the contents identification information which is received by the contents identification information receiving section; and a comment information delivery section which delivers the comment information read by the comment information reading section to the terminal device which transmits the contents identification information, and the terminal device comprising: a contents identification information transmitting section which transmits the contents identification information for contents targeted for playback to the comment delivery server; a comment information receiving section which receives the comment information transmitted from the comment delivery server; [0013-0015]).
Claim 14. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the content includes a song, the comment includes at least one of a foreword or an afterword set to the song, and the specific service includes a music distribution service contracted by the user. (Layden: The Internet audio device's number system, users choose from a database of thousands of recordings, purchase rights to listen to a song, and have the music delivered in streaming audio format or via file transfer, on demand. This Internet jukebox eliminates the necessity of a user to physically possess a recording, such as a CD or cassette tape, to play the music).
Claim 15. The content providing system according to claim 2, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to acquire voice information regarding voices of the comment from a voice distribution server, process the voice information to generate a voice for the creator to set the comment, and use the generated voice to synthesize the voice of the text as the comment information. (Saeki: The speech synthesis server 15 is a server that executes speech synthesis processing for converting text information into speech and outputting the speech. When text-to-speech data of a given topic is transmitted from the program playback application 21 of the mobile terminal 11, the speech synthesis server 15 executes speech synthesis processing using the text-to-speech data to produce audio data, and transmits (or returns) the audio data to the program playback application 21, [0054-0056]).
Claim 16. The content providing system according to claim 11, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to match a tone of the synthesized voice of the advertisement data with a tone of the synthesized voice of the comment information.(Saeki: The speech synthesis server 15 is a server that executes speech synthesis processing for converting text information into speech and outputting the speech. When text-to-speech data of a given topic is transmitted from the program playback application 21 of the mobile terminal 11, the speech synthesis server 15 executes speech synthesis processing using the text-to-speech data to produce audio data, and transmits (or returns) the audio data to the program playback application 21, [0054-0056]).
Claim 18. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to add at least one of a character or an image during provision of the content to achieve video jockey functionality. (Carrick: an automated disc jockey comprising: means for accessing a database that models multiple music tracks as linked data objects each music track model comprising a music track data object, at least identifying the music track, linked to a plurality of other data objects that parameterize metadata of the music track, [0004] where content may also include generics facts or a set of facts to be expressed, [0057-0059]).
Claims 19. The content providing system according to claim 5, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to return a portion of revenue from reproduction of the content by the second service to the first service or the creator. (Asokan: With respect to the distribution of rights through copying, the creation of a new right for a piece of content is metered and reported so that the resulting revenue can be effectively collected and shared, [0041]).
Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saeki OR Carrick in view of Ban and further in view of Leyden, Asokan, Hansson OR Hansen and further in view of Pinnamaneni (US 11,113449) or Jackson et al (US 10,949,429).
Saeki and Carrick do not teach claims 8 and 9 as seen below:
Claim 8. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to in a case where it is determined that the comment is not appropriate as the comment regarding the content, notify the user of an inappropriate portion of the comment.
Claim 9. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to in a case where it is determined that the comment is not appropriate as the comment regarding the content, not store a script including the comment information corresponding to the comment in the predetermined storage medium.
Pinnamaneni teaches “The user-provided annotation semantic relationship data can be used in conjunction with user reputation to validate the user selection of annotation semantic relationships and to potentially identify inappropriate content generated and posted by users. … For moderation of user-generated annotations, pre-trained BERT that are fine-tuned for sentiment analysis can be used to flag inappropriate user-generated content. Col. 14, lines 17-30.
Jackson teaches “spam server 1048 may communicate with the activity streams backend 1002 and/or the update pump 1008 to identify posts or comments that may be inappropriate (e.g., offensive, abusive, or otherwise inappropriate), duplicative, deceptive (e.g., in which one user poses as another user), and to act appropriately with respect to such content (e.g., providing for automatic and/or manual review of the content and perhaps removing the content from the system 1000 or making the content hidden). Col. 34, lines 44-53.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan to incorporate the teaching of Pinnamaneni or Jackson into the teaching of Ban, Saeki and Carrick for the purpose of promoting the integrity/decency of communication and being free and transparent from any inappropriate behavior or comment.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saeki OR Carrick in view of Ban and further in view of Leyden, Asokan, Hansson OR Hansen and further in view of Alhabobi et al (US 2015/0088485) or Szturo et al (US 2020/0356635).
Saeki and Carrick do not teach claim 17 as seen below:
Claim 17. The content providing system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to detect a native language of the user, translate the comment information into the native language of the user, and provide the translated comment information to the user.
Alhabobi teaches, “[0019] A computerized system for translating communication in real time is disclosed. In one exemplary embodiment, an auto-detect feature of the chat-room software will detect what language a person activating the software is using and from then on will automatically translate all other user's postings into that user's native language. As an alternative, the user can choose from a menu which language he or she prefers and then all postings will also be automatically translated into his or her preferred language”.
Szturo teaches the feature. Please Fig. 3 and [0055]: The translation management platform 302 may monitor for changes in computer executable instructions (e.g., a user making changes), identify human language content 308, and communicate the human language content 308 to a translation service provider 314, such as for translating from a first language 314 to a second language 316. The first and second language may be any human language or dialect, such as English, French, Mandarin Chinese, Hindustani, Spanish, Arabic, Italian, Portuguese, Portuguese-Brazil, Danish, Dutch, and the like.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching Alhabobi or Szturo into the teaching of Saeki or Carrick for the purpose of providing users with preferable languages where they can fully enjoy others’ comments in real time.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUNG-HOANG J. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1949. The examiner can normally be reached Reg. Sched. 6:00-3:00.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7503. 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.
/PHUNG-HOANG J NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights