Prior art — US Patent 10355863

Prior Art Analysis for US 10,355,863

This section details the prior art cited during the prosecution of US patent 10,355,863. Each reference is analyzed for its potential to anticipate the independent claim under 35 U.S.C. § 102. The analysis is based on the information available in the patent's file wrapper and the content of the references themselves.

The independent claim (Claim 1) of US 10,355,863 outlines a server-side method for authenticating data. The key steps are:

Receiving a data request from a client.
Retrieving the data.
Generating an authenticity marker, specifically a fractal, from an algorithm.
Formatting the data in real-time by inserting the generated fractal.
Returning the formatted data to the client.

The novelty appears to hinge on the real-time generation and insertion of a fractal as the specific authenticity marker.

U.S. Patent Citations

1. US 6,243,468 B1

Full Citation: Stefik, et al., "Method for authenticating electronic documents using identifiable bit-maps," issued June 5, 2001, filed May 2, 1997.
Brief Description: This patent describes a method for embedding a "glyph"—a type of bitmap that encodes data—into a digital document to authenticate it. The glyph can contain information about the document's origin, a timestamp, or a digital signature. The glyph is designed to be scannable and machine-readable, even when printed.
Potential Anticipation of Claim 1: This reference teaches embedding a visual, machine-readable marker (a glyph) into a document for authentication. However, it does not specifically disclose the use of a fractal as the marker. While a glyph is a type of image, it is distinct from a fractal, which is generated from a mathematical algorithm to create a complex, self-similar pattern. Claim 1 specifies the generation of a fractal, which is a narrower and more specific type of marker than the glyphs described in '468. Therefore, US 6,243,468 B1 likely does not anticipate claim 1 because it fails to teach the "generating the authenticity marker... from an algorithm, wherein the authenticity marker is a fractal" limitation.

2. US 6,557,103 B1

Full Citation: Boncelet, Jr., et al., "Self-embedding of authentication data in an image," issued April 29, 2003, filed July 21, 2000.
Brief Description: This patent discloses a method for watermarking an image to ensure its integrity and authenticity. It involves generating a digital signature or hash of the image and embedding this data back into the image itself, typically in the least significant bits of the image data. This allows a recipient to extract the watermark, recalculate the hash of the received image, and compare the two to detect any modifications.
Potential Anticipation of Claim 1: Boncelet teaches embedding authentication data within an image, but the focus is on verifying the integrity of the image itself, not authenticating a broader piece of electronic content (like a web page) by inserting a separate visual marker. Furthermore, it does not teach generating a fractal. The embedded data is a hash or signature, which is not inherently a visual fractal pattern. Therefore, US 6,557,103 B1 does not anticipate claim 1 as it fails to teach inserting a separate, algorithmically-generated fractal into general electronic data for authentication purposes.

3. US 7,203,838 B1

Full Citation: Bishop, et al., "System and method for authenticating a web page," issued April 10, 2007, filed September 6, 2000.
Brief Description: This patent is part of the same patent family as US 10,355,863. It describes a system where a user's browser has a plug-in that verifies an "authenticity key" embedded in a web page. The key is generated by a server and can be used to trigger the display of a user-defined "authenticity stamp" (e.g., an icon, text, or a specific color) to confirm the page's origin. The specification mentions that the stamp could be a computer-generated fractal design.
Potential Anticipation of Claim 1: As the parent patent, '838 discloses the core concepts of the invention. The '838 specification explicitly states, "In another embodiment, the stamp is a computer-generated fractal design." (Col. 7, ll. 1-2). It further describes a server generating and appending the fractal to the content. This disclosure appears to teach all the elements of claim 1 of US 10,355,863. Because US 10,355,863 is a continuation of the application that led to this patent, '838 is not prior art that can be used for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102. It is cited for informational purposes as part of the patent's lineage.

4. US 7,730,508 B2

Full Citation: Gasparini, et al., "Method and system for providing an originality mark for an electronic document," issued June 1, 2010, filed April 21, 2005.
Brief Description: This reference describes generating a unique "originality mark" for an electronic document. The mark is derived from the document's content and characteristics (e.g., text, images, metadata) and is unique to that specific version of the document. The mark can be a visual image or a string of characters. The system involves a trusted third-party server that generates and records these marks.
Potential Anticipation of Claim 1: Gasparini teaches the server-side generation of a unique visual mark to prove originality. However, it does not specifically teach that this mark must be a fractal. The mark is generated based on the document's content, which is a different generation method than using a specific mathematical algorithm to produce a fractal pattern. Because it does not explicitly disclose the "fractal" limitation, US 7,730,508 B2 likely does not anticipate claim 1.

5. US 2002/0120853 A1

Full Citation: Golan, et al., "Dynamic security images," published August 29, 2002, filed January 19, 2001.
Brief Description: This application describes a system for preventing phishing and spoofing by displaying a "dynamic security image" during a login process. The image is pre-selected by the user and is associated with their account. When the user attempts to log in, the authentic server displays this personal, user-recognized image, assuring the user they are on the legitimate site. The image itself can be dynamically generated or selected.
Potential Anticipation of Claim 1: Golan teaches the real-time insertion of a security image by a server to authenticate a web page to a user. The core concept is similar. However, the image described is typically a pre-selected photograph or icon familiar to the user, not an algorithmically generated fractal. The patent focuses on user recognition of a static or semi-static image, not on the unique, non-repeatable, and complex nature of a freshly generated fractal. Therefore, US 2002/0120853 A1 does not anticipate claim 1 as it does not teach the specific "fractal" limitation.

Conclusion on Prior Art

The prior art cited against US 10,355,863 establishes that the general concept of embedding a visual marker or digital watermark into electronic content for authentication was known. References like Golan ('853) and Stefik ('468) describe systems where servers insert images to prove authenticity. However, none of the cited references, apart from its own parent patent, explicitly teach the specific limitation recited in claim 1: the real-time generation and insertion of a fractal as the authenticity marker. The patentability of this claim appears to rest on the novelty of using this particular type of complex, algorithmically-generated image for authentication purposes. An argument for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 might be constructed by combining these references, but for a strict anticipation challenge under § 102, the cited art appears insufficient as it does not disclose every element of the claim, specifically the "fractal" limitation.