Invalidity dossier
US 7570763
Method for subscribing service and distributing encryption key based on public-key encryption algorithm in digital CATV system
Current assignee: Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute
Added 9/23/2026, 10:57:28 PM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
Patent Overview — US7570763B2
Title: Method for subscribing service and distributing encryption key based on public-key encryption algorithm in digital CATV system
Patent number / application: US7570763B2; application US10/868,508, filed 2004-06-14.
Inventors: Han-Seung Koo, O-Hyung Kwon, Soo-In Lee.
Assignee: Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI), the original assignee. The record also lists later reassignments to IDEAHUB and to HELIOS STREAMING, LLC.
Key dates (as listed): Priority date 2003-12-27; filed 2004-06-14; published as US20050141712A1 on 2005-06-30; granted 2009-08-04. Status: Active, with adjusted expiration 2026-12-21.
Purpose and plain-language scope: The patent concerns a digital cable television (CATV) system in which a subscriber signs up for a service and receives an encryption key, using a public-key (asymmetric) encryption algorithm. In plain terms, it describes how a head end and a subscriber exchange messages so the subscriber obtains the key material needed to decrypt subscribed programming, with the subscription and key-distribution steps tied together. Consistent with this, the prior-art keywords listed are "subscriber," "head," "message," "key," and "session key." Classifications place it in selective content distribution / control signaling for authorization by transmitting a key, and in cryptographic key distribution using asymmetric-key encryption or PKI.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US7570763](/patent/US7570763)/en
What the excerpt does not establish: The supplied text contains no claims, no detailed description, no drawings, and no cited prior-art references, so it does not establish the specific claim limitations, the precise cryptographic steps, or the scope of any infringement position. It also does not establish the accuracy of Google's legal-status, expiration, or assignee listings, which Google itself states are assumptions rather than legal conclusions. No litigation, validity, or ownership analyses are drawn here.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:33:01 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 7570763. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Proceedings on file (0)
All PTAB activity →AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.
PTAB challenges
AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.
Assignment history
Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.
Prior art
Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.
Obviousness
Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Extensions
Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.
Derivative works
Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.