Obviousness

Obviousness Analysis of U.S. Patent 8,249,912

Based on a technical analysis of the prior art cited in U.S. Patent 8,249,912, a strong case for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 can be constructed against the independent claims of the patent. The core concepts of monitoring user behavior, analyzing media content, and using that analysis to target advertising were well-established in the art prior to the February 20, 2008 filing date. A person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) would have been motivated to combine existing technologies to achieve the claimed method with a reasonable expectation of success.

The primary argument is that combining a system for correlating real-time audience feedback with broadcast segments (as taught by US 6,134,531) with a system for advertisement selection based on user characteristics (as taught by US 6,216,129) would render the claims of the '912 patent obvious.

Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art (PHOSITA)

A PHOSITA at the time of the invention would have been an individual with a Bachelor's degree in computer science, electrical engineering, or a related field, and 2-3 years of experience in data analysis, media systems, or online advertising. This person would have been familiar with database management, statistical analysis methods like regression, and the state of interactive television and internet advertising technologies.

Analysis of Independent Claim 1

Claim 1 outlines a method comprising:

1. Providing a computer with databases: A standard element in the art.
2. Identifying and storing program/product placement elements at specified time intervals: This involves logging events within a media program.
3. Detecting and storing consumer media reviewing actions: Tracking what the viewer does (e.g., clicks, channel changes).
4. Correlating program elements with consumer actions to assign "responsiveness probability values": The core analytical step.
5. Utilizing said values to obtain determinable probabilities of creating responsiveness, graphically represented: Using the analysis for a practical output.

An obviousness rejection for Claim 1 can be formulated based on the combination of US Patent 6,134,531 to Blaney ("Blaney") and US Patent 6,216,129 to Aggarwal et al. ("Aggarwal").

• Blaney (US 6,134,531): This patent, filed in 1997, explicitly discloses a "Method and apparatus for correlating real-time audience feedback with segments of broadcast programs." Blaney teaches a system where audience members provide feedback via a network, and this feedback is correlated with the specific program segment being broadcast at that time. (Blaney, Abstract). This directly teaches the core steps of identifying media elements (program segments), detecting consumer actions (feedback), and correlating the two in real-time. Blaney's system is designed to "determine audience interest in particular segments" which is analogous to calculating a responsiveness value.

• Aggarwal (US 6,216,129): This patent, filed in 1998, describes an "Advertisement selection system supporting discretionary target market characteristics." Aggarwal teaches a system that selects ads for a user based on a profile, which can be built from demographic data or, more importantly, from tracking the user's behavior. (Aggarwal, Col. 2, lines 52-61). Aggarwal's system uses data to predict the likelihood of a user responding to a certain type of advertisement, which is the commercial motivation behind the '912 patent's "responsiveness probability values."

• Motivation to Combine: A PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine Blaney's real-time content-to-feedback correlation mechanism with Aggarwal's advertisement selection engine. Blaney provides a granular method for understanding what specific content generates a response, while Aggarwal provides the framework for using user data to select the most effective ad. The motivation would be to improve the precision of ad targeting. Instead of just targeting based on the overall show a person watches (a coarse indicator), one could use Blaney's method to identify the precise moments or content types within that show that are most engaging, and then use Aggarwal's framework to serve an ad at that peak moment of engagement. This combination directly leads to the method claimed in the '912 patent: analyzing content and user response to determine optimal advertising moments. The graphical representation of probabilities is a conventional way of presenting statistical data and would have been an obvious design choice for displaying the correlation results.

Analysis of Independent Claims 8 and 12

Claims 8 and 12 are narrower than Claim 1, adding the limitation of applying the calculated probabilities from a first episode of a serialized program to place an advertisement in a second episode. This limitation is an obvious extension of the base method.

This application is rendered obvious by the same combination of Blaney and Aggarwal, further considered in light of the common knowledge in the art regarding serialized media and predictive analysis.

• Obvious Extension: Once the PHOSITA has combined Blaney and Aggarwal to create a system that correlates in-show content with viewer response to determine ad effectiveness, applying this system to a serialized program is a matter of logical and predictable extension. Serialized programs, by their nature, feature recurring elements (characters, scene types, plot devices). It would have been entirely obvious to the PHOSITA that responsiveness probabilities calculated from viewer reactions to elements in the first episode would be predictive of viewer reactions to similar elements in a subsequent episode.

• Predictable Result: The goal of data-driven advertising, as taught by Aggarwal, is prediction. Applying the data from one instance (episode 1) to a future, similar instance (episode 2) is the very essence of how predictive models were used in the art at the time. The motivation is clear: to leverage historical data for future ad placement decisions, thereby increasing the return on investment for advertisers. A PHOSITA would not need to invent anything new to arrive at this step; it is a straightforward application of the combined system to a common media format (a TV series) to achieve the predictable result of improved ad targeting.

Conclusion

The independent claims of US Patent 8,249,912 recite a method that is a predictable combination of known elements from the prior art. Blaney teaches the granular correlation of program content with real-time viewer feedback. Aggarwal teaches the use of user data to select and target advertisements. A PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine these teachings to create a more precise ad-targeting tool. The application of this tool to serialized programming, as specified in claims 8 and 12, is an obvious use of the underlying method to leverage its predictive power. Therefore, the claims are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.