Obviousness

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 8,494,904 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

As of April 26, 2026, this analysis evaluates whether the invention claimed in US patent 8,494,904 would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) at the time of the invention. The analysis is based on combining the teachings of the prior art references cited during the patent's prosecution.

The core of the invention in the '904 patent, as detailed in independent claims 1, 11, and 21, involves three key concepts:

1. Aggregating User Data: A central system receives "partial profiles" from multiple unaffiliated third-party websites to build a more comprehensive user profile.
2. Tracking the Source: The system electronically records which third party contributed which specific piece of profile data.
3. Monetizing the Data: The aggregated profile is used to target advertisements, and the source-tracking record is used to compensate the third-party data contributors.

Several combinations of the cited prior art render these claims obvious.

---

Combination 1: US 2002/0065730 ('730) in view of U.S. Patent 6,269,361 ('361)

This combination provides a strong basis for an obviousness rejection of the claims of the '904 patent.

• Base Reference: US 2002/0065730 ('730)
  The '730 published application provides the foundational framework for the '904 patent's claims. It explicitly describes a system where "different websites can share user data to create more comprehensive user profiles for targeted advertising." This teaching directly addresses the core concept of aggregating partial profiles from a plurality of unaffiliated third parties and using the resulting comprehensive profile for ad targeting. Therefore, '730 teaches the collection of partial profiles containing attributes from multiple sources to enhance an existing profile for the purpose of targeting ads.

• Modifying Reference: U.S. Patent 6,269,361 ('361)
  While '730 describes the "exchange" of data between websites, it does not explicitly detail a system for compensating the data providers. The '361 patent, however, directly addresses this concept in the analogous field of online advertising. It discloses a pay-for-performance search engine where tracking the source of information (an advertiser's bid and associated link) is a fundamental requirement for the system's financial operation (billing the advertiser). '361 teaches a robust method for receiving information from a third party and tracking its source for a subsequent financial transaction.

• Motivation to Combine
  A person of ordinary skill in the art, when implementing the data-sharing network described in '730, would have been immediately faced with a business and technical problem: how to incentivize unaffiliated websites to contribute their valuable user data. The most direct and obvious motivation would be financial compensation. A POSITA would have been motivated to look for known solutions for tracking and compensating online contributions. The '361 patent provides precisely such a solution. The motivation to combine the data-sharing network of '730 with the pay-for-performance tracking system of '361 is clear: to create a viable economic model that encourages participation and enables the data aggregation system to function. It would have been obvious to a POSITA that to make the '730 system work in a commercial setting, one would need to pay the data providers, and to do that, one would need to track their contributions, a method taught by '361.

• URL Redirection and Expectation of Success
  The '904 patent's claims specify that the partial profile is received via an "electronically URL-redirected" method. At the time of the invention, URL redirection was a common, well-understood technique used by web developers for tracking user navigation, passing information between different servers, and logging ad clicks. It was a standard tool in the art. Implementing the data transfer from the third-party site to the central server in the combined '730/'361 system using URL redirection would have been an obvious, routine design choice for a skilled artisan. There would have been a high degree of certainty—a reasonable expectation of success—that this standard web technology would work for its intended purpose of transferring the partial profile data.

Therefore, the combination of '730's data-sharing network and '361's source-tracking and compensation model, implemented using the well-known technique of URL redirection, would render the invention claimed in the '904 patent obvious.

---

Combination 2: U.S. Patent 6,026,368 ('368) in view of U.S. Patent 6,269,361 ('361)

This combination offers an alternative, but equally compelling, argument for obviousness.

• Base Reference: U.S. Patent 6,026,368 ('368)
  The '368 patent describes a system for "collecting and analyzing data from a plurality of data sources" to create user profiles for purposes including "targeted marketing." This patent teaches the aggregation of data from different, unaffiliated sources and its use for advertising, thereby establishing the foundational elements of the '904 claims.

• Modifying Reference: U.S. Patent 6,269,361 ('361)
  As in the previous combination, the '368 patent describes data collection but lacks a specific economic model for incentivizing the data sources. The '361 patent provides the missing element: a system for tracking third-party contributions for the purpose of compensation.

• Motivation to Combine
  The motivation to combine '368 and '361 is identical to the motivation in the first combination. A POSITA seeking to commercialize the data collection system of '368 would need to encourage third parties to provide data. The obvious way to do this is to pay them. This creates the need to track who provided what data. '361 teaches just such a tracking-for-payment system. A POSITA would have logically combined the data aggregation method of '368 with the monetization method of '361 to create a commercially viable system. This combination would directly teach a system that receives partial profiles from unaffiliated third parties, adds them to a maintained profile, tracks the source of the data, and uses the profile for ad targeting, with the implicit purpose of compensating the source.

---

Conclusion

The independent claims of US patent 8,494,904 describe a combination of previously known elements: (1) aggregating user data from multiple websites for ad targeting, as taught by '730 and '368, and (2) tracking the source of third-party online contributions for financial compensation, as taught by '361. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated by clear economic and business reasons to combine these teachings to create the claimed system. The specific technical implementation of data transfer using URL redirection was a well-known and obvious choice at the time. Therefore, the invention described in US patent 8,494,904 would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.