Prior art

Here is an analysis of the most relevant prior art for US patent 8,713,624, based on the patent's own citations and descriptions. For each reference, the full citation, publication/filing date, a brief description, and potential anticipation of claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102 are provided.

The priority date of US8713624 is November 3, 1981. For a reference to be considered prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (pre-AIA, relevant for a 1995 filing), its effective date (e.g., filing or publication date) must precede this date. All patents discussed below satisfy this criterion.

Prior Art Analysis

1. U.S. Pat. No. 4,381,522 to Lambert

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,381,522, "Cable television system for scheduling and distributing programs to subscribers", to Lambert.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on August 1, 1978; Published on April 29, 1983.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a cable television system where a minicomputer responds to signals from viewers (transmitted by telephone) to generate a schedule for pre-recorded local origination programs. The computer displays this schedule to viewers as a video image, then activates video players to transmit the scheduled programs to designated cable channels.
• Potential Anticipation: Based on US8713624's own limitations of this prior art, it is unlikely to fully anticipate any of the independent claims. However, elements of Lambert's system could be considered relevant to:
  • Claim 24 (Personalized information service): Lambert describes a system that responds to viewer preferences to generate a personalized schedule. While it lacks the embedded instructions from a broadcaster and direct access to stored personal information as claimed in US8713624, the concept of a system tailoring information for a user is present.
  • Claim 52 (Broadcaster control of subscriber equipment): Although Lambert's system involves viewer-initiated control of a central computer that then controls program transmission equipment, it lacks the direct control of subscriber station apparatus by embedded instructions transmitted by broadcasters, which is central to Claim 52.

2. U.S. Pat. No. 4,337,480 to Bourassin et al.

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,337,480, "Dynamic interconnection system for television receiver and peripheral units", to Bourassin et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on May 18, 1979; Published on June 29, 1982.
• Brief Description: This patent details a system for dynamically connecting a television receiver to multiple peripheral units. It enables automatic connection/disconnection of peripherals and allows for superimposing a secondary image from a peripheral onto the primary television image ("image-within-image").
• Potential Anticipation: Bourassin's system of combining images is relevant to the "combining" aspect of US8713624's claims:
  • Claim 1 (Personalized A/V display): The "image-within-image" feature of Bourassin's system demonstrates combining images from different sources. However, US8713624 differentiates itself by emphasizing the control of this combination via embedded digital instructions from a broadcaster and the generation of locally specific, personalized graphic information.
  • Claim 42 (Combining TV program with local A/V source): Similar to Claim 1, Bourassin's ability to display a secondary image from a peripheral with a primary TV image relates to combining audio-visual sources. The distinction lies in the lack of embedded digital instructions controlling a local processor to blend the specific elements as claimed in US8713624.

3. U.S. Pat. No. 4,264,925 to Freeman et al.

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,264,925, "Multi-channel programming transmission system", to Freeman et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on May 4, 1979; Published on April 28, 1981.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a multi-channel programming transmission system where subscribers can manually select among related programming alternatives broadcast simultaneously on separate channels.
• Potential Anticipation: The US8713624 patent explicitly states that Freeman lacks the capacity for automatic operation based on broadcaster-transmitted instructions. Therefore, it is unlikely to anticipate the independent claims of US8713624, which heavily rely on such automation and control.

4. U.S. Pat. No. 4,025,851 to Haselwood et al.

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,025,851, "Audience measurement system and method for television", to Haselwood et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on January 20, 1975; Published on May 24, 1977.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system that monitors television programming using embedded digital signals, primarily for audience measurement purposes.
• Potential Anticipation: Haselwood, Crosby, and Greenberg (discussed below) all relate to embedding signals for monitoring, which is a foundational concept also present in US8713624.
  • Claims 1, 20, 24, 42, 52, 76, 83 (Generally, for "embedded digital instructions"): Haselwood's use of "embedded digital signals" to convey information (for monitoring) demonstrates the general principle of embedding data within a broadcast. However, US8713624 distinguishes itself by using these embedded signals not just for monitoring but for actively controlling a local processor to generate user-specific content, enable conditional access, or synchronize external apparatus, functionalities that Haselwood lacks according to US8713624's self-assessment.

5. U.S. Pat. No. 3,845,391 to Crosby

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 3,845,391, "System for monitoring a communications transmission", to Crosby.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on April 20, 1972; Published on October 29, 1974.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system for monitoring communications transmissions using "substantially inaudible" audio codes embedded within the signal.
• Potential Anticipation: Similar to Haselwood, Crosby's system involves embedding codes for monitoring.
  • Claims 1, 20, 24, 42, 52, 76, 83 (Generally, for "embedded digital instructions"): Crosby demonstrates the concept of embedding information (audio codes) within a broadcast for a specific function (monitoring). However, as with Haselwood, it lacks the broader control, personalization, and interactive capabilities central to US8713624's claims, especially the use of these embedded signals to trigger complex processing and output at the subscriber's station.

6. U.S. Pat. No. 4,547,804 to Greenberg

• Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 4,547,804, "Television program monitor", to Greenberg.
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed on June 8, 1981; Published on October 15, 1985.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system that automatically monitors multiple television channels sequentially and can monitor audio and visual quality, primarily for generating "ratings."
• Potential Anticipation: Greenberg also focuses on monitoring by means of embedded signals, specifically mentioning a digital signal on a particular line of each frame of a television program.
  • Claims 1, 20, 24, 42, 52, 76, 83 (Generally, for "embedded digital instructions"): Greenberg, like Haselwood and Crosby, establishes the prior art of embedding signals in broadcasts for monitoring. US8713624 specifically notes Greenberg's use of signals on a particular line of a video frame. While this teaches embedding, US8713624 explicitly critiques this prior art for its limited function (only identifying programming) and lack of capacity to decrypt, record, or transfer information simultaneously, or to control subscriber apparatus in the sophisticated ways claimed.

In summary, while these prior art patents demonstrate various individual elements relevant to different parts of US8713624's claims (e.g., embedding signals, combining images, rudimentary personalization), the US8713624 patent itself meticulously describes why each of these references lacks the specific combination of features, particularly the dynamic control of local processors and equipment via broadcaster-embedded instructions to create personalized content or manage access, as defined in its independent claims. Therefore, based on the provided patent text, these references individually would likely not fully anticipate the independent claims of US8713624 under 35 U.S.C. § 102.