InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 27
Posts 707
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/16/2004

Re: None

Tuesday, 04/24/2007 10:15:28 AM

Tuesday, April 24, 2007 10:15:28 AM

Post# of 326338
To all NeoMedia investors.

I just want to share some thoughts, and ideas that I have had about NeoMedia’s patents vs. Scanbuy’s. It’s the way I see it so far, and it’s my hope to encourage, and create interest for the people who do DD/research already on I-Hub, to direct a portion of there effort at researching NeoMedia’s patents.

First of all I just want to point out something that is basic, but I don’t think has been mentioned before on this thread. Qode is not equal to the patents, but is covered by the patents. The patents cover more than qode. I believe they are so broad that they cover every aspect involved with taking a picture of a bar code, or a logo, or an object with a camera phone, and cover any, and all processes of interpreting the things that are in the picture taken by a camera phone, and sending the user information about the objects in the picture over the mobile web. This is why NeoMedia’s patents are so coveted by everyone who understands this application, and this technology.

In a recently posted blog article, Jeff Mould pointed out that NeoMedia’s patents were broad, and went on to mentioned patent #699573, and how qode works.

As Jeff said, to really get a better understanding of the patents we need to go to the US Patent Office web site, and look at the full text version of the patents. It takes a little work, but I think that you will find it worth the effort, since it will show all of the patent in detail. The patent references listed on the NeoMedia web site show only a brief version of the patents.

Most of you probably have heard that old saying a picture is worth a thousand words. Well, I think that’s why they incorporate pictures in patents. It’s nice to see what they are talking about when they refer to the drawings. These drawings can be block diagrams of the system, flow charts, and pictures of objects. In this case pictures of bar codes, and cell phones. I’ve given a few links below that will get you connected to the patents so you can peruse them, and learn what you own, and see what our competitors own for yourself.

US Patent Office web site.
http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html

US Patent Office Full-Page Images.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/patimg.htm

If you haven’t used this full text version before, this link will help you to download the software to enable you to view the pages. If you have trouble call the Patent Office, the people there are very helpful. The times that I called, I was talking to a patent attorney. 800-786-9199, or 571-272-1000
http://www.uspto.gov/patft/help/images.htm

NeoMedia patent #06993573.
http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=06993573&idkey=NONE

I haven’t seen any prior art showing the type of diagram like the one depicted in the first page of the NeoMedia patent #06993573. They are the first ones to patent the idea of taking a picture of a barcode with a cell phone camera, and using it over internet. That process in itself is part of the patent. That is the broad part that I’m talking about. So that covers it all.

NeoMedia patent #6865608 is a prior art that shows a detailed description of the qode system with block diagrams, and flow chart, and the claims write-up referring to the diagrams. This is also referenced in NeoMedia’s latest patent #06993573.
http://patimg1.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=06865608&idkey=NONE

I just thought it would be worth posting this stuff since I heard that there was so much interest in the patents. Again I know it takes some work to do this, but I figured that there are a number of posters at I-Hub that do a lot of research, and I thought it would be good to direct your efforts toward reading these patents, and maybe everyone will have something to say about it. The more people involved the better. It would be good if there was a patent lawyer in the group, however, I think that a group of people used to doing research can figure it out. It just takes a lot of persistent digging.


When talking to a patent attorney at the US Patent Office I discussed some of the issues about reading patents. One of he important things in reading a patent is understanding the claims. Only the claims written in the patent are the issues that will hold up in court. Some of the other things that are related to the patent that are discussed in the patent may not be part of the actual claims. For example things like this may include systems that the patent may work in, or enhance, and increase the capabilities of the system functions even though the system may be patented by another company. The patent may talk about how it interacts with another system, and that is where it can get confusing, since the reader might at first glance think that this is part of the patent. If it’s not stated in the claims it’s not part of the patent.

Scanbuy patent #07156311.
http://patimg1.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=07156311&idkey=NONE

Scanbuy’s patent 7,156,311 describes a method for decoding bar codes with a digital camera attached to a mobile device as indicated in the Abstract. Patent 7,168,621 is a more detailed continuation of 7,156,311.

The 7,156,311 abstract; “The present invention discloses a system and method for decoding barcodes using mobile device. Generally, the barcode image is acquired via a digital camera attached to the mobile device. After the barcode image has been acquired, software located on the mobile device enhances the barcode image and subsequently decodes the barcode information. The barcode information is then transmitted to a server via a wireless network. The server processes the barcode information and transmits media content related to the barcode back to the mobile device”.

The abstract, and the rest of the claims deal with decoding the bar codes, and they talk about using their servers for decoding, and sending data back, and forth from the phone to their server to accomplish this task. This is not connecting the cell phone user to a target URL like NeoMedia’s patent #06993573 does. It is just a method of reading 1D bar codes. Or more precisely, making the bar code clearer, and more readable.

They claim to have invented a better/different way of decoding the bar codes, and particularly the 1D codes. Remember my post a while ago about how when you tilt the camera the lines go in stare steps, and the steps get smaller with higher resolution. Well, they claim to have a solution to resolve this with a low resolution camera phone. They claim that all of the ills of taking pictures of 1D bar codes are solved with their process.

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=14735126


In the abstract they use the term “Generally”. “Generally, the barcode image is acquired via a digital camera attached to the mobile device”. So they are not even making this claim. They are saying that generally this is how it’s done. The actual substance of the patent is in the claims. Each of their claims are very similar, but with different variations.

Here is an example of one of the claims;

6. A system for decoding a barcode, comprising: at least one machine readable barcode; at least one mobile device equipped with a digital camera for imaging said machine readable barcode, wherein said system converts said barcode image to an array of pixels; divides said array of pixels into vertical sections; determines a first intensity for at least one pixel in each of said vertical sections; assigns a second intensity to said at least one pixel if said first intensity is at least one of below a first threshold intensity and above a second threshold intensity to enhance said barcode image; decodes said enhanced barcode image to obtain barcode information; calculates the number of edges in said enhanced barcode image; load a first symbology library; compares said number of edges to a predetermined threshold require for said symbology library; and decodes said barcode from said barcode image utilizing said symbology library; and a wireless network in communication with said mobile device and in communication with a server, wherein said mobile device sends at least one of said barcode information and said barcode image to said server and receives media content associated with said barcode information from said server.

As you can see, they are describing a method of formatting data of a picture of a bar code in the cell phone software to be sent to a server, where the actual image processing occurs. It doesn’t get all processed just in the cell phone software if the image is poor. These means that a server is required for the image processing task to make a poor bar code image into a good one, and that’s it. This is not at all dealing with the whole process that NeoMedia’s patents do that connect the user to a target URL, and they don’t say that in their claims since that would be a violation of NeoMedia’s patents. They do say in their explanation that this information is used for that purpose. The last part of the claim sounds like they might be sending a URL back to the cell phone, but that would be a violation of NeoMedia’s patents, “wherein said mobile device sends at least one of said barcode information and said barcode image to said server and receives media content associated with said barcode information from said server”. I’m thinking that the “media content” that they send back is information stored in their own server about the bar code, that is, price comparison about the product. Mobot does the same type of thing with their servers. This is not the same thing as connecting the cell phone user to a target URL over the mobile web. Also notice in their diagram on the front page of their patent. They are showing an SMS/MMS connection between the cell phone, and their server. NeoMedia’s patent uses the mobile web.

So the bottom line is that their ScanZoom system uses a server to resolve the bar code.

Regardless of the Scanbuy patent, I think Scanbuy is definitely infringing on NeoMedia’s patents since they will probably be using the server to send the URL to the phone anyway.

In the second Scanbuy patent, #07,168,621 they go into a more detailed description of their IP. They are using digital signal processing techniques to create a clear image. Notice they use the terms gray scale, and thresholding. Since they are showing 1D bar codes in the patent I’m guessing that both of these patents just may be for 1D codes. Now I know there has been a lot of talk about 2D codes on I-Hub, but the last time I walked into a supermarket, and picked up items, all of them had 1D codes on them. Most of Scanbuy’s business of price comparing involves 1D bar codes.

Scanbuy patent #07,168,621.
http://patimg1.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=07168621&idkey=NONE

These techniques are not new. Here’s an example; Even before special digital signal processors were developed, and in wide use these things were being done. For example back in the early 80s I design a circuit to reduce an anomaly called sea clutter for maritime RADAR. The problem is that RADAR returns from waves on the ocean can clutter up the RADAR display so much that it becomes difficult to see a real target. One way to fix the problem is to digitize the incoming RADAR video, and make comparisons to adjacent RADAR scans. Usually only one or two scans will return off a wave, but there are many returns reflected off a real target/ship depending on the range. In the process of digitizing the data a lower threshold, and a gray scale is formed to define the brightness range of the video. Part of the exclusion of sea clutter can be done depending on where you set the lower threshold of the video range, since in general video returns off of waves are not as strong as a return from a solid metal object like a ship.

In contrast the cell phone pictures have a lower threshold brightness level that the camera sensor can operate at. Starting from this threshold level the video brightness is digitized so that many levels of brightness can be translated into a digital word that can be used for processing. In a sophisticated system there might be several thousand levels of brightness. The higher the number the more continuous the appearance of the image will be. This is done using a device called an analog-to-digital converter. There’s a lot going on in a photo sensor, when you realize that each pixel is being converted from an analog voltage level that represents the brightness of that pixel to a digital word. Remember in a good digital camera there are millions of pixels. Once this brightness level is converted to a digital form it can be used by a digital signal processor to enhance the image.

Now Scanbuy’s patent is doing something slightly different than the example above. The above was a hardware example at the nuts, and bolts level. Scanbuy is doing a software version of this, since the camera sensor has already done the basic digital conversion. So they are using the same basic ideas/techniques, but doing further manipulation of the video with their software.

Abstract
This present invention discloses a system and method for enhancing images of barcodes and other similar objects taken by the digital camera connected to or embedded in a mobile device. This filter works by converting the image into its equivalent gray scale. The algorithm then divides the image into sections and finds the pixels of minimum intensity in each section of the image. This minima is used to calculate cut-off values for thresholding. After thresholding, the image is reassembled from its divided sections.
Note: Since these Scanbuy patents mainly focus on the enhancement of 1D bar codes they would become useless if all items were converted to QR codes.


Another thing that I would like to mention is that Scanbuy’s patent was filed/initiated on January 14, 2004, and completed Jan. 2, 2007. NeoMedia’s latest patent #6,993,573 was filed June 7, 2004, completed Jan. 31, 2006. Notice that Scanbuy’s patent was filed about six months before NeoMedia’s patent was filed, but was approved about a year after NeoMedia’s patent was approved.

NeoMedia’s latest patent #06993573 is based on prior art, i.e., their previous patents that go back a number of years. If you recall there were a number of patents that Scanbuy filed for, and only two were accepted. I suspect that those patents filed by Scanbuy were rejected because they conflicted with NeoMedia’s prior art, and even these two patents that got through were delayed because they had to be reworded so they would not infringe on NeoMedia’s prior art.

One other thing I would like to mention is that I remember Oliver Attia, former CEO of Scanbuy, saying that he didn’t like patents. I think he really just meant he didn’t like the idea of NeoMedia having the patent bridge for this camera phone technology. Why do I say this? It became obvious when Scanbuy came out with two of their own patents related to bar code identification with a cell phone camera. I believe that they did this to protect their own version of bar code recognition technology, that is ScanZoom, as they should, if it has value.

If you have ever tried to understand the mentality of poker playing, you learn that your opponent will do things that will reveal the strength his hand. So, Scanbuy acquiring their two patents is a giveaway of their real intent. I believe that they understand how broad, and comprehensive NeoMedia’s patents are on this issue. They also understand that their business is covered by NeoMedia’s patents. So when they were filing for these two patents they were just trying to protect their IP just like NeoMedia did to protect their IP. But again the problem for Scanbuy is that their IP is just a subset of NeoMedia’s IP, and they know that eventually they will have to license with NeoMedia to stay in business. It’s just a matter of time.

There may be some confusion between the way qode works, and what the patents cover. That is, qode using the gateway, and resolution servers, and the talk about QR codes containing the URL, and not using the servers. The way I see it, both/all methods are covered by NeoMedia’s patents. In fact any process using a camera phone to read bar codes, logos, RFID, etc., are covered by NeoMedia’s patents. Again I think that it’s covered in the diagram on the front page of the latest patent #06993573. Even just taking a picture with a cell phone camera of something in the physical world with the intent to receive information about that object is depicted in that diagram. No one has done that before.
http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=06993573&idkey=NONE

One last thing. Remember the EFF group of lawyers trying to overthrow NeoMedia’s patents? Their main argument was that NeoMedia’s patents were too broad, and according to them that made the patents no good. Do you remember Chas Fritz response in the last conference call when asked about EFF?

Call the US Patent Office, and ask the patent attorneys that work there if broad, and comprehensive patents are good, or not. I did, and they told me the broader the better.

Again I just want to encourage everyone to go to the US Patent Office web site, and download the patents to your own computer, and study them, and come to your own conclusions.

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free”. JC