Justia › US Law › US Case Law › US Supreme Court › Volume 509 › Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School Dist.
Petitioners, a deaf child and his parents, filed this suit after respondent school district refused to provide a sign-language interpreter to accompany the child to classes at a Roman Catholic high school. They alleged that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment required respondent to provide the interpreter and that the Establishment Clause did not bar such relief. The District Court granted respondent summary judgment on the ground that the interpreter would act as a conduit for the child's religious inculcation, thereby promoting his religious development at government expense in violation of the Establishment Clause. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
1. The prudential rule of avoiding constitutional questions if there is a nonconstitutional ground for decision is inapplicable here, since respondent did not urge upon the District Court or the Court of Appeals any of the nonconstitutional grounds it now raises in this Court. Pp.6-8.
receive an attenuated financial benefit. Mueller v. Allen, 463 U. S. 388; Witters v. Washington Dept. of Services for Blind, 474 U. S. 481. The same reasoning used in Mueller and Witters applies here. The service in this case is part of a general government program that distributes benefits neutrally to any child qualifying as disabled under the IDEA, without regard to the sectarian-nonsectarian, or public-nonpublic nature of the school the child attends. By according parents freedom to select a school of their choice, the statute ensures that a government-paid interpreter will be present in a sectarian school only as a result of individual parents' private decisions. Since the IDEA creates no financial incentive for parents to choose a sectarian school, an interpreter's presence there cannot be attributed to state decisionmaking. The fact that a public employee will be physically present in a sectarian school does not by itself make this the same type of aid that was disapproved in Meek v. Pittenger, 421 U. S. 349, and School Dist. of Grand Rapids v. Ball, 473 U. S. 373. In those cases, the challenged programs gave direct grants of government aid-instructional equipment and material, teachers, and guidance counselors-which relieved sectarian schools of costs they otherwise would have borne in educating their students. Here, the child is the primary beneficiary, and the school receives only an incidental benefit. In addition, an interpreter, unlike a teacher or guidance counselor, neither adds to nor subtracts from the sectarian school's environment but merely interprets whatever material is presented to the class as a whole. There is no absolute bar to the placing of a public employee in a sectarian school. Pp.8-14.
REHNQUIST, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which WHITE, SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS, JJ., joined. BLACKMUN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, J., joined, and in which STEVENS and O'CONNOR, JJ., joined as to Part I, post, p. 14. O'CONNOR, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS, J., joined, post, p. 24.
William Bentley Ball argued the cause for petitioners.
With him on the briefs was Thomas J. Berning.
John C. Richardson argued the cause for respondent.
*Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf by Bonnie P. Tucker; for the American Jewish Congress et al. by Marc D. Stern, Lois C. Waldman, Oliver S. Thomas, and J. Brent Walker; for the Christian Legal Society et al. by Michael W McConnell, Steven T. McFarland, and Bradley P. Jacob; for the Deaf Community Center, Inc., by Jay Alan Sekulow, James M. Henderson, Sr., Mark N. Troobnick, Jordan W Lorence, Keith A. Fournier, John G. Stepanovich, Thomas Patrick Monaghan, and Walter M. Weber; for the United States Catholic Conference by Mark E. Chopko, John A. Liekweg, and Phillip H. Harris; for the Institute for Justice by William H. Mellor III and Clint Bolick; and for the National Jewish Commission on Law and Public Mfairs by Nathan Lewin and Dennis Rapps.
Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed for the American Civil Liberties Union et al. by Bradley S. Phillips, Steven R. Shapiro, John A. Powell, Steven K. Green, Steven M. Freeman, and Samuel Rabinove; for the Arizona School Boards Association, Inc., by Robert J. DuComb, Jr.; for the Council on Religious Freedom by Lee Boothby, Robert W Nixon, Walter E. Carson, and Rolland Truman; for the National School Boards Association by Gwendolyn H. Gregory, August W Steinhilber, and Thomas A. Shannon; and for the National Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty et al. by David B. Isbell, T. Jeremy Gunn, and Elliot M. Mincberg.
James Zobrest attended grades one through five in a school for the deaf, and grades six through eight in a public school operated by respondent. While he attended public school, respondent furnished him with a sign-language interpreter. For religious reasons, James' parents (also petitioners here) enrolled him for the ninth grade in Salpointe Catholic High School, a sectarian institution.1 When petitioners requested that respondent supply James with an interpreter at Salpointe, respondent referred the matter to the county attorney, who concluded that providing an interpreter on the school's premises would violate the United States Constitution. App. 10-18. Pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 15253(B) (1991), the question next was referred to the Arizona attorney general, who concurred in the county attorney's opinion. App. to Pet. for Cert. A-137. Respondent accordingly declined to provide the requested interpreter.
1 The parties have stipulated: "The two functions of secular education and advancement of religious values or beliefs are inextricably intertwined throughout the operations of Salpointe." App. 92.
2 The parties agreed that exhaustion of administrative remedies would be futile here. Id., at 94-95.
3 During the pendency of this litigation, James completed his high school studies and graduated from Salpointe on May 16, 1992. This case nonetheless presents a continuing controversy, since petitioners seek reimbursement for the cost they incurred in hiring their own interpreter, more than $7,000 per year. Id., at 65.
request for a preliminary injunction, finding that the provision of an interpreter at Salpointe would likely offend the Establishment Clause. Id., at 52-53. The court thereafter granted respondent summary judgment, on the ground that "[t]he interpreter would act as a conduit for the religious inculcation of James-thereby, promoting James' religious development at government expense." App. to Pet. for Cert. A-35. "That kind of entanglement of church and state," the District Court concluded, "is not allowed." Ibid.
4 Respondent now concedes that "the IDEA has an appropriate 'secular purpose.' " Brief for Respondent 16.
5 The Court of Appeals also rejected petitioners' Free Exercise Clause claim. 963 F. 2d, at 1196-1197. Petitioners have not challenged that part of the decision below. Pet. for Cert. 10, n. 9.
J.). We granted certiorari, 506 U. S. 813 (1992), and now reverse.
6 Respondent may well have waived these other defenses. For in response to an interrogatory asking why it had refused to provide the requested service, respondent referred only to the putative Establishment Clause bar. App. 59-60.
7 That regulation prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for "[r]eligious worship, instruction, or proselytization." 34 CFR § 76.532(a)(1) (1992). The United States asserts that the regulation merely implements the Secretary of Education's understanding of (and thus is coextensive with) the requirements of the Establishment Clause. Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 23; see also Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae in Witters v. Dept. of Services for Blind, O. T. 1985, No. 84-1070, p. 21, n. 11 ("These regulations are based on the Department's interpretation of constitutional requirements"). This interpretation seems persuasive to us. The only authority cited by the Secretary for issuance of the regulation is his general rulemaking power. See 34 CFR § 76.532 (1992) (citing 20 U. S. C. §§ 1221e-3(a)(1), 2831(a), and 2974(b)). Though the Fourth Circuit placed a different interpretation on § 76.532 in Goodall v. Stafford County School Board, 930 F.2d 363, 369 (holding that the regulation prohibits the provision of an interpreter to a student in a sectarian school), cert. denied, 502 U. S. 864 (1991), that court did not have the benefit of the United States' views.
a service would offend Art. II, § 12, of the Arizona Constitution. Tr. of Oral Arg. 28.
It is a familiar principle of our jurisprudence that federal courts will not pass on the constitutionality of an Act of Congress if a construction of the Act is fairly possible by which the constitutional question can be avoided. See, e. g., United States v. Locke, 471 U. S. 84, 92 (1985), and cases cited therein. In Locke, a case coming here by appeal under 28 U. S. C. § 1252 (1982 ed.), we said that such an appeal "brings before this Court not merely the constitutional question decided below, but the entire case." 471 U. S., at 92. "The entire case," we explained, "includes nonconstitutional questions actually decided by the lower court as well as nonconstitutional grounds presented to, but not passed on, by the lower court." Ibid. Therefore, in that case, we turned "first to the nonconstitutional questions pressed below." Ibid.
"The Zobrests appeal the district court's ruling that provision of a state-paid sign language interpreter to James Zobrest while he attends a sectarian high school would violate the Establishment Clause. The Zobrests also argue that denial of such assistance violates the Free Exercise Clause." 963 F. 2d, at 1191.
that. The only concern that came up at the time was the Establishment Clause concern").
litigate the case on the federal constitutional issues alone. "Both parties' motions for summary judgment raised only federal constitutional issues." Brief for Respondent 4, n. 4. Accordingly, the District Court's order granting respondent summary judgment addressed only the Establishment Clause question. App. to Pet. for Cert. A-35.
Given this posture of the case, we think the prudential rule of avoiding constitutional questions has no application. The fact that there may be buried in the record a nonconstitutional ground for decision is not by itself enough to invoke this rule. See, e. g., Board of Airport Comm'rs of Los Angeles v. Jews for Jesus, Inc., 482 U. S. 569, 572 (1987). "Where issues are neither raised before nor considered by the Court of Appeals, this Court will not ordinarily consider them." Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co., 398 U. S. 144, 147, n. 2 (1970). We therefore turn to the merits of the constitutional claim.
with government programs offering general educational assistance.
In Mueller, we rejected an Establishment Clause challenge to a Minnesota law allowing taxpayers to deduct certain educational expenses in computing their state income tax, even though the vast majority of those deductions (perhaps over 90%) went to parents whose children attended sectarian schools. See 463 U. S., at 401; id., at 405 (Marshall, J., dissenting). Two factors, aside from States' traditionally broad taxing authority, informed our decision. See Witters, supra, at 491 (Powell, J., concurring) (discussing Mueller). We noted that the law "permits all parents-whether their children attend public school or private-to deduct their children's educational expenses." 463 U. S., at 398 (emphasis in original). See also Widmar, supra, at 274 ("The provision of benefits to so broad a spectrum of groups is an important index of secular effect"); Board of Ed. of Westside Community Schools (Dist. 66) v. Mergens, 496 U. S. 226, 248 (1990) (plurality opinion) (same). We also pointed out that under Minnesota's scheme, public funds become available to sectarian schools "only as a result of numerous private choices of individual parents of school-age children," thus distinguishing Mueller from our other cases involving "the direct transmission of assistance from the State to the schools themselves." 463 U. S., at 399.
to undertake sectarian education." Id., at 488. We also remarked that, much like the law in Mueller, "Washington's program is 'made available generally without regard to the sectarian-nonsectarian, or public-nonpublic nature of the institution benefited.''' Witters, supra, at 487 (quoting Committee for Public Ed. & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist, 413 U. S. 756, 782-783, n. 38 (1973)). In light of these factors, we held that Washington's program-even as applied to a student who sought state assistance so that he could become a pastor-would not advance religion in a manner inconsistent with the Establishment Clause. Witters, supra, at 489.
of course, assuming that the school makes a profit on each student; that, without an IDEA interpreter, the child would have gone to school elsewhere; and that the school, then, would have been unable to fill that child's spot.
Respondent contends, however, that this case differs from Mueller and Witters, in that petitioners seek to have a public employee physically present in a sectarian school to assist in James' religious education. In light of this distinction, respondent argues that this case more closely resembles Meek v. Pittenger, 421 U. S. 349 (1975), and School Dist. of Grand Rapids v. Ball, 473 U. S. 373 (1985). In Meek, we struck down a statute that, inter alia, provided "massive aid" to private schools-more than 75% of which were church related-through a direct loan of teaching material and equipment. 421 U. S., at 364-365. The material and equipment covered by the statute included maps, charts, and tape recorders. Id., at 355. According to respondent, if the government could not place a tape recorder in a sectarian school in Meek, then it surely cannot place an interpreter in Salpointe. The statute in Meek also authorized state-paid personnel to furnish "auxiliary services" -which included remedial and accelerated instruction and guidance counseling-on the premises of religious schools. We determined that this part of the statute offended the First Amendment as well. Id., at 372. Ball similarly involved two public programs that provided services on private school premises; there, public employees taught classes to students in private school classrooms.9 473 U. S., at 375. We found that those programs likewise violated the Constitution, relying largely on Meek. 473 U. S., at 386-389. According to respondent, if the government could not provide educational services on the premises of sectarian schools in Meek and Ball, then it surely cannot provide James with an interpreter on the premises of Salpointe.
9Forty of the forty-one private schools involved in Ball were pervasively sectarian. 473 U. S., at 384-385.
support for nonpublic, sectarian institutions.'" Witters, supra, at 488 (quoting Nyquist, supra, at 783).
Second, the task of a sign-language interpreter seems to us quite different from that of a teacher or guidance counselor. Notwithstanding the Court of Appeals' intimations to the contrary, see 963 F. 2d, at 1195, the Establishment Clause lays down no absolute bar to the placing of a public employee in a sectarian schoo1.10 Such a fiat rule, smacking of antiquated notions of "taint," would indeed exalt form over substance.ll Nothing in this record suggests that a sign-language interpreter would do more than accurately interpret whatever material is presented to the class as a whole. In fact, ethical guidelines require interpreters to "transmit everything that is said in exactly the same way it was intended." App. 73. James' parents have chosen of their own free will to place him in a pervasively sectarian environment. The sign-language interpreter they have requested will neither add to nor subtract from that environment, and hence the provision of such assistance is not barred by the Establishment Clause.
10 For instance, in Wolman v. Walter, 433 U. S. 229, 242 (1977), we made clear that "the provision of health services to all schoolchildren-public and nonpublic-does not have the primary effect of aiding religion," even when those services are provided within sectarian schools. We accordingly rejected a First Amendment challenge to the State's providing diagnostic speech and hearing services on sectarian school premises. Id., at 244; see also Meek v. Pittenger, 421 U. S. 349, 371, n. 21 (1975).
11 Indeed, respondent readily admits, as it must, that there would be no problem under the Establishment Clause if the IDEA funds instead went directly to James' parents, who, in turn, hired the interpreter themselves. Brief for Respondent 11 ("If such were the case, then the sign language interpreter would be the student's employee, not the School District's, and governmental involvement in the enterprise would end with the disbursement of funds").
JUSTICE BLACKMUN, with whom JUSTICE SOUTER joins, and with whom JUSTICE STEVENS and JUSTICE O'CONNOR join as to Part I, dissenting.
Today, the Court unnecessarily addresses an important constitutional issue, disregarding longstanding principles of constitutional adjudication. In so doing, the Court holds that placement in a parochial school classroom of a public employee whose duty consists of relaying religious messages does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. I disagree both with the Court's decision to reach this question and with its disposition on the merits. I therefore dissent.
principles regarding the institution of judicial review and this Court's proper role in our federal system, ibid.
The majority does not deny the existence of these alternative grounds, nor does it dispute the venerable principle that constitutional questions should be avoided when there are nonconstitutional grounds for a decision in the case. Instead, in its zeal to address the constitutional question, the majority casts aside this "time-honored canon of constitutional adjudication," Spector Motor Service, 323 U. S., at 105, with the cursory observation that "the prudential rule of avoiding constitutional questions has no application" in light of the "posture" of this case, ante, at 8. Because the parties chose not to litigate the federal statutory issues in the District Court and in the Court of Appeals, the majority blithely proceeds to the merits of their constitutional claim.
1 Respondent also argues that public provision of a sign-language interpreter would violate the Arizona Constitution. Article II, § 12, of the Arizona Constitution provides: "No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise, or instruction, or to the support of any religious establishment." The Arizona attorney general concluded that, under this provision, interpreter services could not be furnished to James. See App. 9.
on hypothetical Acts of Congress or dubious constitutional principles, an opinion that would be difficult to characterize as anything but advisory." United States Nat. Bank of Ore. v. Independent Ins. Agents of America, Inc., 508 U. S. 439, 447 (1993). See United States v. CIO, 335 U. S. 106, 126 (1948) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
That the federal statutory and regulatory issues have not been properly briefed or argued does not justify the Court's decision to reach the constitutional claim. The very posture of this case should have alerted the courts that the parties were seeking what amounts to an advisory opinion. After the Arizona attorney general concluded that provision of a sign-language interpreter would violate the Federal and State Constitutions, the parties bypassed the federal statutes and regulations and proceeded directly to litigate the constitutional issue. Under such circumstances, the weighty nonconstitutional questions that were left unresolved are hardly to be described as "buried in the record." Ante, at 8. When federal- and state-law questions similarly remained open in Wheeler v. Barrera, 417 U. S. 402 (1974), this Court refused to pass upon the scope or constitutionality of a federal statute that might have required publicly employed teachers to provide remedial instruction on the premises of sectarian schools. Prudence counsels that the Court follow a similar practice here by vacating and remanding this case for consideration of the nonconstitutional questions, rather than proceeding directly to the merits of the constitutional claim. See Youakim v. Miller, 425 U. S. 231 (1976) (vacating and remanding for consideration of statutory issues not presented to or considered by lower court); Escambia County v. McMillan, 466 U. S. 48,51-52 (1984) (vacating and remanding for lower court to consider statutory issue parties had not briefed and Court of Appeals had not passed upon); Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. v. NLRB, 463 U. S. 147, 157-158 (1983) (vacating and remanding for consideration of statutory question).
Despite my disagreement with the majority's decision to reach the constitutional question, its arguments on the merits deserve a response. Until now, the Court never has authorized a public employee to participate directly in religious indoctrination. Yet that is the consequence of today's decision.
2 The Faculty Employment Agreement provides: "'Religious programs are of primary importance in Catholic educational institutions. They are not separate from the academic and extracurricular programs, but are instead interwoven with them and each is believed to promote the other.''' App.90-91.
At Salpointe, where the secular and the sectarian are "inextricably intertwined," governmental assistance to the educational function of the school necessarily entails governmental participation in the school's inculcation of religion. A state-employed sign-language interpreter would be required to communicate the material covered in religion class, the nominally secular subjects that are taught from a religious perspective, and the daily Masses at which Salpointe encourages attendance for Catholic students. In an environment so pervaded by discussions of the divine, the interpreter's every gesture would be infused with religious significance. Indeed, petitioners willingly concede this point: "That the interpreter conveys religious messages is a given in the case." Brief for Petitioners 22. By this concession, petitioners would seem to surrender their constitutional claim.
"'1. Teacher shall at all times present a Christian image to the students by promoting and living the school philosophy stated herein, in the School's Faculty Handbook, the School Catalog and other published statements of this School. In this role the teacher shall support all aspects of the School from its religious programs to its academic and social functions. It is through these areas that a teacher administers to mind, body and spirit of the young men and women who attend Salpointe Catholic High School.
"'3. The School believes that faithful adherence to its philosophical principles by its teachers is essential to the School's mission and purpose. Teachers will therefore be expected to assist in the implementation of the philosophical policies of the School, and to compel proper conduct on the part of the students in the areas of general behavior, language, dress and attitude toward the Christian ideaL'" Id., at 91.
occurs as "part of a general government program that distributes benefits neutrally to any child qualifying as 'disabled' under the IDEA, without regard to the 'sectariannonsectarian, or public-nonpublic nature' of the school the child attends." Ante, at 10. Second, the majority finds significant the fact that aid is provided to pupils and their parents, rather than directly to sectarian schools. As a result, " '[a]ny aid ... that ultimately flows to religious institutions does so only as a result of the genuinely independent and private choices of aid recipients.'" Ante, at 9, quoting Witters v. Washington Dept. of Services for Blind, 474 U. S. 481, 487 (1986). And, finally, the majority opines that "the task of a sign-language interpreter seems to us quite different from that of a teacher or guidance counselor." Ante, at 13.
or parents"); Wolman v. Walter, 433 U. S. 229, 250 (1977) (it would "exalt form over substance if this distinction [between equipment loaned to the pupil or his parent and equipment loaned directly to the school] were found to justify a ... different" result); Ball, 473 U. S., at 395 (rejecting "fiction that a ... program could be saved by masking it as aid to individual students"). The majority's decision must turn, then, upon the distinction between a teacher and a signlanguage interpreter.
"Although Establishment Clause jurisprudence is characterized by few absolutes," at a minimum "the Clause does absolutely prohibit government-financed or governmentsponsored indoctrination into the beliefs of a particular religious faith." Id., at 385. See Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U. S., at 623 (O'CONNOR, J., concurring) ("[Ainy use of public funds to promote religious doctrines violates the Establishment Clause") (emphasis in original); Meek, 421 U. S., at 371 (" 'The State must be certain, given the Religion Clauses, that subsidized teachers do not inculcate religion,'" quoting Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U. S. 602, 619 (1971)); Levitt v. Committee for Public Ed. & Religious Liberty, 413 U. S. 472, 480 (1973) ("[T]he State is constitutionally compelled to assure that the state-supported activity is not being used for religious indoctrination"). In keeping with this restriction, our cases consistently have rejected the provision by government of any resource capable of advancing a school's religious mission. Although the Court generally has permitted the provision of "secular and nonideological services unrelated to the primary, religion-oriented educational function of the sectarian school," Meek, 421 U. S., at 364, it has always proscribed the provision of benefits that afford even the "opportunity for the transmission of sectarian views," Wolman, 433 U. S., at 244.
employment of publicly funded buses for field trips controlled by parochial school teachers, Wolman, 433 U. S., at 254. Similarly, the Court has permitted the provision of secular textbooks whose content is immutable and can be ascertained in advance, Board of Ed. of Central School Dist. No.1 v. Allen, 392 U. S. 236 (1968), while prohibiting the provision of any instructional materials or equipment that could be used to convey a religious message, such as slide projectors, tape recorders, record players, and the like, Wolman, 433 U. S., at 249. State-paid speech and hearing therapists have been allowed to administer diagnostic testing on the premises of parochial schools, id., at 241-242, whereas state-paid remedial teachers and counselors have not been authorized to offer their services because of the risk that they may inculcate religious beliefs, Meek, 421 U. S., at 371.
These distinctions perhaps are somewhat fine, but" 'lines must be drawn.'" Ball, 473 U. S., at 398 (citation omitted). And our cases make clear that government crosses the boundary when it furnishes the medium for communication of a religious message. If petitioners receive the relief they seek, it is beyond question that a state-employed signlanguage interpreter would serve as the conduit for James' religious education, thereby assisting Salpointe in its mission of religious indoctrination. But the Establishment Clause is violated when a sectarian school enlists "the machinery of the State to enforce a religious orthodoxy." Lee v. Weisman, 505 U. S. 577, 592 (1992).
is actually endorsing religion. But the graphic symbol of the concert of church and state that results when a public employee or instrumentality mouths a religious message is likely to "enlis[t]-at least in the eyes of impressionable youngsters-the powers of government to the support of the religious denomination operating the school." Ball, 473 U. S., at 385. And the union of church and state in pursuit of a common enterprise is likely to place the imprimatur of governmental approval upon the favored religion, conveying a message of exclusion to all those who do not adhere to its tenets.
Moreover, this distinction between the provision of funds and the provision of a human being is not merely one of form. It goes to the heart of the principles animating the Establishment Clause. As amicus Council on Religious Freedom points out, the provision of a state-paid sign-language interpreter may pose serious problems for the church as well as for the state. Many sectarian schools impose religiously based rules of conduct, as Salpointe has in this case. A traditional Hindu school would be likely to instruct its students and staff to dress modestly, avoiding any display of their bodies. And an orthodox Jewish yeshiva might well forbid all but kosher food upon its premises. To require public employees to obey such rules would impermissibly threaten individualliberty, but to fail to do so might endanger religious autonomy. For such reasons, it long has been feared that "a union of government and religion tends to destroy government and to degrade religion." Engel v. Vitale, 370 U. S. 421, 431 (1962). The Establishment Clause was designed to avert exactly this sort of conflict.
School Dist. No. 71, Champaign Cty., 333 U. S. 203, 212 (1948). To this end, our cases have strived to "chart a course that preserve[s] the autonomy and freedom of religious bodies while avoiding any semblance of established religion." Walz v. Tax Comm'n of New York City, 397 U. S. 664, 672 (1970). I would not stray, as the Court does today, from the course set by nearly five decades of Establishment Clause jurisprudence. Accordingly, I dissent.
JUSTICE O'CONNOR, with whom JUSTICE STEVENS joins, dissenting.
I join Part I of JUSTICE BLACKMUN'S dissent. In my view, the Court should vacate and remand this case for consideration of the various threshold problems, statutory and regulatory, that may moot the constitutional question urged upon us by the parties. "It is a fundamental rule of judicial restraint ... that this Court will not reach constitutional questions in advance of the necessity of deciding them." Three Affiliated Tribes of Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Engineering, P. c., 467 U. S. 138, 157 (1984). That "fundamental rule" suffices to dispose of the case before us, whatever the proper answer to the decidedly hypothetical issue addressed by the Court. I therefore refrain from addressing it myself. See Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U. S. 173, 223-225 (1991) (O'CONNOR, J., dissenting).


text:
First topics related to a content page, such as a web page, are identified. Thereafter, second topics related to a first content element, such as advertisements, and a second content element, such as media files, are identified based on the first topics. Common topics are identified that are common to the first and second topics. Based on the common topics, first and second content elements are identified and combined in a bundle that is transmitted to a user requesting the content page.
The systems and methods described herein generally relate to advertising systems.
Content for a web page or other entity can include media files that are related to the content of the web page. The content can be included in a content page, such as the web page, that is delivered to a user through a browser. This content is typically manually selected by a publisher of a web page and embedded into the web page. The content that the publishers typically embed can have associated advertising. However, if advertisements are included, the advertisements targeted or sold may not relate to the content on the publisher's site, as manually selecting media to display on a publisher's web page does not ensure that the publisher's web page displays the media that is best targeted to the publisher's audience.
Disclosed herein are systems and methods for generating optimal content to be displayed to a user requesting the content through, for example, a browser. In one implementation, a content page, e.g., a web page, can be analyzed to determine first topics related to the subject matter of the content page. Second topics can be identified from first content elements, e.g. advertisements, and second content elements, e.g. media files. The first topics and second topics can be analyzed to determine common topics. Content from the first and second content elements can be identified based on the common topics. A bundle can be generated from the identified content and transmitted to a publisher. The publisher can embed the bundle within the content page.
In another implementation, the bundle can be monitored to evaluate the performance according to one or more parameters. If the bundle does not meet parameter thresholds, the bundle elements that do not meet the parameter thresholds can be removed and replaced with additional content from the first and second content elements.
In another implementation, a bundle analysis engine can be configured to identify first topics related to a content page and identify second topics related to first content elements and second content elements. The bundle analysis engine can also identify common topics among the first topics and the second topics. A bundler can be configured to generate a bundle from the first content elements and the second content elements based on the common topics identified by the bundle analysis engine. A monitoring engine can be configured to monitor a performance of the bundle of first content elements and second content elements.
In one implementation, first topics related to one or more advertisements can be identified. Second topics can be identified related to a content page and one or more media files, wherein the media files are selected by a publisher of the content page. Common topics common to the first topics and second topics can be identified. One or more advertisements can be selected to combine in a bundle with the one or more selected media files based on the common topics. A bundle can be generated from the one or more advertisements and selected media files and transmitted to a publisher. The publisher can embed the bundle within the content page.
FIGS. 1A and 1B are block diagrams of an example bundle generator system.
FIG. 1C is a block diagram of an example bundle of first content elements and second content elements.
FIGS. 1D and 1E are block diagrams of another example bundle generator system.
FIG. 2 is a flow diagram of an example process for generating a bundle of content from first content elements and second content elements.
FIG. 3 is flow diagram of an example process for identifying a set of topics from first content elements and second content elements.
FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of another example process for generating a bundle of first content elements and second content elements.
FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of an example process for evaluating first content elements and second content elements.
FIG. 6 is a flow diagram of an example process for monitoring the performance of a bundle of first content elements and second content elements.
FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of an example process for adjusting a first bundle of first content elements and second content elements to generate a second bundle of first content elements and second content elements.
FIG. 8 is a flow diagram of an example process for generating a bundle of content from advertisements and selected media files.
FIG. 9 is block diagram of an example computer system.
FIGS. 1A and 1B are block diagrams of an example bundle generator system 100. A bundle analysis engine 110 can identify first topics 107 related to a content page 105, e.g. using a topics engine 125. The content page 105 can be a web page that publishes a variety of different content, e.g. video, audio, text, advertisements, news feeds, digital print, images, etc.
In one implementation, the first topics 107 of the content page 105 can be identified by analyzing signals from a content source associated with the content page 105. For example, the signals can be keywords that are related to the content page 105 and that are identified by the topics engine 125 of the bundle analysis engine 110. The topics engine 125 can crawl, i.e., scan, the content page 105 and determine keywords that are related to the content page 105. After identifying the keywords related to the content page 105, the topics engine 125 of the bundle analysis engine 110 can rank the identified keywords to generate the first topics 107. Other signals can be identified from a content source associated with the content page 105.
For example, the content page 105 can be a web page that is related to sports in general, but primarily relates to baseball, and which sells baseball equipment. After analyzing the web page, the topics engine 125 can identify the keywords of the content page 105 as sports, baseball, and baseball equipment. Subsequently, the topics engine 125 can rank the keywords to determine which keywords are the most relevant to the web page. For example, this list can include baseball equipment, baseball, and sports. The list can represent the first topics 107.
In another implementation, the first topics 107 of the content page 105 can be identified by receiving one or more of the first topics 107 from a content source associated with the content page 105. For example, a publisher of the content page 105 can supply topics to the bundle analysis engine 110 based on the publisher's analysis of what are the most relevant topics of the content page 105. In this implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can use the publisher's recommendations as the first topics 107.
The bundle analysis engine 110 can identify second topics 109 related to first content elements 115 and second content elements 120. The first content elements 115 can include advertisement content, and the advertisement content can come from one or more advertisement content sources. The second content elements 120 can include media content, e.g. video files, audio files, etc, and the media content can come from one or more media content sources. In one implementation, the first content elements 115 can also include advertisements in the form of media files, such as video files.
In one implementation, the second topics 109 related to the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 can be identified by analyzing signals from the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120. For example, the signals can be keywords that are related to the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120. These keywords can be identified by the topics engine 125 of the bundle analysis engine 110.
For example, the topics engine 125 can identify one or more keywords related to the first content elements 115, and can rank these keywords to produce a set of third topics 117. The first content elements 115 can, for example, include advertisements related to a variety of different topics.
The topics engine 125 can also identify one or more keywords related to the second content elements 120. The second content elements 120 can include media content, e.g. video files, audio files, etc., related to a variety of different topics, and the topics engine 125 can identify keywords from this media content, and can rank these keywords to produce a set of fourth topics 122.
Other signals can also be analyzed related to the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120. For example, the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 can include media files, such as video files. In one implementation, the analyzed signals can include keywords associated with the media file. For example, the keywords can include the title, description, metadata, and comments associated with the media file. The keyword can also include web page anchor text that directs a user to the media file, and search query logs or click logs that keep track of how users are directed to a particular advertisement and which other advertisements they may interact with.
In another implementation, additional signals related to the media files can be analyzed. For example, speech-to-text technology can be utilized to determine particular keywords related to the media files by converting the audio signal to text signals. Media file metric data can also be analyzed and can include data regarding the presentation of the media file, such as the play and pause time; whether the media file had been fast-forward, rewound, and/or skipped; stop events, the duration of the media file that was viewed and/or listened to; the number of media files, including videos and/or advertisements watched in a bundle, and click-throughs. In another implementation, video content analysis data, such as face detection, object detection, and/or color histogram, can also be analyzed.
Additional signals can include data related to the users who interact with the media files. For example, these signals can include demographic information regarding the users. The signals can also include information about other media files that a particular user has interacted.
Based on the analyzed signals, the topics engine 125 can derive a set of second topics 109 based on the third topics 117 from the first content elements 115 and the fourth topics 122 from the second content elements 120.
In another implementation, the second topics 109 related to the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 can be identified based on the first topics 107 related to the content page 105. For example, the topics engine 125 can identify one or more keywords related to the first content elements 115 based on the first topics 107 from the content page 105. The topics engine 125 can also rank these keywords to produce a set of third topics 117. The topics engine 125 can also identify one or more keywords related to the second content elements 120 based on the first topics 107 from the content page 105, and can also rank these keywords to produce a set of fourth topics 122.
The topics engine 125 of the bundle analysis engine 110 can identify common topics that are common to the first topics 107 and the second topics 109. In one implementation, the topics engine 125 can identify the common topics by combining the rankings from the first topics 107 and the second topics 109 to determine the most common topics.
For example, the first topics 107 from the content page 105, such as a web page, can include baseball equipment, baseball, and sports. Additionally, the second topics 109 from the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 can include football, basketball, soccer, baseball, sporting equipment, and baseball instructional videos. From these two sets of topics, the topics engine 125 can determine that the common topics common to the first topics 107 and the second topics 109 are baseball, sporting equipment, and baseball instructional videos. For example, the topics engine 125 can identify that the topic of “baseball” is common among the topics of baseball, sporting equipment, e.g., baseball equipment can be a subset of the topic of sporting equipment, and baseball instructional videos.
After identifying the common topics, the bundle analysis engine 110 can generate a bundle from the first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 based on the common topics. The common topics can be ranked to determine which topics are the most relevant between the content page 105, first content elements 115, and the second content elements 120. To generate a bundle, the bundle analysis engine 110 can identify first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 based on the common topics.
For example, the common topics can be baseball, sporting equipment, and instructional videos. The topics engine 125 can rank these common topics and determine that the ranked order of the most common topics can be sporting equipment, baseball, and instructional videos. The bundle analysis engine 110 can use the ranked order of most common topics to identify first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 to utilize in the bundle 140.
In one implementation, the bundle analysis engine can identify first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 based on the common topics. Therefore, the bundle analysis engine 110 can search the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 and select content from the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 to utilize in the bundle. For example, in the first content elements 115, the bundle analysis engine 110 can identify advertisements related to a sporting goods store, baseball paraphernalia, ticket agencies selling tickets to baseball games, etc. Furthermore, in the second content elements 120, the bundle analysis engine 110 can identify media content such as baseball highlights, instructional videos teaching baseball skills, podcasts providing baseball commentary, etc. The bundle analysis engine 110 can send the identified content to the bundler 130 to generate a bundle 140.
In another implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can identify first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 by evaluating the identified first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 according to one or more performance parameters. Evaluating the identified first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 according to one or more performance parameters can allow the bundle analysis engine 110 to generate a bundle 140 that is optimized for a higher performance with regards to, for example, monetization and relevance.
The bundle analysis engine 110 can search the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 and select elements from both the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 based on the common topics. In the example above, the bundle analysis engine 110 can identify advertisements related to a sporting goods store, baseball paraphernalia, and ticket agencies selling tickets to baseball games from the first content elements 115 and the bundle analysis engine 110 can identify media content such as baseball highlights, instructional videos teaching baseball skills, and podcasts providing baseball commentary from the second content elements 120. The bundle analysis engine 110 can evaluate each identified content element from both the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 according to one or more performance parameters.
For example, the identified content elements can be monitored with respect to a click-through rate; a click-to-play rate; an aggregate cost; and/or a consumption. In another implementation, the identified content elements can be evaluated by monitoring the past performance of the elements according to the one or more performance parameters. In another implementation, the identified content elements can be evaluated by monitoring the performance of the elements relative to other content pages 105, e.g. web pages, in a similar genre or category. Other performance parameters can be used to monitor the performance of the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120.
Based on the measured values of the one or more performance parameters, the bundle analysis engine 110 can select first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 that can be combined in a bundle 140 that is optimized for a higher performance with regards to, for example, monetization and relevance. For example, the bundle analysis engine 110 can determine the total number of first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 to include in the bundle 140. Furthermore, the bundle analysis engine 110 can determine the optimal number of first content elements 115 to show in combination with the second content elements 120, and in what sequence these elements will be shown.
The bundler 130 can combine the first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 that were identified by the bundle analysis engine 110 into a bundle 140. The bundle 140 can be transmitted to a user requesting the content page 105. For example, the bundle analysis engine 110 can determine that the best combination of first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 would be a bundle 140 that includes advertisements for a sporting goods store that sells baseball equipment along with instructional videos teaching how to hit a baseball.
Additional first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 could also be included in the bundle 140 that is created by the bundler 130. After the bundler 130 has created the bundle 140, the bundle 140 can be transmitted to a publisher of the content page, such as a web page. The publisher can embed the bundle within the web page, and the bundle can be displayed to a user who has requested the web page.
In another implementation, the performance of a first bundle of first content elements 115, e.g., advertisements, and second content elements 120, e.g. media files, can be monitored by a monitoring engine 135 at a content page 105. The performance of the first bundle can be monitored with a monitoring engine 135 by evaluating the first bundle of advertisements and media files according to one or more performance parameters. If the monitored performance of the first bundle is less than a threshold, the bundle analysis engine 110 can generate a second bundle of advertisements and media files. Other performance parameters can be used to monitor the performance of a first bundle of first content elements 115 and the second content elements 120 by the monitoring engine 135.
For example, the performance of a first bundle can be monitored with respect to an aggregate click-through rate, a click-to-play rate, an aggregate cost, and a consumption. The monitoring engine 135 can determine whether the values of the one or more measured performance parameters meet a threshold. In response to determining that the values of the one or more measured performance parameters do not meet the threshold, the bundle analysis engine 110 can generate a second bundle of advertisements and media files.
In one implementation, after determining that the values of the one or more measured performance parameters do not meet the threshold, the bundle analysis engine 110 can generate a second bundle by repeating the process used to create the first bundle. For example, the bundle analysis engine 110 could identify a set of first topics 107 related to the content page 105 and can also identify a set of second topics 109 related to the first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 based on the first topics 107. The bundle analysis engine can also identify a set of common topics that were common to the first topics 107 and the second topics 109, and generate a second bundle from first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 based on the common topics. In some implementations, bundle elements can be substituted over time. The performance of the new bundle configuration can be measured and compared to previous bundle configurations. An optimal configuration can be derived over time.
In another implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can adjust the first bundle of advertisements and media files in response to the monitoring engine 135 determining that the values of the one or more measured performance parameters do not meet a threshold. For example, bundle analysis engine 110 can remove the advertisements and/or media files from the first bundle that do not meet the threshold values. The bundle analysis engine 110 can identify additional advertisements from the first content elements 115 and/or media files from the second content elements 120 that would be relevant to replace the removed elements. The bundle analysis engine 110 could transmit these additional elements to the bundler 130 that could combine the additional advertisements and/or media files into a second bundle with the remaining advertisements and/or media files from the first bundle.
For example, the performance of the bundle can be monitored with respect to an aggregate click-through rate. The aggregate click-through rate can represent the number of times the first bundle was selected by a user viewing the first bundle in a ratio to the number of times it was displayed. Therefore, if the aggregate click-through rate of the first bundle is low, the monitoring engine 135 can analyze the advertisements and/or media files from the first bundle to determine which elements are performing below a threshold with respect to the click-through rate. Based on the analysis, the bundle analysis engine 110 can decide to replace any and/or all of the advertisements and/or media files from the first bundle with additional advertisements and/or media files into a second bundle with the goal of improving the aggregate click-through rate of the bundle.
FIG. 1C is a block diagram of an example bundle of first content elements and second content elements. The bundle 140 can include first content elements 145, e.g. ads, that are identified by the bundle analysis engine 110 from the first content elements 115. The bundle 140 can also include second content elements 150, e.g. media, that are identified by the bundle analysis engine 110 from the second content elements 120. The bundle 140 can also include topics 155 which can include common topics common to the content page 105, first content elements 115, and the second content elements 120. The topics 155 in the bundle 140 can be identified by the topics engine 125. The bundle 140 can also include performance parameter data 160 which can include performance parameter data associated with the identified first content elements 145 and second content elements 150 of the bundle 140.
In one implementation, the bundle 140 can be stored at a web page associated with the content page 105. For example, the bundle 140 can be transmitted by the bundle generator system 100 to a publisher of the content page 105, such as a web page. The publisher can embed the bundle 140 within the web page, and the bundle 140 can be displayed to a user who has requested the web page.
In another implementation, the bundle 140 can be stored at the bundle generator system 100. For example, the bundle 140 can be generated and stored by the bundle generator system 100. Selected content of the bundle 140 can then be transmitted to a user requesting the content page 105.
In another implementation, portions of the bundle 140 can be stored at the content page 105 and other portions of the bundle 140 can be stored at the bundle generator system 100. For example, the first content elements 145 and the second content elements 150 can be transmitted to a publisher of the content page 105, such as a web page, and the publisher can embed the first content elements 145 and the second content elements 150 of the bundle 140 within the web page. Furthermore, the topics 155 and the performance parameter data 160 can be stored at the bundle generator system 100. For example, the bundle generator system 100 can store the topics 155 and the performance parameter data 160 to facilitate the monitoring of the first content elements 145 and the second content elements 150 of the bundle 140.
The bundle 140 can, for example, be displayed to a user in a media player. In one implementation, the media player can display one of the identified second content elements 150, i.e., video files, of the bundle 140 in a main window of the video player. Furthermore, thumbnails of other video files and/or identified first content elements 145, i.e., advertisements, can, for example, be displayed on a side and/or bottom panel of the media player. The thumbnails can, for example, allow a user to select a different content element to be displayed in the media player. In another implementation, a media player can display a sequence of content elements, i.e., a play list, that includes one or more identified first content elements 145 and second content elements 150.
FIGS. 1D and 1E are block diagrams of another example bundle generator system 150. In the example bundle generator system 150, a publisher of a content page 105 can select one or more media files 155 to display on the content page 105. In response, the example bundle generator system 150 can identify relevant advertisements 160 to display in conjunction with the one or more selected media files 155 in a bundle 140.
A bundle analysis engine 110 can identify first topics 180 related to one or more advertisements 160. In one implementation, the first topics 180 related to the one or more advertisements 160 can be identified by analyzing signals from the one or more advertisements 160. For example, the signals discussed with respect to the first content elements 115 as identified with respect to FIGS. 1A and 1B can be utilized with respect to FIGS. 1D and 1E for the one or more advertisements 160. For example, the signals can be keywords that are related to the advertisements 160. These keywords can be identified by the topics engine 125 of the bundle analysis engine 110. For example, the topics engine 125 can identify one or more keywords related to the one or more advertisements 160, and can rank these keywords to produce the set of fourth topics 180.
The bundle analysis engine 110 can also identify third topics 165 related to a content page 105, e.g. using a topics engine 125. The content page 105 can be a web page that publishes a variety of different content, e.g. video, audio, text, advertisements, news feeds, digital print, images, etc. In one implementation, the third topics 165 of the content page 105 can be identified by analyzing signals from a content source associated with the content page 105. For example, the signals discussed with respect to the content page 105 as identified with respect to FIGS. 1A and 1B can be utilized with respect to FIGS. 1D and 1E for the content page 105.
The bundle analysis engine 110 can also identify fourth topics 170 related to selected media files 155. For example, the publisher of the content page 105 can select one or more media files 155 to be displayed on the content page 105. In one implementation, the publisher can select a list of particular media files 155 to be displayed. In another implementation, the publisher can, for example, select media files 155 that are associated with a particular provider, genre, keyword, etc.
In one implementation, the fourth topics 170 related to the selected media files 155 can be identified by analyzing signals from the selected media files 155. For example, the signals discussed with respect to the second content elements 120 as identified with respect to FIGS. 1A and 1B can also be utilized with respect to FIGS. 1D and 1E for the selected media files 155.
Based on the analyzed signals, the topics engine 125 can derive a set of second topics 175 based on the third topics 165 from the content page 105 and the fourth topics 170 from the selected media files 155. For example, the topics engine 125 can rank keywords associated with the content page 105 to produce the set of third topics 165, and can rank keywords associated with the selected media files 155 to produce the set of fourth topics 170. The set of second topics 175 can then, for example, be derived based on the combined rankings.
The topics engine 125 of the bundle analysis engine 110 can then, for example, identify common topics that are common to the first topics 180 and the second topics 175. In one implementation, the topics engine 125 can identify the common topics by combining the rankings from the first topics 180 and the second topics 175 to determine the most common topics.
In one implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can identify advertisements 160 based on the common topics. Therefore, the bundle analysis engine 110 can select one or more advertisements 160 to combine in a bundle 140 with the one or more selected media files 155 based on the common topics. For example, after selecting one or more advertisements 160, the bundle analysis engine 110 can send the identified advertisements 160 along with the publisher selected media files 155 to the bundler 130 to generate a bundle 140.
In another implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can identify advertisements 160 by evaluating the advertisements 160 according to one or more performance parameters. Evaluating the advertisements 160 according to one or more performance parameters can allow the bundle analysis engine 110 to generate a bundle 140 that is optimized for a higher performance with regards to monetization and relevance.
Based on the evaluation of the advertisements 160 with respect to one or more performance parameters, the bundle analysis engine 110 can select advertisements 160 that can be combined in a bundle 140 with the selected media files 155 that is optimized for a higher performance with regards to monetization and relevance. The bundler 130 can combine the advertisements 160 with the selected media files 155 into a bundle 140. The bundle 140 can be transmitted to a user requesting the content page 105.
Additional media files 155 and advertisements 160 can also be included in the bundle 140 that is created by the bundler 130. After the bundler 130 has created the bundle 140, the bundle 140 can be transmitted to a publisher of the content page, such as a web page. The publisher can embed the bundle within the web page, and the bundle can be displayed to a user who has requested the web page.
FIG. 2 is a flow diagram of an example process 200 for generating a bundle of content from first content elements and second content elements. The process 200 can, for example, be implemented in the bundle analysis engine 110. In one implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can be integrated into the bundle generator system 100. In another implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can be integrated into the content page 105.
Stage 205 identifies first topics related to a content page. The content page 105 can be a web page that publishes a variety of different content, e.g. video, audio, text, advertisements, news feeds, digital print, images, etc. For example, the first topics 107 can be identified with a topics engine 125 that analyzes signals from the web page, wherein the signals can include relevant keywords related to the content on the web page. The identified relevant keywords can be ranked by the topics engine 125 to generate the first topics 107. The first topics 107 can also include one or more items transmitted from a content source associated with the content page 105.
Stage 210 identifies second topics related to the first content elements and second content elements. The first content elements can include advertisement content, and the second content elements can include media content, e.g. video files, audio files, etc. The second topics can be identified by analyzing keywords related to the first content elements and second content elements. These keywords can, for example, be identified by a topics engine 125.
Stage 215 identifies common topics that are common to the first topics and the second topics. For example, the common topics can be identified by the topics engine 125 by combining the rankings from the first topics 107 and the second topics 109.
Stage 220 generates a bundle from the first content elements and second content elements based on the common topics. For example, a bundler 130 can generate the bundle 140 after a bundle analysis engine 110 has identified first content elements 115 and second content elements 120.
Other processes for generating a bundle of content from first content elements and second content elements can also be used.
FIG. 3 is flow diagram of an example process 300 for identifying a set of topics from first content elements and second content elements. The process 300 can, for example, be implemented in the topics engine 125. In one implementation, the topics engine 125 can be integrated into the bundle analysis engine 110. In another implementation, the topics engine 125 can be integrated into the bundle generator system 100. In another implementation, the topics engine 125 can be integrated into the content page 105.
Stage 305 identifies third topics related to the first content elements by analyzing signals from the first content elements. The signals from the first content elements can include relevant keywords related to the content of the first content elements. A topics engine 125 can, for example, analyze the signals from the first content elements. The identified relevant keywords can be ranked by the topics engine 125 to generate the third topics 117.
Stage 310 identifies fourth topics related to the second content elements by analyzing signals from the second content elements. The signals from the second content elements can include relevant keywords related to the content of the second content elements. A topics engine 125 can, for example, analyze the signals from the second content elements. The identified relevant keywords can be ranked by the topics engine 125 to generate the fourth topics 122.
Stage 315 combines the third and fourth topics to generate the second topics. For example, the ranked lists of third and fourth topics 122 can be combined by a topics engine 125 to determine the most relevant topics to the first topics 107 from the content page 105.
Other processes for identifying a set of topics from first content elements and second content elements can also be used.
FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of an example process 400 for generating a bundle of content. The process 400 can, for example, be implemented in the bundle analysis engine 110. In one implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can be integrated into the bundle generator system 100. In another implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can be integrated into the content page 105.
Stage 405 identifies first content elements and second content elements based on the common topics. For example, the bundle analysis engine 110 can search the first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 and select elements from the first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 to utilize in the bundle 140 that have similar topics as compared to the content page 105.
Stage 410 evaluates first content elements and second content elements according to one or more performance parameters. For example, after identifying the first content elements 115 and second content elements 120, the bundle analysis engine 110 can evaluate the performance of the elements according to performance parameters, such as a click-through rate, a click-to-play rate, an aggregate cost, and a consumption.
Stage 415 monitors the past performance of first content elements and second content elements according to one or more performance parameters. For example, the bundle analysis engine 110 can evaluate the past performance of the elements according to performance parameters, such as a click-through rate, a click-to-play rate, an aggregate cost, and a consumption.
Stage 420 combines first content elements and second content elements in a bundle based on the evaluation of the first content elements and second content elements according to one or more performance parameters. For example, the bundle analysis engine 110 can select first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 that can be combined in a bundle 140 that is optimized for a higher performance with regards to monetization and relevance. For example, the bundle analysis engine 110 can determine the total number of first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 to include in the bundle 140, and the bundle analysis engine 110 can determine the optimal number of first content elements 115, e.g. advertisements, to show in combination with the second content elements 120, e.g. media files, and in what sequence these elements will be shown.
Other processes for generating a bundle of content can also be used.
FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of an example process 500 for evaluating first content elements and second content elements. For example, the performance of the first bundle can be monitored with a monitoring engine 135 by evaluating the first bundle of first content elements 115, e.g. advertisements, and second content elements 120, e.g. media files, according to one or more performance parameters. The process 500 can, for example, be implemented in the monitoring engine 135. In one implementation, the monitoring engine 135 can be integrated into the bundle generator system 100. In another implementation, the monitoring engine 135 can be integrated into the content page 105.
Stage 505 evaluates first content elements and second content elements by monitoring an aggregate click-through rate of first content elements and second content elements. Stage 510 evaluates first content elements and second content elements by monitoring a click-to-play rate of first content elements and second content elements. Stage 515 evaluates first content elements and second content by monitoring an aggregate cost of first content elements and second content elements. Stage 520 evaluates first content elements and second content elements by monitoring a consumption of first content elements and second content elements. A monitoring engine 135 can, for example, be utilized for monitoring first content elements and second content elements with respect to an aggregate click-through rate, a click-to-play rate, an aggregate cost, and/or a consumption.
Other processes for evaluating first content elements and second content elements can also be used.
FIG. 6 is a flow diagram of an example process 600 for monitoring the performance of a bundle of first content elements and second content elements. The process 600 can, for example, be implemented in the monitoring engine 135. In one implementation, the monitoring engine 135 can be integrated into the bundle generator system 100. In another implementation, the monitoring engine 135 can be integrated into the content page 105.
Stage 605 evaluates the performance of the bundle according to one or more performance parameters, such as an aggregate click-through rate, a click-to-play rate, an aggregate cost, and a consumption, and represented in FIG. 5. For example, a monitoring engine 135 can be utilized to measure the performance of the bundle according to one or more performance parameters.
Stage 610 determines whether the values of the one or more performance parameters meet a threshold. The threshold values for the one or more performance parameters can be designated based on the preferences of the content page 105. The measured values of the performance parameters from Stage 605 can be compared to these threshold values.
Stage 615 generates a second bundle of first content elements and second content elements if the values of the one or more performance parameters do not meet a threshold. For example, after comparing the measured values of the performance parameters to the threshold values with a monitoring engine 135, the bundle analysis engine 110 can determine whether a second bundle should be generated that includes elements that meet certain threshold values.
Other processes for monitoring the performance of a bundle of first content elements and second content elements can also be used.
FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of an example process 700 for adjusting a first bundle of first content elements and second content elements to generate a second bundle of first content elements and second content elements. The process 700 can, for example, be implemented in the bundle analysis engine 110. In one implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can be integrated into the bundle generator system 100. In another implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can be integrated into the content page 105.
As represented in FIG. 6, the first content elements and second content elements are evaluated to determine whether they meet certain threshold values with regards to one or more performance parameters. Stage 705 removes first content elements and second content elements from a first bundle that do not meet a threshold. For example, the bundle analysis engine 110 can remove the first content elements and second content elements from a first bundle based on the evaluation by a monitoring engine 135.
Stage 710 identifies additional first content elements and second content elements. The additional first content elements and second content elements can be identified utilizing the same processes that can be used to initially identify the first content elements and second content elements to include in the first bundle. For example, the additional first content elements 115 and second content elements 120 can be identified with a bundle analysis engine 110.
Stage 715 combines additional first content elements and second content elements into a second bundle. For example, after identifying additional first content elements and second content elements, a bundler 130 can be utilized to combine the additional first content elements and second content elements into a second bundle.
Other processes for adjusting a first bundle of first content elements and second content elements to generate a second bundle of first content elements and second content elements can also be used.
FIG. 8 is a flow diagram of an example process 800 for generating a bundle of content from advertisements and selected media files. The process 200 can, for example, be implemented in the bundle analysis engine 110. In one implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can be integrated into the bundle generator system 100. In another implementation, the bundle analysis engine 110 can be integrated into the content page 105.
Stage 805 identifies first topics related to one or more advertisements. For example, the first topics 107 can be identified with a topics engine 125 that analyzes signals from the one or more advertisements 160, wherein the signals can include relevant keywords related to the advertisements. The identified relevant keywords can be ranked by the topics engine 125 to generate the first topics 180. The first topics 180 can also include one or more items transmitted from a publisher associated with the advertisements 160.
Stage 810 identifies second topics related to a content page and one or more media files, wherein the media files are selected by a publisher of the content page. The content page 105 can be a web page that publishes a variety of different content, e.g. video, audio, text, advertisements, news feeds, digital print, images, etc. The media files 155 can be selected by the publisher of the content page 105 to be displayed on the content page 105. In one implementation, the publisher can select a list of particular media files 155 to be displayed. In another implementation, the publisher can, for example, select media files 155 that are associated with a particular provider, genre, keyword, etc.
Stage 815 identifies common topics that are common to the first topics and the second topics. For example, the common topics can be identified by the topics engine 125 by combining the rankings from the first topics 180 and the second topics 175.
Stage 820 selects one or more advertisements to combine in a bundle with the one or more selected media files based on the common topics. For example, a bundler 130 can generate the bundle 140 after a bundle analysis engine 110 has selected the one or more advertisements 160 to combine with the selected media files 155.
FIG. 9 is block diagram of an example computer system 900. The example computer system 900 can be utilized to implement a server computer device and/or a client computer device, or some other computer device. In one implementation, the example computer system 900 can be utilized to implement the content page 105 and bundle generator system 100 of FIGS. 1A and 1C.
The system 900 includes a processor 910, a memory 920, a storage device 930, and an input/output device 940. Each of the components 910, 920, 930, and 940 can, for example, be interconnected using a system bus 950. The processor 910 is capable of processing instructions for execution within the system 900. In one implementation, the processor 910 is a single-threaded processor. In another implementation, the processor 910 is a multi-threaded processor. The processor 910 is capable of processing instructions stored in the memory 920 or on the storage device 930.
The storage device 930 is capable of providing mass storage for the system 900. In one implementation, the storage device 930 is a computer-readable medium. In various different implementations, the storage device 930 can, for example, include a hard disk device, an optical disk device, or some other large capacity storage device.
The input/output device 940 provides input/output operations for the system 900. In one implementation, the input/output device 940 can include one or more of a network interface device, e.g., an Ethernet card, a serial communication device, e.g., and RS-232 port, and/or a wireless interface device, e.g., and 802.11 card. In another implementation, the input/output device can include driver devices configured to receive input data and send output data to other input/output devices, e.g., keyboard, printer and display devices 960.
The apparatus, methods, flow diagrams, and structure block diagrams described in this patent document can be implemented in computer processing systems including program code comprising program instructions that are executable by the computer processing system. Other implementations can also be used. Additionally, the flow diagrams and structure block diagrams described in this patent document, which describe particular methods and/or corresponding acts in support of steps and corresponding functions in support of disclosed structural means, can also be utilized to implement corresponding software structures and algorithms, and equivalents thereof.
This written description sets forth the best mode of the invention and provides examples to describe the invention and to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the invention. This written description does not limit the invention to the precise terms set forth. Thus, while the invention has been described in detail with reference to the examples set forth above, those of ordinary skill in the art can effect alterations, modifications and variations to the examples without departing from the scope of the invention.
providing the advertisement bundle to be displayed on the web page.
receiving one or more of the first keywords from a content source associated with the web page.
analyzing signals from a content source associated with the web page.
the third keywords are determined by analyzing signals from the sponsored video files that the one or more computers can select for display on the client device.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the advertisement bundle is generated further based on the ranking of the common keywords.
combining the one or more advertisements and the one or more sponsored video files in the bundle.
combining one or more advertisements and one or more sponsored video files in an advertisement bundle based on evaluating the one or more advertisements and the one or more sponsored video files.
monitoring a consumption of one or more advertisements and one or more sponsored video files.
monitoring past performance of the one or more advertisements and the one or more sponsored video files according to the one or more performance parameters.
14. The system of claim 10, wherein the advertisement bundle is generated further based on the ranking of the common keywords.
combining the one or more advertisements and the one or more sponsored video files in the advertisement bundle based on evaluating the one or more advertisements and the one or more sponsored video files.
monitoring a consumption of the one or more advertisements and the one or more sponsored video files.
"Ad Serving with RealSystemTM G2," RealNetworks, 1999, 38 pages, [online] [Retrieved on Feb. 13, 2009] Retrieved from the internet .
"Ad Serving with RealSystemTM G2," RealNetworks, 1999, 38 pages, [online] [Retrieved on Feb. 13, 2009] Retrieved from the internet <URL:http://service.real.com/help/library/blueprints/adserve/adserve.htm>.
"Overlay & Video AdType," ScanScout, 2007, [online] [Retrieved on Jul. 15, 2008] Retrieved from the internet .
"Overlay & Video AdType," ScanScout, 2007, [online] [Retrieved on Jul. 15, 2008] Retrieved from the internet <URL://demo.scanscount.com/livedemo.shtml?adType=overlay&videoAdType=rightSide&ss . . . >.
"www.BrightRoll.com," 2 pages, Archived on Apr. 29, 2007 on web.archive.org [online] [Retrieved on Oct. 19, 2009] Retrieved from the internet: .
"www.BrightRoll.com," 2 pages, Archived on Apr. 29, 2007 on web.archive.org [online] [Retrieved on Oct. 19, 2009] Retrieved from the internet: <Url:http://web.archive.org/web/20070429110654/http://www.birghtroll.com/>.
"www.Scanscout.com," 2 pages, Archived on Apr. 7, 2007 on web.archive.org [online] [Retrieved on Oct. 19, 2009] Retrieved from the internet: .
"www.Scanscout.com," 2 pages, Archived on Apr. 7, 2007 on web.archive.org [online] [Retrieved on Oct. 19, 2009] Retrieved from the internet: <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20070407233129/http://www.scanscout.com/>.
"www.YuMe.com," 2009, 1 Page, [online] [Retrieved on Oct. 19, 2009] Retrieved from the internet: .
"www.YuMe.com," 2009, 1 Page, [online] [Retrieved on Oct. 19, 2009] Retrieved from the internet: <URL:http://www.yume.com>.
Ajax Activity Indicators, Archived on Dec. 25, 2006 on www.web.archive.org [online] [Retrieved on Jun. 10, 2008] Retrieved from the internet .
Ajax Activity Indicators, Archived on Dec. 25, 2006 on www.web.archive.org [online] [Retrieved on Jun. 10, 2008] Retrieved from the internet <URL:http://web.archive.org/web/20061225134638/http://www/napyfab.com/ajax-indicators/>.
Authorized officer Simin Baharlou, International Preliminary Report on Patentability in PCT/US2009/052866, mailed Feb. 17, 2011, 7 pages.
Baluj a et al. "Video Suggestion and Discovery for YouTube: Taking Random Walks through the View Graph", ACM, WW 2008, Apr. 21-25, 2008.
Chinese Office Action in Chinese Application No. 200980130845.X, dated Dec. 27, 2011, 17 pages.
Communication Pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC issued in international application No. 08756776.4 on Apr. 29, 2011, 7 pages.
Delaney, Kevin J., "Start-Ups See to Cash in on Web-Video Ads", Wall Street Journal, Mar. 2, 2007,[online] [Retrieved Sep. 3, 2008] Retrieved from the internet .
Delaney, Kevin J., "Start-Ups See to Cash in on Web-Video Ads", Wall Street Journal, Mar. 2, 2007,[online] [Retrieved Sep. 3, 2008] Retrieved from the internet <URL://www. scanscout. com/wsj-070302.html]>.
Dorothée Mülhausen, International Preliminary Report on Patentability in PCT/US2007/078299, mailed Mar. 26, 2009, 14 pages.
EP Communication from European Application No. 08781112.1 mailed Oct. 26, 2010, 4 pages.
European Search Report issued in international application No. 08756776.4 on Apr. 20, 2011, 3 pages.
Examiner Ana Viets, Supplementary EP Search Report in EP 09 80 5508, mailed Nov. 3, 2011, 5 pages.
Examiner Eric Gerard, Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC for EP Appl. No. EP 07 842 355.5-1502 dated Mar. 14, 2013, 6 pages.
Examiner Maurice Moynihan, Supplementary EP Search Report in EP 08 74 6298, mailed Jan. 23, 2012, 7 pages.
Examiner Satoh Sakamoto, JP Office Action in Application No. 2009-528455, dated Aug. 13, 2012, 7 pages.
Greg Sandoval: "YouTube: Too rough for advertisers?" [online] [Retrieved on Apr. 21, 2006]. Retrieved from the Internet: , 2 pages.
Greg Sandoval: "YouTube: Too rough for advertisers?" [online] [Retrieved on Apr. 21, 2006]. Retrieved from the Internet: < URL: http://www.news.com >, 2 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT Application No. PCT/US2008/066175, mailed Dec. 23, 2009, 7 pgs.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability from International Application No. PCT/US2008/073914, mailed Mar. 4, 2010, 7 pgs.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability issued in international application No. PCT/US2008/062103 on Nov. 3, 2009, 6 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability issued in international application No. PCT/US2008/062442 on Nov. 3, 2009, 7 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability issued in international application No. PCT/US2008/066175 on Dec. 11, 2009, 7 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US2008/068624, dated Aug. 4, 2009, 12 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from International Application No. PCT/US08/66175, mailed Jun. 9, 2009, 8 pgs.
Japanese Second Office Action for JP 2009-528455 dated Jun. 18, 2013 w/English translation, 4 pages.
Korean Office Action in Korean Application No. 10-2009-7007416, mailed Mar. 10, 2014, 13 pages (with English translation).
Lowe, D.G., "Object Recognition from Local Scale-Invariant Features," Proc. Seventh IEEE Int'l Conf on Computer Vision ICCV 99, Kerkyra, Greece, Sep. 20-27, 1999, pp. 1150-1157.
Mahesh Dwivedi, International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT Application No. PCT/US2008/068624, dated Jan. 5, 2010, 6 pages.
Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration. Form PCT/ISA/220, European Patent Office. Jun. 23, 2009.
PC World, Steve Bass's Tips & Tweaks., http//blogs.pcworld.com/tipsandtweaks/archives/006418/html, downloaded Feb. 14, 2011, 2 pages.
PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion, PCT/US2008/062103, Aug. 26, 2008.
PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion, PCT/US2008/062442, Jul. 14, 2008.
Reexamination of U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,061, filed Sep. 3, 2002, Stone et al.
Reexamination of U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,068, filed Dec. 7, 2002, Stone et al.
Reexamination of U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,069, filed Jul. 11, 2002, Dean et al.
Reexamination of U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,073, filed Sep. 30, 2004, Stone et al.
Riley, D., "Contextual In-Video Advertising: ScanScout," May 14, 2007, [online] [Retrieved on Jul. 15, 2008] Retrieved from the internet .
Riley, D., "Contextual In-Video Advertising: ScanScout," May 14, 2007, [online] [Retrieved on Jul. 15, 2008] Retrieved from the internet <URL://www.techcrunch. com/2007/05/14/contextual-in-video-advertising-scanscout/.>.
Strange, Adario, "VideoEgg Exec: YouTube's New Ads are Just Like Ours," [online], [Retrieved Jun. 2008, pp. 1-8,] Retrieved from the internet .
Strange, Adario, "VideoEgg Exec: YouTube's New Ads are Just Like Ours," [online], [Retrieved Jun. 2008, pp. 1-8,] Retrieved from the internet <URL://http://blog.wired.com/business/2007/08/network-wars-vi.html>.
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority. Form PCT/ISA/237. European Patent Office. Jun. 23, 2009.

matches:
Application No. 200980130845
application No. 08756776
Application No. 08781112
application No. 08756776
Application No. 2009
Application No. 10


D.C. Law Library - § 47–811.04. Abatement of penalty and interest; compromise.
↪ § 47–811.04. Abatement of penalty and interest; compromise.
(ii) Subordinate liens shall be released before the tax is compromised.
For temporary (90 day) addition of this section, see § 12(h) of Tax Clarity and Related Amendments Emergency Act of 2002 (D.C. Act 14-456, July 23, 2002, 49 DCR 8107).
For temporary (90 day) addition of this section, see § 12(h) of Tax Clarity and Related Amendments Congressional Review Emergency Act of 2002 (D.C. Act 14-510, October 23, 2002, 49 DCR 10247).
For temporary (225 day) addition of section, see § 12(h) of Tax Clarity and Recorder of Deeds Temporary Act of 2002 (D.C. Law 14-191, October 5, 2002, law notification 49 DCR 9549).
For temporary (225 day) addition of section, see § 12(h) of Tax Clarity and Related Amendments Temporary Act of 2003 (D.C. Law 14-228, March 23, 2003, law notification 50 DCR 2741).