text:
2011-06-07 Assigned to ECHOSTAR TECHNOLOGIES L.L.C. reassignment ECHOSTAR TECHNOLOGIES L.L.C. ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: GRATTON, MAX S.
A system for fingerprinting audiovisual content. The system includes a content receiver and a display device in communication with the content receiver. The content receiver is configured to receive a video signal, where the video signal includes audiovisual content. The content receiver may then be configured to generate a matrix barcode that includes identification data. The content receiver is also configured to create a fingerprinted content that includes the audiovisual content from the video signal and the matrix barcode. The content receiver may then be configured to output the fingerprinted content. The display device is configured receive the fingerprinted content form the content receiver. Also, the display device is configured to display the fingerprinted content.
The present disclosure relates generally to audiovisual content and, more specifically, to watermarking audiovisual content.
Audiovisual content (e.g., television shows, movies, recorded presentations and other viewable and/or listenable programs) may be recorded and displayed multiple times, often by secondary sources. For example, users may record a television show at home and then upload a copy of the television show to the Internet. Other users may then view and/or download the television show. This transmission and viewing may be a problem because it may be unauthorized. For example, the digital file storing the television show may contain copyrighted material and the copyright owner may not authorize the user to transmit, display and/or record the television show. Therefore, it may be beneficial to digitally watermark the content to include data such as the owner's name, the date it was displayed/created, and so on. Additionally, the content owner may also desire to know information regarding the user that originally uploaded the content to the Internet or another data storage location.
In one embodiment, a method implemented on a computer system is disclosed. The method may include receiving content, such as audiovisual content, on a content receiver. Then, the content receiver may generate a matrix barcode. The matrix barcode may include content data that corresponds to information regarding the content, as well as receiver data corresponding to information regarding the content receiver. Then the content receiver may create a modified or fingerprinted content. The modified content may include the matrix barcode and the content. Then, after the modified content has been created the content receiver may output the modified content to a display device.
In still other embodiments, a method for determining a source of unauthorized content is described. The method may use a computing device to access a video content from an unauthorized source. The video content may include a matrix barcode or data matrix having data corresponding to an identifier for a content receiver. Then, a display device may present the video content and the matrix barcode. As the video content and the matrix barcode are being presented, a computing device or matrix barcode reader may analyze the matrix barcode to determine an original source of the video content.
Another embodiment may take the form of a system for fingerprinting audiovisual content. The system includes a content receiver and a display device in communication with the content receiver. The content receiver is configured to receive a video signal, where the video signal includes audiovisual content. The content receiver may then be configured to generate a matrix barcode that includes identification data. The content receiver is also configured to create a fingerprinted content that includes the audiovisual content (from the video signal) and the matrix barcode. The content receiver may then be configured to output the fingerprinted content. The display device is configured to receive the fingerprinted content from the content receiver. Also, the display device is typically configured to display the fingerprinted content.
FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a system for fingerprinting content and determining a content source via the fingerprint.
FIG. 2 is a flow chart illustrating a method for fingerprinting content to include origination or source data.
FIG. 3 is a flow chat illustrating another embodiment of a method for fingerprinting and displaying content.
FIG. 4 is a flow chart illustrating a method for detecting an original content source via fingerprinting the content.
Various examples of a system to fingerprint audiovisual content to embed the content with data corresponding to the original source of the content and/or the original content receiver that received the audiovisual content. As non-limiting examples, content may be fingerprinted with the name of the content provider, such as HBO, a serial number of the content receiver that receives the content from a network, a name of the copyright holder, a date and time at which content is transmitted and/or received, and data regarding the owner of the content receiver. In some embodiments, a matrix barcode is embedded within audiovisual content. The matrix barcode may be generated at the content provider and/or may be generated at the content receiver (e.g., set top box, computer) when the content receiver receives the content. A content provider may include either a matrix barcode or data that may allow the content receiver to generate the matrix barcode. The content receiver may also generate a matrix barcode containing both content data and identification data, or may generate a separate identification matrix barcode. As the content is output to a display device such as a television, the content receiver may embed the matrix barcode(s) within the content.
The matrix barcode may serve as a fingerprint or identifier for the content. For example, the matrix barcode may include data such as the content owner, the date/time the content was originally broadcast, the content receiver identification number that recorded/displayed the content, the user's account tied to the content receiver and so on. This may be beneficial because if the content is transferred to another computer, network or other data storage facility, the original content receiver and the content owner may be determined. This may be especially helpful in stopping/deterring copyright violations, such as movie piracy.
In one embodiment, a content provider may provide audiovisual content to a content receiver. The content receiver may generate a matrix barcode that includes data such as a content receiver identifier, user account information (e.g., user name, account number), content-related information, and/or content provider related-information. The content receiver may then output a modified or fingerprinted content that includes the original audiovisual content and the matrix barcode. The matrix barcode may be configured to be displayed on multiple frames and therefore it may be visible to a viewer during normal playback. Or, the matrix barcode may be configured to be displayed in only a single frame, or a small number of sequential or non-sequential frames, so that it generally cannot be perceived by the human eye during normal playback. Additionally, the matrix barcode may be configured to be displayed multiple times throughout the audiovisual content or may be displayed once at a particular location of the audiovisual content.
When the matrix barcode is generated at the content receiver, the location of the content receiver, the receiver identification number, customer information and the like may be included within the matrix barcode. This is because the content receiver may be configured to store and utilize any or all of this information. Thus, the matrix barcode may act as a fingerprint as well as a watermark. In other words, the matrix barcode will not only relay information such as the content owner and/or copyright owner, but also the specific content receiver that recorded/output the audiovisual content.
Using the fingerprint, a content owner or broadcasting source, such as a broadcast satellite service, and/or cable company, may be able to determine the origin of the audiovisual content. For example, if the audiovisual content is stored at and accessible from an online content aggregator such as the web site YOUTUBE, the user who originally recorded the content from a content receiver may be determined by analyzing the matrix barcode. This may be helpful because content online is often re-posted, copied and distributed by users other than the original uploader. The matrix barcode may assist a content owner in tracking the original source of the online content. For example, if a user records a television show and then posts the television show to a content aggregator, the copyright owner of the television show may be able to track down the original user, content receiver, and/or uploading computer via the matrix barcode.
Additionally, the matrix barcode may be embedded within the digital file for the audiovisual content, so that it may be more difficult for a user to transmit the content without the matrix barcode. Therefore, as the digital file is copied, re-copied, downloaded, uploaded, or otherwise transmitted, the matrix barcode may remain a part of the file.
FIG. 1 illustrates an embodiment of a system 100 for fingerprinting audiovisual content. The content may include video content and/or audio content. For example, the content may be television programming, movies, or the like. The system 100 may include a content source 102, such as television programming, provided to a content receiver 104 (e.g., a set top box, cable box and the like) via a transmission medium. The content receiver 104 may then provide content from the content source 102 to a display device 110, a first computing device 106, and/or a second computing device 114. Additionally the system 100 may also include a second display device 116, a reading device 118 and a network 112 to facilitate communication between various components of the system 100.
The content receiver 104 receives content from the content source 102 and then may transmit the content to the display device 110, the first computing device 106 and/or the network 112. The content receiver 104 may modify the content from the content source 102 and may include a matrix barcode 128 within the content. The matrix barcode 128 may be embedded, injected or otherwise included within the content, and as the content is transmitted from device to device, the matrix barcode 128 may be transmitted as well.
The content receiver 104 may be practically any type of computing device able to receive and process audio, video and/or data signals. For example, the content receiver 104 may be a set top box, a television receiver, a digital video recorder, or a computer. The content receiver 104 may receive practically any form/type of content from almost any number of sources, this may include the content source 102, recorded audio/video, streaming data from the Internet, downloaded data, and so on.
In some embodiments, the content receiver 104 may include a network/communication interface 126, memory storage 122, a processor 120 and an input/output interface 124 connected via a system bus. Additionally, the content receiver 104 may also include an optical drive (e.g., digital video disc player, compact disc player, high definition digital video disc player), a universal serial bus drive, or other electronic inputs. Furthermore, although the display device 110 is illustrated as separate form the content receiver 104, it should be understood that in various implementations the display device 110 may be incorporated into the content receiver 104.
The network/communication interface 126 may receive the content source 102 from a broadcast headend (not shown), the network 112 and/or other communication mechanisms. Additionally, the network/communication interface 126 may also communicate with the first computing device 106, and/or the second computing device 114 via the network 112.
The memory storage 122 may store electronic data that may be utilized by the content receiver 104. For example, the memory storage 122 may store content in the form of video/audio signals, an electronic programming guide, user preference data such as a desired language and residential time zone, or settings data. The memory storage 122 may be, for example, a magnetic storage medium, optical storage medium, magneto-optical storage medium, read only memory, random access memory, erasable programmable memory, or flash memory.
The processor 120 may control operation of the content receiver 104. The processor 120 may be any electronic device cable of processing, receiving, and/or transmitting instructions. For example, the processor 120 may be a microprocessor or a microcomputer.
The input/output interface 124 provides communication to and from the content receiver 104 to and from a variety of devices/sources. For example, the input/output interface 124 may receive data from the display device 110, a remote control, control buttons located on the content receiver 104, or other computing devices. Additionally, the input/output interface 126 may also receive/transmit data to and from an optical drive, universal serial bus (USB) drive, or other video/audio/data inputs.
The display device 110 may be in electronic communication with the content receiver 104. The display device 110 may be configured to display/output the content and/or data. For example, the display device 110 may be a television display or a computer monitor capable of displaying audio, video and data signals. The display device 110 may be any kind of electronic display such as, a cathode ray tube display, a liquid crystal display, or a plasma display.
The matrix barcode 128 may be a two-dimensional barcode with data included in both the horizontal and vertical directions, such as a QR code or matrix code. The matrix barcode 128 may consist of black blocks or modules arranged in a pattern against a white background. The information encoded within the matrix barcode 128 may be text, uniform resource indicator (URI), alphanumeric, numeric and other data. The matrix barcode 128 may be readable by the reading device 118, a barcode scanner, a digital camera, a computing device, smart phone or the like.
The recording device 108 may be in communication with the display device 110 and the first computing device 106. The recording device 108 may record the content, including the matrix barcode 128, when the content is displayed on the display device 110. For example, after the content receiver 104 transmits the fingerprinted content to the display device 110, the recording device 108 may then capture the fingerprinted content. The recording device 108 may be any device capable of recording video content. For example, the recording device 108 may be a video camera, digital camera, digital video disc recorder, videocassette recorder, and so on. Additionally, the recording device 108 may be incorporated into the display device.
After the recording device 108 records the fingerprinted content, the content and the matrix barcode 128 may be transmitted to the first computing device 106. For example, a user may download the fingerprinted content to the first computing device 106 in order to post the fingerprinted content on a website, transmit to other users, or provide access to the fingerprinted content. In some embodiments, the fingerprinted content may be transmitted directly from the content receiver 104 to the first computing device 106. For example, the content receiver 104 may transmit the fingerprinted content to the first computing device 106.
The first computing device 106 may be used to transmit the fingerprinted content via the network 112 to other computing devices or users. For example, the first computing device 106 may be used to post the fingerprinted content to a website, such as YOUTUBE, electronically mail the fingerprinted content, or otherwise transmit the fingerprinted content. The first computing device 106 may be any type of computing device, for example, a personal computer, a laptop computer, a tablet computer, a smart phone, and so on.
The first computing device 106 may include a processor 130, memory storage 132, an input/output interface 134, a network/communication interface 135 all connected via a system bus 138. The processor 130 may be substantially similar to the processor 120 in the content receiver 104. Similarly, the memory storage 132 may be substantially similar to the memory storage 122 in the content receiver 104, and the network/communication interface 136 may also be substantially similar to the network/communication interface 126 component in the content receiver 104. The input output interface 134 may receive input from various input devices (e.g., a keyboard, mouse, trackball, joystick) and produce output signals to various devices (e.g., a computer monitor, display device, speakers, and so on).
The first computing device 106 may communicate via the network 112 to the second computing device 114. Additionally, in some embodiments, the content receiver 104 may communicate with the second computing device 114 via the network 112. The second computing device 114 may download, stream or otherwise access the fingerprinted content from the network 112. The second computing device 114 may access the fingerprinted content either directly from the first computing device 106 or the content receiver 104, or the second computing device 114 may access the fingerprinted content from another computing device, server, or the like that forms part of the network 112. For example, if a user uploads the fingerprinted content to YOUTUBE, the second computing device 114 may access the fingerprinted content from another computing device (e.g., server) other than the first computing device 106 or content receiver 104.
The second computing device 114 may be substantially similar to the first computing device 106, or may be different. For example, the second computing device 114 may be practically any computing device, such as a personal computer, a laptop computer, a tablet computer, a smart phone, and so on. The second computing device 114 may include a processor unit 140, a memory storage 142, an input/output interface 144, a network/communication interface 146 all connected together via a system bus. The processor 140 may be substantially similar to the processor 130 in the first computing device 106. Similarly, the memory storage 142 may be substantially similar to the memory storage 132, the network/communication interface 148 may be substantially similar to the network/communication interface 138, and the input/output interface 144 may be substantially similar to the input/output interface 134 of the first computing device 106.
The second computing device 114 may be in communication with a second display device 116. In some embodiments, the second computing device 114 may transmit the fingerprinted content to the second display device 116. The second display device 116 may then display the fingerprinted content including the matrix barcode 128. For example, a user may download or otherwise access the fingerprinted content, and the display device 116 may then display the content and the matrix barcode 128. The second display device 116 may be substantially the same as the display device 110, or may be different. For example, the second display device 116 may be a computer monitor, a plasma display, a cathode ray tube display, or a liquid crystal display. Additionally, in some embodiments, the second display device 116 may be incorporated into the second computing device 114, such as a smart phone, tablet computer, hand held computing device, notebook computer, and the like.
After or as the content and the matrix barcode 128 are being displayed on the display device 116, a reading device 118 may capture and analyze the fingerprinted content and the matrix barcode. In some embodiments, the reading device 118 may be incorporated into the second computing device 114. In other embodiments, the reading device 118 may be a separate computing device. In these embodiments, the reading device 118 may include an optical component 156 to capture the matrix barcode 128 as it is presented. Additionally, the reading device 118 may also include a processor 150, a memory 152, and an input/output interface 154.
The network 112 provides communication paths between the content receiver 104, the first computing device 106, and the second computing device 114. The communication paths between the devices may be wireless (e.g., satellite, microwave and other electromagnetic frequencies) or wired (e.g., fiber optic wire, CAT 5 wiring, coaxial cable). In some embodiments, the network 112 may further include satellites, receivers and/or transmitters to further transmit and receive content to and from the content receiver 104, the broadcasting source, and the first and second computing devices 106, 114.
FIG. 2 is a flow chart illustrating a method 200 for fingerprinting content. Generally, the method shown in FIG. 2 may be performed by a content creator and/or distributor. The content source 102 may include content, such as audiovisual content. The content source 102 may originate at a broadcast headend, broadcasting center, or other similar broadcasting source (not shown). In operation 204 the content is created, in this operation 204 audiovisual content, such as a television show, movie, and so on may be recorded or otherwise captured. After the content is created and ready to be transmitted the method 200 may proceed to operation 206. In this operation 206, the content is evaluated to determine if a matrix barcode 128 should be embedded within the content; that is, the evaluation determines whether the content should be fingerprinted. If a matrix barcode 128 is not going to be embedded, the method 200 proceeds to operation 208 and the content is transmitted. In this operation 208, the content may be included in the content source 102 signal. For example, the content may relate to a particular television show, and the content source 102 may include numerous different content signals corresponding to various different television channels.
If, at operation 206, the content is to be fingerprinted such that the matrix barcode 128 is inserted into the content, then the method 200 proceeds to operation 210 and the matrix barcode 128 is embedded into the content. The matrix barcode 128 may be configured to be visible to the user when displayed on a display device 110, 116. Alternately, the matrix barcode 128 may be configured to be substantially invisible to the user. For example, the matrix barcode 128 may be configured to appear only on a single frame or a couple of frame, so that when the content is viewed under normal conditions (e.g., not paused or stopped), the matrix barcode 128 may not visible. These embodiments may be beneficial as users may not realize that the content is fingerprinted and therefore may not attempt to remove or delete the matrix barcode 128 from the content. In at least one embodiment, the matrix barcode 128 may be embedded in metadata associated with the content, such that the matrix barcode 128 may be accessed on-demand during playback of the content. After operation 206, the method 200 proceeds to operation 212 and the fingerprinted content is transmitted. For example, the content and the matrix barcode 128 may be included in the content source 102 that is transmitted to the content receiver 104.
FIG. 3 illustrates another embodiment of a method 300 for fingerprinting content. Generally, the method shown in FIG. 3 is executed by or at a content receiver. The method begins with operation 302 in which the content is received, for example by the content receiver 104. For example, the content may be included in the video signal 102, which may be transmitted from a broadcast headend or other content provider. After the content is received, the method 300 proceeds to operation 304 and the content is analyzed to determine whether there is a matrix barcode 128 already included within the content (e.g., whether the content is already fingerprinted). For example, in method 200 at operation 210, a matrix barcode 128 may be embedded within the content, and therefore when the video signal 102 is transmitted to the content receiver 104, the matrix barcode 128 may also be transmitted to the content receiver 104.
If a matrix barcode 128 is not included within the content (that is, the content is not already fingerprinted), then the method 300 may proceed to operation 306. In this operation 306, the content receiver 104 may generate a matrix barcode 128. The generated matrix barcode 128 may include data such as a identification number for the content receiver 104, user data, content information, display data, and any other suitable data discussed herein. The content receiver 104 may create the matrix barcode 128 based on data stored in memory storage 122, as well as data included within the video signal 102. For example, information identifying either or both of the content receiver and an associated user may be stored in the memory storage 122, whereas information related to the content may be transmitted from a content provider and arrive with or be associated with the input signal 102.
After the content receiver 104 generates a matrix barcode 128, the method 300 may proceed to operation 310 and the matrix barcode 128 may be injected, embedded, overlaid or otherwise included within the content. At this operation 310, the matrix barcode 128 may be configured to be displayed, transmitted, copied, and so on along with the content. In other words, the content is watermarked or fingerprinted with the matrix barcode 128. As the content is displayed on the display devices 110, 116 the matrix barcode 128 may also be displayed. Additionally, at this operation 310 the display rate of the matrix barcode 128 may be determined. For example, the matrix barcode 128 may be configured to be displayed on a single frame, a couple of frames or numerous frames. Additionally, the matrix barcode 128 may be configured to be displayed at the beginning, the middle, or the end of the content. Furthermore, the matrix barcode 128 may be configured to be displayed at once, twice or multiple times throughout the content.
If it is determined at operation 304 that a matrix barcode 128 is already included in the content, then the method 300 proceeds to operation 308. At operation 308 the content receiver 104 determines whether a new matrix barcode 128 is needed (e.g., whether the content should be additionally watermarked/fingerprinted). For example, in some instances, a new matrix barcode 128 may not be needed, e.g., some content may not need to be tracked if it is re-transmitted. If no matrix barcode 128 is needed then the method 300 proceeds to operation 316 and the content is displayed on the display device 110. However, if a new matrix barcode 128 is needed then the method 300 proceeds to operation 312. In operation 312, the content receiver 104 generates a new matrix barcode 128. It should be noted that the original matrix barcode 128 already included in the content (e.g., from operation 210 in method 200) may be replaced or supplemented. In other words, two matrix barcodes 128 may be included in the content or a new matrix barcode 128 may replace the original matrix barcode 128 embedded within the content. Additionally, operation 312 may be substantially the same as operation 306, although in operation 312 the content data (e.g., title, channel) may be extracted from a matrix barcode 128 that may already be included in the content.
After operation 312, the method 300 may proceed to operation 314, and the new matrix barcode 128 is injected, embedded or otherwise included in the content. This operation 314 may be substantially similar to operation 310. However, in this operation 314, the matrix barcode 128 may be included in addition to or in replace of the matrix barcode 128 previously included in the content (for example, any matrix code embedded at operation 210 in method 200). Once the new matrix barcode 128 has been included in the content, the content is fingerprinted and the method 300 proceeds to operation 316 in which the fingerprinted content is displayed. This operation 316 may be performed by the display device 110. For example, the content receiver 104 may transmit the fingerprinted content the display device 110, which they may display the content and the matrix barcode(s) 128.
FIG. 4 is a flow diagram illustrating a method 400 for using the matrix barcode 128 as a watermark or fingerprint. The method 400 begins with operation 402, in which the fingerprinted content is displayed. This operation 402 may be substantially similar to operation 316 in FIG. 3. For example, the display device 110 may display the content and the matrix barcode 128. As the fingerprinted content is being displayed, the method 400 may proceed to optional operation 404. In operation 404 the fingerprinted content may be recorded. If the fingerprinted content is not recorded, the method 400 may proceed to operation 408 and then fingerprinted content may be transmitted to the network 112. In some embodiments, the content receiver 104 may transmit the fingerprinted content to the network 112 or may transmit the fingerprinted content to the first computing device 106, which may then transmit the fingerprinted content to the network 112. The fingerprinted content may be transmitted without being separately recorded, because the content receiver 104 may have downloaded or otherwise stored the fingerprinted content as it was being displayed or before the fingerprinted content was displayed. For example, the content receiver 104 may be a digital video recorder and record the fingerprinted content prior to the content being displayed on the display device 110.
However, if in operation 404 it is determined that the fingerprinted content may be recorded, then the recording device 108 records the fingerprinted content. For example, the recording device 108 may be a digital video disc recorder and may record the fingerprinted content as it is displayed on the display device 110. After the fingerprinted content is recorded, the method 400 may proceed to operation 406 and the fingerprinted content may be transmitted to the first computing device 106. It should be noted that in some embodiments, the recording device 108 may be incorporated into the first computing device 106 and therefore, this operation may be omitted. However, in other embodiments, the fingerprinted content may be transmitted from the recording device 108 to the first computing device 106 via the network 112 or via a hardwired connection.
After operation 406, the method 400 may proceed to operation 408 and the fingerprinted content may be transmitted to the network 112. For example, the fingerprinted content may be uploaded to a website/server, linked to, or otherwise enabled to be accessed by other computing devices, other than the first computing device 106, e.g., the second computing device 114. In one embodiment, the fingerprinted content may be uploaded to peer-to-peer sharing website/service. In another embodiment, the fingerprinted content may be uploaded to a content-sharing website, such as YOUTUBE. In still other embodiments, the fingerprinted content may be electronically mailed or otherwise provided directly to other users.
After the fingerprinted content has been transmitted to the network 112, the method 400 may proceed to operation 410. In this operation 410, the fingerprinted content may be viewed, downloaded or otherwise accessed on the second computing device 114. For example, a user may view the content on the content-sharing website. In these embodiments the second user may not be authorized to view the content. In other embodiments, the content may actually be downloaded on the second computing device 114, e.g., if the content was electronically mailed, or shared via a peer-to-peer file sharing website. The second computing device may be a set-top box or other television receiver, in certain embodiments.
The method 400 may then proceed to operation 412 and the fingerprint in the content may be detected on the second computing device 114. For example, the content owner may scan the content to view the fingerprint. As another option, software, hardware or firmware associated with the second computing device may be configured to recognize QR code patterns. In this embodiment, the second computing device may thus analyze the content frame by frame and look for the QR code or other matrix code occurring in at least a single frame. The second computing device 114 may be a server hosting the website, a computing device of a peer-to-peer network, a laptop or desktop computing device, a mobile phone, a tablet device, a set-top box, and so on. The fingerprinted content may be detected by viewing, downloading or otherwise accessing the content.
After the fingerprinted content has been detected, the method 400 may proceed to operation 416 in which the content is analyzed to determine if there is a matrix barcode 128 associated with the content (e.g., whether the content has been fingerprinted). The matrix barcode 128 may have been included in the content by the content provider (e.g., in operation 210 in FIG. 2) or by the content receiver (e.g., in operations 310, 314 in FIG. 3). If there is no matrix barcode 128 included in the content, then the original source of the content may not be able to be determined and the method ends. However, if there is a matrix barcode 128 in the content, then the original source of the content may be determined. For example, if there is a matrix barcode 128 in the content, the method may proceed to operation 417 and the matrix barcode is analyzed.
Operation 417 may be performed by the reading device 118 or, more likely, by the second computing device 114. The reading device 118 may capture the matrix barcode(s) 128 via the optical component 156. The processor 150 may analyze the matrix barcode(s) 128 to extract the data. As the data may include data corresponding to the content receiver 104, data corresponding to the content (e.g., copyright owner, content provider, title), and other data the method 400 may proceed to operation 418. Alternatively, the second computing device 114 may execute or include functionality permitting it to not only detect the fingerprint but also to analyze it and extract data in the manner previously discussed.
In operation 418 the original content source and uploading information may be determined. For example, the original content receiver 104 that received the video signal 102 containing the content, the time/date the content was displayed, the channel, the content provider, and so on may be determined. Once the content source may be determined, the content owner may then decide whether to protect the content and/or attempt to prevent unauthorized transmissions, uploading, and/or sharing of the content, as well as whether or not to contact the content uploader. As one option, the secondary computing device 112 may provide the content source and/or receiver to a user, or any other data that was included in the fingerprint. Following operation 418, the method ends.
outputting, by the content receiving device, the modified content for display.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the replacement matrix barcode is inserted in multiple positions of the modified content to be displayed periodically as the modified content is displayed.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the replacement matrix barcode is inserted once into the modified content to be displayed in a single frame of the modified content.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the matrix barcode is inserted in multiple frames of the modified content to be displayed on multiple sequential frames of the modified content.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the content receiving device is a television receiver.
a time the content was received at the content receiver.
an output configured to output the fingerprinted content.
9. The system of claim 8, wherein the content receiver is a television receiver.
10. The system of claim 8, wherein the extracted content data includes a content owner identity and a content provider identity.
11. The system of claim 8, wherein the receiver data comprises an identification number for the content receiver and user identity for a user account associated with the content receiver.
12. The system of claim 8, wherein the fingerprinted content further comprises a second replacement matrix barcode positioned in an additional position within the fingerprinted content.
output the modified content for display.
14. The non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium of a content receiver of claim 13, wherein the replacement matrix barcode is inserted in multiple positions of the modified content to be displayed periodically as the modified content is displayed.
15. The non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium of a content receiver of claim 13, wherein the replacement matrix barcode is inserted once into the modified content to be displayed in a single frame of the modified content.
16. The non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium of a content receiver of claim 13, wherein the matrix barcode is inserted in multiple frames of the modified content to be displayed on multiple sequential frames of the modified content.
17. The non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium of a content receiver of claim 13, wherein the content receiver is a television receiver.
18. The non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium of a content receiver of claim 13, wherein the extracted content data includes a content owner identity and a content provider identity.
19. The non-transitory, processor-readable storage medium of a content receiver of claim 13, wherein the receiver data comprises an identification number for the content receiver and user identity for a user account associated with the content receiver.
European Office Action for EP 11842890.3 dated Mar. 13, 2015, 8 pages.
European Search Report for EP 11844504 dated Feb. 24, 2015, 10 pages.
European Search Report for EP 11855065 dated Mar. 6, 2014, 6 pages.
Extended European Search Report for EP 11842890.3 dated Mar. 26, 2014, 8 pages.
Extended European Search Report for EP 11846486 dated Mar. 26, 2014, 5 pages.
Extended European Search Report for EP 11850819.1 dated Mar. 17, 2014, 5 pages.
Extended European Search Report for EP 11852630 dated Jun. 30, 2014, 7 pages.
First Examination Report from European Patent Office dated Feb. 4, 2015 for EP 12716751.8, 4 pages.
First Examination Report from European Patent Office dated May 18, 2015 for EP 11849496.2, 7 pages.
First Office Action by the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/00988 dated Aug. 14, 2014, 3 pages.
First Office Action by the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/009881 dated Aug. 14, 2014, 3 pages.
First Office Action for CN 201180065044.7 issued Feb. 13, 2015 by the State Intellectual Property Office, 4 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2011/060002 mailed Jun. 6, 2013, 6 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2011/060094 mailed Jun. 20, 2013, 6 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2011/060098 mailed Jun. 13, 2013, 9 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2011/060109 mailed Jun. 20, 2013, 7 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2011/060121 mailed Jun. 20, 2013, 6 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2011/061211 mailed Jul. 4, 2013, 7 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2011/061773 mailed Jun. 6, 2013, 6 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2011/061778 mailed Jul. 11, 2013, 6 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2011/063308 mailed Jul. 18, 2013, 9 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2012/022405 mailed Aug. 8, 2013, 7 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2012/022581 mailed Aug. 8, 2013, 12 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2012/024923 mailed Aug. 29, 2013, 8 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2012/024956 mailed Aug. 29, 2013, 7 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2012/025607 mailed Sep. 12, 2013, 8 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2012/025634 mailed Sep. 6, 2013, 5 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2012/026373 mailed Sep. 12, 2013, 10 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2012/026624 mailed Sep. 12, 2013, 12 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability of PCT/US2011/059977 mailed on Jun. 6, 2013, 6 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability of PCT/US2011/063111 mailed Jun. 13, 2013, 8 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability of PCT/US2011/068161 mailed on Jul. 25, 2013, 13 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability of PCT/US2012/025502 mailed Sep. 6, 2013, 9 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability of PCT/US2012/048032 mailed on Apr. 3, 2014, 6 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of PCT/US2012/048032, mailed Oct. 16, 2012, 13 pages.
Jung, Eui-Hyun et al., "A Robust Digital Watermarking System Adopting 2D Barcode against Digital Piracy on P2P Network," IJCSNA International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, vol. 6, No. 10, Oct. 2006, 6 pages.
Kato et al, "2D barcodes for mobile phones", Mobile Technology, Applications and Systems, 2005 2nd International Conference on Guangzhou, China Nov. 15-17, 2005, Piscataway, NJ, USA, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, Nov. 15, 2005, pp. 8 pp. 8, XP031887368, DOI: 10.1109/MTAS.2005.207166; ISBN: 978-981-05-4573-4, 8 pages.
Liu, Yue et al., "Recognition of QR code with mobile phones," Control and Decision Conference, 2008. CCDC 2008. Jul. 2-4, 2008, pp. 203-206.
Notice of Allowance and search report for ROC (Taiwan) Patent Application No. 101106288 received May 29, 2015, 9 pages.
Notice of Allowance by the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/009881 dated Jan. 12, 2015, 1 page.
Office Action and Search Report for ROC (Taiwan) Patent Application No. 100142966 dated May 27, 2014, 6 pages.
Office Action and Search Report for ROC (Taiwan) Patent Application No. 10014870 dated May 7, 2014, issued in the corresponding foreign application, 9 pages.
Office Action and Search Report for ROC (Taiwan) Patent Application No. 100149344 issued Jan. 23, 2015, 8 pages.
Office Action and Search Report from the State Intellectual Property Office for CN Pat. Appln. No. 201180066584.7 issued on Jul. 10, 2015, 12 pages.
Office Action dated Apr. 22, 2015 for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/009883, 2 pages.
Office Action dated Feb. 10, 2015 for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/006770, 2 pages.
Office Action dated Feb. 18, 2015 for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/009794, 1 page.
Office Action dated Feb. 6, 2015 for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/006520, 2 pages.
Office Action dated Jan. 28, 2015 for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/006973 is not translated into English, 3 pages.
Office Action for EP 11855065 dated Mar. 13, 2015, 6 pages.
Office Action for European Patent Application No. 12707435.9 dated Mar. 12, 2015, 6 pages.
Office Action for European Patent Application No. 12719817.4 dated Jun. 23, 2014 issued in the corresponding foreign application, 5 pages.
Office Action from European Patent Office for Application No. 11852630.0 dated May 12, 2015, 7 pages.
Office Action from European Patent Office for Application No. 12716728.6 dated Feb. 26, 2015, 4 pages.
Office Action from State Intellectual Property Office for CN Appln. No. 201180056242.7 received Jun. 17, 2015, 10 pages.
Office Action of the Intellectual Property Office for ROC Patent App. No. 100142978 dated Sep. 23, 2014, 9 pages.
Office Action of the Intellectual Property Office for ROC Patent App. No. 100143194 dated Sep. 23, 2014, 10 pages.
Office Action of the Intellectual Property Office for ROC Patent App. No. 101101486, dated Aug. 5, 2014, 4 pages.
Publication of PCT/US2011/059977 by the India Controller General of Patents Designs and Trademarks as India Patent Publication No. 4694/CHENP/2013 A on Sep. 5, 2014, 1 page.
Publication of PCT/US2012/025634 by the India General Patents Designs and Trademarks as India Patent Publication No. 6967/CHENP/2013 A on Aug. 1, 2014, 1 page.
The First Office Action dated Jul. 13, 2015 for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/009791 is not translated into English, 2 pages.
The First Office Action dated Nov. 12, 2014 for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/009794 is not translated into English, 2 pages.
The First Office Action for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/006262 is not translated into English. This document is from prosecution of the corresponding foreign matter for which we do not have a translation. Dated Aug. 7, 2014, 2 pages.
The First Office Action for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/007672 is not translated into English. This document is from prosecution of the corresponding foreign matter for which we do not have a translation. Dated Sep. 11, 2014, 2 pages.
The Notice of Allowance received Dec. 16, 2014 for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/009882 is not translated into English, 1 page.
The Second Office Action dated Jun. 1, 2015 for Mexican Patent Application No. MX/a/2013/007672 is not translated into English, 2 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/953,227, filed Nov. 23, 2010, Final Office Action mailed May 24, 2013, 17 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/953,227, filed Nov. 23, 2010, Non Final Office action mailed Mar. 24, 2015, 39 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/960,285, filed Dec. 3, 2010 Non-Final Office Action mailed May 14, 2015, 21 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/960,285, filed Dec. 3, 2010, Final Office Action mailed Apr. 18, 2013, 14 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/960,285, filed Dec. 3, 2010, Final Office Action mailed Dec. 3, 2014, 19 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/960,285, filed Dec. 3, 2010, Non-Final Office Action mailed Jun. 6, 2014, 19 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/961,369, filed Dec. 6, 2010, Non-Final Office Action mailed Feb. 13, 2014, 21 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/961,369, filed Dec. 6, 2010, Non-Final Office Action mailed Jul. 12, 2013, 22 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/961,369, filed Dec. 6, 2010, Non-Final Office Action mailed Mar. 25, 2013, 17 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/961,369, filed Dec. 6, 2010, Notice of Allowance mailed Jul. 16, 2014, 15 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/964,478, filed Dec. 9, 2010, Final Office Action mailed Sep. 16, 2013, 12 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/964,478, filed Dec. 9, 2010, Non-Final Office Action mailed Mar. 26, 2013, 19 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/965,645, filed Dec. 10, 2010, Final Office Action, mailed Mar. 18, 2014, 24 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/965,645, filed Dec. 10, 2010, Non-Final Office Action, mailed Jul. 19, 2013, 20 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/965,645, filed Dec. 10, 2010, Notice of Allowance, mailed Jun. 20, 2014, 35 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,349, filed Dec. 7, 2010, Final Rejection mailed Oct. 24, 2012, 11 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/971,349, filed Dec. 7, 2010, Notice of Allowance mailed Oct. 2, 2013, 24 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/973,431, filed Dec. 20, 2010 Notice of Allowance mailed May 28, 2015, 20 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/973,431, filed Dec. 20, 2010, Final Office Action mailed Aug. 27, 2013, 11 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/973,431, filed Dec. 20, 2010, Non-Final Rejection mailed Dec. 19, 2014, 30 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/973,431, filed Dec. 20, 2010, Non-Final Rejection mailed May 15, 2013, 30 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/981,244, filed Dec. 29, 2010, Final Office Action mailed Oct. 30, 2013, 10 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/981,244, filed Dec. 29, 2010, Notice of Allowance mailed Mar. 25, 2014, 17 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/006,270, filed Jan. 13, 2011 Non-Final Office Action mailed Sep. 12, 2014, 41 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/006,270, filed Jan. 13, 2011, Final Office Action mailed Mar. 23, 2014, 51 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/006,270, filed Jan. 13, 2011, Final Office Action mailed May 9, 2014, 41 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/006,270, filed Jan. 13, 2011, Non-Final Office Action mailed Oct. 8, 2013, 20 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/007,317, filed Jan. 14, 2011, Office action mailed Dec. 19, 2012, 29 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/007,317, Notice of Allowance mailed May 13, 2013, 16 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/010,557, filed Jan. 20, 2011, Final Rejection mailed Jan. 16, 2014, 17 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/010,557, filed Jan. 20, 2011, Non-Final Rejection mailed Aug. 5, 2013, 17 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/014,591, Notice of Allowance mailed May 24, 2013, 32 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/016,483, filed Jan. 28, 2011 Final Office Action mailed Jun. 27, 2013, 13 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/016,483, filed Jan. 28, 2011 Final Office Action mailed May 13, 2015, 34 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/016,483, filed Jan. 28, 2011, Non-Final Office Action mailed Nov. 3, 2014, 33 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/028,030, filed Feb. 15, 2011, Final Office Action mailed Jul. 11, 2014, 43 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/028,030, filed Feb. 15, 2011, Final Office Action mailed Jul. 17, 2015, 63 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/028,030, filed Feb. 15, 2011, Non-Final Office Action mailed Dec. 17, 2013, 60 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/028,030, filed Feb. 15, 2011, Non-Final Office Action mailed Feb. 6, 2015, 56 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/028,030, filed Feb. 15,2011, Office Action mailed Jan. 11, 2013, 14 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/031,115, Notice of Allowance mailed Apr. 16, 2013, 24 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/034,482, filed Feb. 24, 2011 Notice of Allowance mailed Aug. 29, 2014, 45 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/034,482, filed Feb. 24, 2011, Final Office Action mailed Apr. 25, 2013, 19 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/035,525, filed Feb. 25, 2011, Final Office Action mailed Sep. 12, 2013, 21 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/035,525, filed Feb. 25, 2011, Non-Final Office Action mailed May 15, 2013, 15 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,302, filed Feb. 28, 2011 Final Office Action mailed May 4, 2015, 54 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,302, filed Feb. 28, 2011 Final Office Action mailed Oct. 16, 2013, 28 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,312, filed Feb. 28, 2011, Notice of Allowance mailed Jun. 13, 2013, 10 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,316, filed Feb. 28, 2011, Final Office Action mailed Aug. 28, 2013, 13 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/192,287, filed Jul. 27, 2011 Final Office Action mailed Jan. 28, 2014, 18 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/192,287, filed Jul. 27, 2011 Non Final Office Action mailed Jun. 13, 2013, 22 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/302,717, filed Nov. 22, 2011 Final Rejection mailed May 8, 2015, 44 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/302,717, filed Nov. 22, 2011, Non-Final Rejection mailed Dec. 18, 2014, 71 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/475,794, filed May 18, 2012 Final Office Action mailed Jun. 1, 2015, 45 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/475,794, filed May 18, 2012 Non-Final Office Action mailed Sep. 18, 2013, 19 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/475,794, filed May 18, 2012, Non-Final Office Action mailed Nov. 21, 2014, 33 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/673,480, filed Nov. 9, 2012 Final Office Action mailed Sep. 9, 2013, 10 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/673,480, filed Nov. 9, 2012 Notice of Allowance mailed Nov. 12, 2013, 16 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/864,474, filed Apr. 17, 2013 Non Final Office Action mailed Aug. 11, 2015, 59 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/968,611, filed Aug. 16, 2013, Non-Final Office Action mailed Jan. 17, 2014, 21 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/968,611, filed Aug. 16, 2013, Notice of Allowance mailed May 2, 2014, 40 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/179,336, filed Feb. 12, 2014 Notice of Allowance mailed Feb. 18, 2015, 15 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/179,336, filed Feb. 12, 2014, Final Office Action mailed Dec. 1, 2014, 30 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/179,336, filed Feb. 12, 2014, Non-Final Office Action mailed May 22, 2014, 14 pages.

matches:
Application No. 101106288
Application No. 100142966
Application No. 10014870
Application No. 100149344
Application No. 12707435
Application No. 12719817
Application No. 11852630
Application No. 12716728


3d wall art wall art decoration panel contemporary bedroom.
3d wall art wall art featured image of wolf wall art effect canvas wall art.
3d wall art metal wall art decor sculpture 3 piece tree brunch modern vintage abstract in home furniture home decor wall hangings.
3d wall art wall art fl art gallery.
3d wall art wall wallpaper wall art background photography artistic ocean sea spray hotel bedroom mural custom painting.
3d wall art smooth door styling animal stickers elephant wall art murals home living room.
3d wall art wall panels design.
3d wall art wall art oil painting by price for wholesale.
3d wall art wall art catalogue studios wall art about us wall art dinosaurs wall sculpture round wall art.
3d wall art foam hanging sculpture.
3d wall art flower wall art flowers wall art wall art ideas meaning of flowers.
3d wall art brings your walls to life with her modern and friendly wall panels made out of the fibrous residue of sugarcane.
3d wall art decorative wavy wall panels.
3d wall art wall art wall art panels.
3d wall art living room wall decor acrylic modern bedroom large unique.
3d wall art sea aquarium under water brick crumbled wall wall art sticker decal transfer.
3d wall art elephant wall decal cracked wall sticker mural by.
3d wall art wall art.
3d wall art blue wall art night light wallpaper simple shadow below lighting nightlight.
3d wall art abstract wall art.
3d wall art walls drawbridge wall stickers creeper decorative wall decal cartoon wallpaper kids party decoration wall art exclusive sale decal wall.
3d wall art beach wall decals inch removable sea wall art stickers home decor.
3d wall art iron man photo wallpaper custom wall murals amazing wallpaper with iron man wall art.
3d wall art tree wall decal living room green yellow acrylic best decorative.
3d wall art wall stickers adorable home.
3d wall art living room with wall art.
3d wall art view in gallery.


An applicant may make an admission, or submit evidence of sale of the invention or knowledge of the invention by others, or the examiner may have personal knowledge that the invention was sold by applicant or known by others.
Note that as an aid to resolving public use or on sale issues, as well as to other related matters of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) activity, an applicant may be required to answer specific questions posed by the examiner and to explain or supplement any evidence of record. See 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.104(a)(2). Information sought should be restricted to that which is reasonably necessary for the examiner to render a decision on patentability. The examiner may consider making a requirement for information under 37 CFR 1.105 where the evidence of record indicates reasonable necessity. See MPEP § 704.10 et seq.
A 2-month time period should be set by the examiner for any reply to the requirement, unless the requirement is part of an Office action having a shortened statutory period, in which case the period for reply to the Office action will also apply to the requirement. If applicant fails to reply in a timely fashion to a requirement for information, the application will be regarded as abandoned. 35 U.S.C. 133. See MPEP § 2133.03.
If there is not enough information on which to base a public use or on sale rejection, the examiner should make a requirement for more information. Form paragraph 7.104.aia. or 7.104.fti can be used.
Applicant is reminded that failure to fully reply to this requirement for information will result in a holding of abandonment.
1. This form paragraph must be preceded by form paragraph 7.105, and should be followed by form paragraphs 7.122 – 7.126 as appropriate.
2. This form paragraph should only be used in an application filed on or after March 16, 2013, where the claims are being examined under 35 U.S.C. 102 /103 as amended by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. This form paragraph must be preceded by form paragraph 7.03.aia.
3. Information sought should be restricted to that which is reasonably necessary for the examiner to render a decision on patentability. See MPEP § 2133.03.
4. A two month time period should be set by the examiner for reply to the requirement unless it is part of an Office action having a shortened statutory period (SSP), in which case the period for reply will apply also to the requirement.
5. If sufficient evidence already exists to establish a prima facie case of public use, sale, or other public availability use form paragraph 7.16.aia to make a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). See MPEP § 2133.03.
1. This form paragraph must be preceded by form paragraph 7.105, and should be followed by form paragraphs 7.122 –7.126 as appropriate.
2. Information sought should be restricted to that which is reasonably necessary for the examiner to render a decision on patentability. See MPEP § 2133.03.
3. A two month time period should be set by the examiner for reply to the requirement unless it is part of an Office action having an SSP, in which case the SSP will apply also to the requirement.
4. If sufficient evidence already exists to establish a prima facie case of public use or on sale, use form paragraph 7.16.fti to make a rejection under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b). See MPEP § 2133.03.


text:
Looking back over the past few years, we've seen a significant uptick in right of way projects and important case decisions. Following a relatively quiet 2009, we saw increased activity in 2010, with regulatory takings issues in particular (think Guggenheim) garnering significant attention. As we rolled into 2011, the momentum continued, with the status of redevelopment agencies across California dominating the headlines.
As we look to 2012, we expect another exciting year. As has become our custom, what follows is an eminent domain recap of 2011, along with our thoughts on what the Right-of-Way profession can expect in 2012.
Still fresh in our minds, 2011 ended with a bang (to put it mildly), as the California Supreme Court issued a landmark decision – California Redevelopment Association v. Matosantos, 2011 Cal. LEXIS 13325 – eliminating redevelopment agencies in California. The decision sets the stage for the dissolution of California's redevelopment agencies and the establishment of "successor agencies" with elaborate "oversight committees" to dispose of redevelopment assets, satisfy existing redevelopment obligations, and funnel all remaining redevelopment funds back into the property tax system.
The first part of 2012 will be focused on the aftermath of the decision and cleaning up the rubble. We will be paying close attention to whether legislation is adopted to reach a compromise – or at least to clean up some inconsistencies created by the new law. In the meantime, we will track just how successor agencies begin the process of disposing assets and managing liabilities.
While successful regulatory takings claims are few and far between, 2011 saw one such case in Avenida San Juan Partnership v. City of San Clemente, 201 Cal.App.4th 1256. The Court held that the City had engaged in spot zoning by treating the property's zoning differently than other similarly-situated properties for an improper purpose, and ultimately found a taking under the Penn Central factors despite the property's not suffering a complete elimination of an economically viable use. That the court found a taking under Penn Central is particularly significant, as the decision represents the first reported case in California imposing liability under Penn Central.
In Wardany v. City of San Jacinto, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57148, the agency placed a center median in the street, preventing left turns in and out of the owner's property. The owner claimed the business lost over half its sales as a result. Despite this impact, the Court concluded that there was no compensable taking because (1) the property retained an economically viable use and (2) the impairment did not qualify as substantial, as a matter of law, as the measure of "substantial" depends on the physical impairment, not the impact that impairment has on the property.
In Colony Cove Properties v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948, the owner of a mobile home park filed suit in federal court, alleging that the City's rent control ordinance deprived the owner of the value of its property while allowing park residents to sell their mobile homes at a premium (an argument similar to that put forth in Guggenheim). The owner asserted both a facial and an as applied challenge to the ordinance, claiming it violated the Fifth Amendment's Taking Clause. As is often the case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared the owner's facial claim time barred since it was asserted after the statute of limitations had run. By contrast, the court held the as-applied claim unripe since the owner failed to first file an inverse condemnation action in state court, which was a prerequisite to bringing the claim in federal court.
In Butte Equipment Rentals, Inc. v. California Air Resources Board, a property owner unsuccessfully challenged several regulations that it claimed resulted in a taking of its ability to mine its property. In an unpublished decision, the Court held that because the regulations impaired only one portion of the owner's rock quarrying business and the owner was still free to mine, quarry, and sell rock for many other unregulated purposes, the owner was still able to make an economically viable use of its property.
In Gurrola v. City of Los Angeles, the Court issued an unpublished decision declaring that a subsequent purchaser knowingly acquiring property potentially impacted by a government taking does not have standing to pursue an inverse condemnation claim since the price paid for the property reflected the known taking.
In Galardi Group Franchise & Leasing, LLC v. City of El Cajon, 196 Cal.App.4th 280, the Court held that despite a franchisor's involvement in a business, the franchisor still fails to qualify for recovery of goodwill unless it has an ownership interest in that business because recovery of goodwill is expressly limited to those "operating a business on the property." However, the Court also held that a franchisee's waiver of its rights to compensation can effect an assignment of those rights to the franchisor, including rights to goodwill losses (which, as a result, allows the franchisor to recover for the franchisee's – but not its own – loss of goodwill).
In Charter Communications Properties v. County of San Luis Obispo, 198 Cal.App.4th 1089, the Court held that when assessing the fair market value of a private utility's possessory interest in the public right-of-way, the County tax assessor can disregard the utility's agreed-upon remaining term of possession and instead assume a much longer anticipated term of possession to match reality. This may result in private utility companies experiencing much higher assessed values for their leasehold interests in public roads and highways.
In People ex rel. Department of Transportation v. 927 Indio Muerto, the Court issued an unpublished opinion in which the primary valuation dispute centered on an interpretation of the resolution of necessity. The Court held that the resolution could not be interpreted as broadly as the owner hoped, and therefore significantly reduced the owner's damages claim. The Court also held that it was appropriate for the judge – as opposed to the jury – to determine the scope of the resolution.
In People ex rel. Department of Transportation v. Bakker, the Court issued an unpublished opinion concluding that when condemned property is subject to a roadway easement, it ordinarily warrants an award of only nominal value. The court explained that absent a showing that the property possesses "something special" that creates a particular value, nominal value applies.
In reaching this conclusion, the Bakker court acknowledged that such property may well have measurable value in the market, particularly in areas where value is measured by gross acreage. Even so, the court affirmed a directed verdict which reduced the award for the portion of the property subject to the easement by more than 99 percent: "[i]f the fact that a parcel is usually sold based on gross acreage proved that the portion of the property subject to a roadway easement has special value, the rule [establishing nominal value for such property] would never apply."
In City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (Plotkin), 194 Cal.App.4th 210, a number of property owners sued the City for inverse condemnation, alleging that the City created "condemnation blight" by buying nearby properties in their neighborhoods, relocating the residents, demolishing the structures, and leaving the properties vacant. The court held that the City was not liable for inverse condemnation because the City's acquisitions were voluntary and unrelated to a public project.
In Joffe v. City of Huntington Park, 201 Cal.App.4th 492, the Court declared that in determining a property and business owner's entitlement to precondemnation damages, the appropriate analysis focuses on the agency's conduct, not the impacts suffered by the owner. Thus, despite the fact that the business was forced to close, meaning the property's owner lost its only tenant, the agency was not liable for precondemnation damages because it had neither acted unreasonably nor engaged in unreasonable conduct.
In Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. Alameda Produce Market, 2011 Cal. LEXIS 12171, the California Supreme Court held that one party's withdrawal of a condemnation deposit does not result in the waiver of any other party's right-to-take challenge, despite the general rule that withdrawal of a condemnation deposit effects such a waiver pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1255.260.
In DFP, LTD v. Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District, the agency recorded a final order of condemnation stating it had acquired an easement in the property when it had actually acquired fee title. The agency thereafter corrected the final order, but not before a new buyer had acquired the property. The Court issued an unpublished decision holding that the buyer, if determined to be a bona fide purchaser for value, is not bound by the "corrected" final order (i.e., as to the buyer, the agency's acquisition is limited to the easement interest stated in the final order that was recorded at the time of the sale).
In City of Gardena v. Rikuo Corporation, 192 Cal.App.4th 595, the parties reached a settlement through a stipulated judgment and left $750,000 on deposit to address ongoing environmental remediation, agreeing that the trial court would retain jurisdiction over the disbursement of the funds. When a dispute arose over the court's distribution of the funds, the property owner sought to appeal the court's post-judgment order. The Court dismissed the appeal, concluding that the order was not appealable because post-judgment orders are only appealable if they follow a judgment that is itself appealable. Since a stipulated judgment typically is not appealable, any post-judgment orders arising from such a judgment are similarly not appealable.
In Cobb v. City of Stockton, 192 Cal.App.4th 65, a condemnation action was dismissed after nine years of failing to make its way to trial. The property owner then filed an inverse condemnation action against the City. The owner's inverse action was initially dismissed on the grounds that it was time-barred (the City took the property over nine years ago, well outside the statute of limitations for an inverse condemnation claim). On Appeal, the Court reversed, holding that the inverse claim did not accrue until the City's occupation of the property became wrongful, which occurred when the eminent domain action was dismissed.
In (at least) the first part of 2012, most attention will continue to be focused on the redevelopment saga. Either through efforts to reincarnate some version of redevelopment, simple clean-up legislation and/or the winding down process, this is sure to be an area in the news. We expect at least some clean up legislation to address some procedural inconsistencies in the existing law, and it is likely that there will be efforts to restore at least the affordable housing component of the redevelopment law. Indeed, legislation (1) to stay the effect of the law while further compromise is explored and (2) to reinstate the affordable housing funding are already circulating in Sacramento. Any effort to restore redevelopment as a whole is both speculative, potentially subject to the Governor's veto even if it occurs, and potentially subject to attack under Proposition 1A even if it avoids a veto.
Finally, we expect to see an increasing split in the way the public perceives the use of eminent domain. As Kelo recedes in many people's minds, the general "eminent domain abuse" mentality also recedes from the mainstream public. And, with the economy continuing to falter and major infrastructure projects providing large numbers of jobs, we expect more public support for traditional uses of eminent domain for public works projects.
On the other hand, if agencies find ways to implement redevelopment-type strategies and/or otherwise engage in questionable uses of eminent domain, the Kelo torch-bearers will likely surface quickly, and in mass.
In other words, the public relations side of eminent domain will be huge in 2012. If agencies can convince the public that they are using eminent domain for "good," they will likely receive considerable support – especially where the project is viewed as something that will create jobs. If agencies are viewed as using eminent domain for "bad," public outcry will be swift, and agencies may find that they have trouble obtaining Board support for projects that will vilify the Board members approving them.
While we've tried to highlight the important case decisions from 2011, it's impossible to cover everything. Our blog, California Eminent Domain Report, had over 100 posts in 2011, as we try to keep our followers up to date on everything right-of-way related, such as announcements of major projects, eminent domain news stories, trial court decisions, legislative updates, and industry events across California. We expect 2012 to bring much of the same, and we hope you'll subscribe to the blog (if you haven't already) to make sure you're on top of important topics as soon as the news breaks.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


text:
The Supreme Court’s Aereo decision last year raised two significant questions for the tech industry. First, would lower courts apply the Supreme Court’s public performance holding narrowly only to services that looked like Aereo (which in turn looked to the Court like the community antenna services of the 1970s), as the Court directed, or would they apply it more broadly to other types of online services? Second, would lower courts interpret the Court’s reluctance to use the word “volition” as an indication that direct infringement liability did not require volitional conduct?
The summary judgment order in Fox v. Dish Network released earlier this week by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California emphatically answered both of those questions in a manner favorable to the tech industry. (For detailed summaries of the decision, see here and here.) The district court rejected Fox’s suggestion that Aereo was “a game-changer that governs the outcome of its copyright claims….” The district court observed that “in an effort to cabin the potential over-reach of its decision,” the Aereo Court “specifically cautioned that its ‘limited holding’ should not be construed to ‘discourage or to control the emergence or use of different kinds of technology.” The district court carefully proceeded to distinguish the Dish Anywhere with Sling service from Aereo. (The Dish Anywhere service allows a subscriber to view a program recorded on his set-top box on another device.) In particular, the district court noted that Dish had a license to transmit programs to the subscriber’s set-top box, while Aereo did not have a license to transmit programs to the user’s computer.
The district court further ruled that the subscriber, not Dish, was the volitional actor with respect to any subsequent transmission from the subscriber’s set-top box to his other devices. The district court acknowledged that the Supreme Court did not expressly address the volitional conduct requirement for direct liability. However, the district court found that “the volitional conduct doctrine is a significant and long-standing rule, adopted by all Courts of Appeal to have considered it, and it would be folly to presume that Aereo categorically jettisoned it by implication.” Because the subscriber was the volitional actor for any transmission from a set-top box, and the transmission only went to the subscriber’s own devices, there was no public performance and thus no infringement.
The district court likewise found that the subscriber was the volitional actor with respect to the PrimeTime Anytime (PTAT) feature, which allowed the subscriber to record blocks of primetime programming. In the appeal of the district court’s rejection of Fox’s motion for preliminary injunction, the Ninth Circuit had already ruled that Dish was not the volitional actor because the service “creates the copy only in response to the user’s command.” Fox contended that Aereo had “altered the test for direct infringement,” but the district court stated that “Aereo did not fundamentally alter the volitional conduct requirement for direct infringement.” The court added that “a system that operates automatically at a user’s command to make a recording does not in itself render the system’s provide a volitional actor for purposes of direct copyright infringement.” The court proceeded to discuss how PTAT was similar to a traditional DVR.
It should be noted that the district court here was not the first-post Aereo court to apply Aereo narrowly and to recognize the continue viability of the volitional conduct doctrine. In September 2014 in the ongoing MP3Tunes litigation, the district court rejected the argument that under Aereo, MP3Tunes had infringed the public performance right when it allowed infringing copies of album covers to be viewed by users. The court stated that Aereo was limited to situations similar to cable television, and had no relevance to a case involving different technology. The MP3Tunes court also considered who was the volitional actor with respect to several of the activities at issue.
Similarly, in November 2014, the district court in Perfect 10 v. Giganet ruled that Usenet provider Giganet was not the volitional actor with respect to the automatic distribution of infringement content uploaded by users.
The district court also found that subscribers’ use of the Hopper Transfers is fair use. Hopper Transfers allows subscribers to space-shift their recordings to other devices. The court saw this as a “paradigmatic fair use.” Here, too, any possible harm to Fox was completely speculative.
More problematic was the court’s rejection of Dish’s fair use defense with respect to the Quality Assurance (QA) copies. In order to ensure the proper operation of the AutoHop feature, which allows subscribers to skip over blocks of commercials, technicians would copy programs and review them to ensure that the commercials were properly marked. When Fox requested a preliminary injunction in 2012, the court found that Fox was likely to succeed on the claim that the QA copies infringed because the court found Dish’s fair use argument for making those copies unconvincing. However, the court determined that the QA copies would not irreparably harm Fox, and it refused to issue a preliminary injunction. After this ruling, Dish stopped making the QA copies. Fox nonetheless pursued the claim for the purpose of recovering damages.
The district court erred by not looking to other, more recent precedents than Sega. In Kelly v. Arriba Soft and Perfect 10 v. Amazon.com, the Ninth Circuit treated the use of a work for a different purpose from the original to be a fair use, even if the user did not create a new work. The Second Circuit in Authors Guild v. HathiTrust and the Fourth Circuit in A.G. v. iParadigm reached the same conclusion. Indeed, as discussed yesterday, a different judge in the same district (the Central District of California) just ruled in Rosen v. eBay that using a copy of a photograph for information rather than artistic purposes was a fair use. It could be that the district court’s analysis of this issue was so superficial because Dish discontinued the making of QA copies in 2012.
With the exception of the QA fair use ruling, the district court’s decision is a solid win for the tech industry.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


text:
Singh V, Agrawal S. Visual functions in amblyopia as determinants of response to treatment. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2013; 1;50(6):348-54.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Agrawal S. Duane Syndrome or Congenital 6th Nerve Palsy? Oman J Ophthalmol,2011;4(2) 92-94.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Gupta SK, Agrawal S. Comparison between Limbal (von Noorden) and Para Limbal (Santiago) Conjunctival Incisions for Adjustable Recessions of Horizontal Recti. Nepal J Ophthalmol 2013;5(10); 220-25.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Bhasker SK, Sharma B. Correlation of visual functions with macular thickness in POAG. Oman J Ophthalmol, 2013;6:96-8.
Agrawal S, Singh V. Corrrection of Exotropia by Implantable Collamer Lens (ICL). Indian J Ophthalmol.2013;61:685.
Agrawal S, Gupta SK, Singh V, Agrawal S. A Novel Technique to Recanalise the Nasolacrimal Duct with Endodiathermy Bipolar Probe. Indian J Ophthalmol 2013;61:718-21.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Gupta SK, Agrawal S. Evaluating a new surgical dosage calculation method for esotropia. Oman J Ophthalmol, 2013;6:165-9.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Singhal V. Cross sectional study of macular thickness variations in unilateral amblyopia. J Clin Ophthalmol Res. 2014;2:15-7.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Singh P. Adjustable recessions in horizontal comitant strabismus- A pilot study. Indian J Ophthalmol, 2015; 63(7):611-13.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Yadav A, Katiyar V. Orthoptic relevance of refractive correction in the phakic plane in unilateral high refractive errors in adults. Indian J Ophthalmol, Under issue preparation.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Misra N, Gupta SK, Srivatava RM . Transcleral fixation of closed loop haptic acrylic posterior chamber intraocular lens in aphakic non vitrectomised eyes. Indian J Ophthalmol, Under issue preparation.
Katiyar V, Sinha S, Gupta SK, Agrawal S, Kishore P, Singh V. Macular spectral domain optical coherence tomography data in Indian subjects with cataract. Egyptian Retina J. 2015; 2(3)102-7.
Agrawal S, Singh V. Cut and paste: A novel method of re-attaching rectus muscles with cyanoacrylate during recessions in strabismus. Indian J Ophthalmol,2011, 59(5), 408-9.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Sharma AK. Comment on outcomes in patients with esotropic duane retraction syndrome and a partially accommodative component.Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014;62(8):895.
Agrawal S, Gupta SK, Singh V, Agrawal S. Nasolacrimal duct recanalization with endodiathermy bipolar probe - Response from authors. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014;62(9):971-2.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Gupta SK, Vinod Kumar BM. Vitreous haemorrhage following inadvertent intraocular injection of botulinum toxin .Oman J Ophthalmol.2015;8:79-80.
2. Sharma Y, Saxena S, Saxena A, Mishra A, Natu SM. Interrelationship of elevated serum Advanced Glycation End-product levels and malnutrition (Subjective Global Assessment) scores with the severity of retinopathy in type II diabetes Clinical Nutrition ESPEN 2015;10, e42-e48. Europe.
4.Meyer CH, Kaymak H, Liu Z, Saxena S, Rodrigues EB. Geometry, penetration force, and cutting profile of different 23-gauge trocar systems for pars plana vitrectomy Retina. 2014 Jul 18. [Epub ahead of print] U.S.A.
7.Jain A, Saxena S, Khanna VK, Shukla R, and Meyer CH. Status of serum VEGF and ICAM-1 and its association with external limiting membrane and IS-OS junction disruption in type 2 diabetes mellitus/ Molecular Vision 2013 2013;19:1760-68.U.S.A.
8. Saxena S, Meyer CH; International Chromovitrectomy Collaboration. A trichrome RGB endoillumination prototype system: a novel application for chromovitrectomy. Ophthalmologica. 2013;230Suppl 2:73-6. Doi: 10.1159/000354168. Epub 2013 Sep 6. Switzerland.
9. Bhasker SK, Saxena S, Singh K. Post-trabeculectomy topical bevacizumab preventing bleb failure: a preliminary study. J Ocul Biol Dis Infor. 2013 Jun 27;5(3-4):89-95. doi: 10.1007/s12177-013-9108-3. eCollection 2012 Dec. U.S.A.
10.Tiwari A, Saxena S, Pant AB, Srivastava P. Protein ligand interaction studies of retinol binding protein 3 with herbal molecules using AutoDock for the management of Eales disease. Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases, And Informatics 2012; DOI: 10.1007/s12177-012-9098-6. U.S.A.
11.Saxena S, Khanna VK, Pant AB, Meyer CH, Singh VK. Elevated tumor necrosis factor in serum is associated with increased retinal ischemia in proliferative Eales' disease. Pathobiology 2011;76:261-265. Switzerland.
12.Saxena S, Srivastava P, Khanna VK. Elevated lipid peroxides induced angiogenesis in proliferative diabetic retinopathy. J Ocular Biology, Diseases, Informatics 2010; 3:85-87. U.S.A.
13.Tiwari A, TrivediAC, Srivastava P, Pant AB, Saxena S. Comparative modeling of retinol-binding protein-3 and retinal S-antigen in Eales disease and prediction of their binding sites using computational methods J Ocular Biology, Diseases, Informatics 2010; 3:88-91. U.S.A.
14. SaxenaS, Pant AB, Khanna VK, Singh K, Shukla R, Meyer CH, Soingh VK. Tumor necrosis factor-α-mediated severity of idiopathic retinal periphlebitis in young adults (Eales disease): implication for anti-TNF-α therapy. J Ocular Biology, Diseases, Informatics 2010; 3:35-38. U.S.A.
15 Saxena S, Khattri M, Vishvkarma K, Kishore P. Multiple subconjunctivalbevacizumab for advanced vascularized primary pterygium. Annals of Ophthalmology 2010; 42:28-30. U.S.A.
fluidity in idiopathic retinal periphlebitis (Eales Disease). J Ocular Pharmacology Therapeutics. 2010;26:623-626. U.S.A.
17. Misra S, Saxena S, Kishore P, Bhasker SK. Misra A, Meyer CH. Association of contrast sensitivity with LogMAR visual acuity and glycosylated hemoglobin in NIDDM. J Ocular Biology, Diseases, Informatics. 2010;3:60-63. U.S.A.
18. Saxena S, Pant AB, Khanna VK,AgrawalAK,Singh K, Kumar D, Singh VK. Interleukin-1 and tumor necrosis factor- alpha: novel targets for immunotherapy in Eales disease. Ocular Immunology Inflammation 2009;17:201-206. U.S.A.
19. Saxena S. Combined oral corticosteroid-methotrexate therapy in Eales disease. Annals of Ophthalmology 2009;41:91-97. U.S.A.
20. Saxena S, Kishore P, Pandey S, KhattriM. Topical bevacizumab for corneal vascularization after penetrating keratoplasty. European J Ophthalmology 2009;19:870-872. Italy.
1. Saxena S, CH Meyer CH. Peripapillary astrocytic hamartomas evolve from the optic nerve BMJ Case Reports 2015, bcr2014207275. U.K.
2. Chod RB, Goodrich C, Saxena S, Akduman L. Lamellar macular hole after intravitreal ocriplasmin injection BMJ Case Reports 2015, bcr2014207810. U.K.
3. SaxenaS,Manisha, Meyer CH, Akduman L. Three-dimensional spectral domain optical coherence tomography in vitreomacular traction. BMJ Case Rep 2014 Jun doi:10.1136/bcr-2013-202065. U.K.
4.Saxena S, Mishra N, Meyer CH.
Three-dimensional spectral domain optical coherence tomography in chronic exposure to welding arc. BMJ Case Rep. 2014 May 15;2014. pii: bcr2013202220. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2013-202220. U.K.
5.Saxena S, Mishra N, Meyer CH, Akduman L. Ischaemia-reperfusion injury in central retinal artery occlusion. BMJ Case Rep. 2013 Oct 21;2013. Pii: bcr2013201415. Doi: 10.1136/bcr-2013-201415. U.K.
6.Desai A, Saxena S, Akduman L. Acute central retinal vein occlusion following episode of myopericarditis. BMJ Case Rep. 2013 Aug 1;2013. pii: bcr2013200583. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2013-200583. U.K.
7.Saxena S, Manisha, Meyer CH. Three-dimensional spectral domain optical coherence tomography in X-linked fovealretinoschisis. BMJ Case Reports 2013; doi:10.1136/bcr-2012-007661. U.K.
8.Saxena S, Misra N. Three-dimensional spectral domain optical coherence tomography in retinal pigment epithelium tear. Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases and Informatics. 2012;5(3-4):70-74. U.S.A.
9.Saxena S, Singhal V, Akduman L. Three-dimensional spectral domain optical coherence tomography imaging of the retina in choroidal tuberculoma. BMJ Case Reports. 2013 Jan 31;2013. doi:pii: bcr2012008156. 10.1136/bcr-2012-008156. U.K.
10.Malhotra HS, Garg RK, Gupta A, Saxena S, Majumdar A, Jain A. An unusual cause of visual impairment in tubercular meningitis. J Neurol Sci 2012;318:174-177. U.S.A.
11.Saxena S,Misra N, Meyer CH. Three dimensional spectral domain optical coherence tomography in Stargardt disease and fundus flavimaculatus. Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases and Informatics.2012;5:13-18. U.S.A.
12.Saxena S, Jain A, Akduman L. Three dimensional optical coherence tomography in choroidal metastasis in breast and lung carcinoma. Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases and Informatics. DOI:10.1007/x12177-012-9092-x. U.S.A.
13. Saxena S, Jain A. Alterations in in vivo histology of retina in bilateral chronic central serous chorioretinopathy after intravitrealbevacizumab Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases, And Informatics 2011 DOI: 10.1007/s12177-012-9077-y. U.S.A.
14. Saxena S, Sinha N, Sharma S. Three-dimensional imaging by spectral domain optical coherence tomography in central serous chorioretinopathy with fibrin. Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases and Informatics 2011 DOI: 10.1007/s12177-012-9087-9. U.S.A.
15. Saxena S, Jain A, Akduman L. Vitreopapillary and vitreomacular traction in proliferative Eales disease. BMJ Case Reports 2012; doi:10.1136/bcr-2012-007231. U.K.
16.Saxena S, Rastogi RAK, Vishvakarma K, Hansraj S, Meyer CH. Spectral-domain optical coherence tomography in healed ocular toxoplasmosis. J Ocular Biology, Diseases, Informatics 2010; 3:109-111. U.S.A.
17.Saxena S, Sharma B, Bhasker SK. Three-dimensional spectral-domain optical coherence tomography of melanocytoma of the optic nerve head. Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases, And Informatics 2011; DOI: 10.1007/s12177-011-9063-9. U.S.A.
18.Saxena S, Jain A. Three-dimensional optical coherence tomography of the optic nerve head with myelinated nerve fibers. Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases, And Informatics 2011; DOI: 10.1007/s12177-012-9082-1. U.S.A.
19. Saxena S, Jain A. Alterations in in vivo histology of retina in bilateral chronic central serous chorioretinopathy after intravitrealbevacizumab Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases, And Informatics 2011 DOI: 10.1007/s12177-012-9077-y. U.S.A.
20. Saxena S, Sinha N, Sharma S. Three-dimensional imaging by spectral domain optical coherence tomography in central serous chorioretinopathy with fibrin. Journal Of Ocular Biology, Diseases and Informatics 2011 DOI: 10.1007/s12177-012-9087-9. U.S.A.
21.Saxena S, Jain A, Akduman L. Vitreopapillary and vitreomacular traction in proliferative Eales disease. BMJ Case Reports 2012; doi:10.1136/bcr-2012-007231. U.K.
22.Saxena S, Rastogi RAK, Vishvakarma K, Hansraj S, Meyer CH. Spectral-domain optical coherence tomography in healed ocular toxoplasmosis. J Ocular Biology, Diseases, Informatics 2010; 3:109-111. U.S.A.
1.Srivastav K, Saxena S, Ruia S, Mahdi AA, Khanna VK. Retinal Nerve Fibre Layer Thinning is Independent of Deranged Serum Lipoprotein Levels in Diabetic Retinopathy Open Science Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2015;3:112-116. USA.
2. Saxena S, K Srivastav K, Ruia S, Kumar VBM, Mishra N. Cube average thickness provides a global perspective of diabetic macular edema Indian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 2015;1 , 29-34.
Retinopathy Int J Ophthalmol Clin Res 2015;2:007. USA.
Band Disruption in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Preliminary Study. Open Science Journal of Clinical Medicine 2015;3:37-41. USA.
7. Chetan CR, Saxena S, Srivastav K, Kishore P, Bhasker SK. Metabolic syndrome is associated with increased severity of diabetic retinopathy J Metabolic Synd 2014 3(145); 2167-0943. 1000145. U.S.A.
9. Jaiswal R, Saxena S, Natu SM, Goel MM. Serum adiponectin levels in diabetic retinopathy. Medical Science 2013; 6:51-56. U.S.A.
10.Saxena S,Tiwari A, Srivastava P. Homology modeling of turmerin and its molecular interaction with human erythropoietin. World J Retina Vitreous 2012;2:1-4.
11. Diwan S, Kishore P, Kumar D,Saxena S. Combined SICS and trabeculectomy. Asian J Ophthalmology 2010. Singapore.
Small incision cataract surgery combined with trabeculectomy: Comparision of two techniques - ShilpiDiwan, Poonam Kishore, Dipak Kumar, Sandeep Saxena. Asian Journal of Ophthalmology-2010, 12, 1.
Association of contrast sensitivity with logMAR visual acuity & glycosylated Hb in non-insulin dependant diabetes mellitus- Shaili Mishra, Sandeep Saxena, Poonam Kishore, Shashi Bhasker, Arvind Mishra, Carsten H. Meyer Journal of ocular biology, disease & informatics 2010; 3:60-63.
Correlation of refractive error with axial length and corneal topography Asian Journal of Ophthalmology 14-09-041 Poonam Kishore, Vineeta Singh, Nitin Chaudhary, Surabhi Ruia.
'Macular Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography Data in Indian subjects with cataract.'Egyptian Retina Journal.erj_25_1. Vishal Katiyar, Shivani Sinha, Sanjiv Gupta, Siddharth Agarwal, Poonam Kishore, Vinita Singh.
Gupta S K. Choroidal osteoma in young male, a rarity. J. of PG Medical education training & research. Vol. III, No. 1-2, Jan-April 2008; 48-50.
Gupta SK, Kumar A, Agarwal S. Cataract surgery under topical anesthesia using 2% lignocaine jelly and intracameral lignocaine: Is manual small incision cataract surgery comparable to clear corneal Phacoemulsification? Indian J Ophthalmol 2010;58:537-40.
Gupta SK, Kumar A, Agarwal S. Cataract surgery under topical anesthesia: Gender-based study of pain experience. Oman J Ophthalmol 2010;3:140-4.
Gupta SK, Kumar A, Agarwal S, Pandey P. Transcanalicular laser Dacryocystorhinostomy using low energy 810 nm diode laser. Oman J Ophthalmol 2012;5:171-4.
Gupta SK, Kumar A, Agarwal S, Agarwal S. Phacoemulsification without preoperative topical mydriatics: Induction and sustainability of mydriasis with intracameralmydriatic solution. Indian J Ophthalmol 2014;62:333-6.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Gupta SK, Agrawal S. Comparison between limbal (von Noorden) and para limbal. (Santiago) conjunctival incisions for adjustable recessions of horizontal recti.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Gupta SK, Agrawal S. Evaluating a new surgical dosage calculation method for esotropia. Oman J Ophthalmol. 2013 Sep;6(3):165-9.
Agrawal S, Gupta SK, Singh V, Agrawal S. A novel technique to recanalize the nasolacrimal duct with endodiathermy bipolar probe. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2013 Nov 11.
Gupta S K, Agarwal S, Goyal S, Kumar A. Query to the author of 'comparison of different techniques of cataract surgery in bacterial contamination of the anterior chamber in diabetic and non-diabetic population'. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2013 Jan-Feb;61(1):39-40.
Goyal S, Gupta SK, Singh V, Singh Re: Sutureless 23-gauge versus 20-gauge vitrectomy with silicone oil injection in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Retina. 2012 Oct;32(9):1997; author reply 1997-8.
Aggarwal H, Singh RD, Kumar P, Gupta SK, Alvi HA. Prosthetic guidelines for ocular rehabilitation in patients with phthisis bulbi: a treatment-based classification system. J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Jun;111(6):525-8.
Vishal Katiyar, KumariMugdha, SonalBangwal, Sanjiv Kumar Gupta. Normative macular cirrus spectral domain optical coherence tomography data in Indian paediatricpopulation.Egyptian Retina Journal. Sep-Dec 2013;Vol 1 Issue 3: 50-55.
Agrawal S, Gupta S K, Singh V, Agrawal S. Nasolacrimal duct recanalization with endodiathermy bipolar probe: Response from authors. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014 Sep;62:971-2.
AgrawalSiddharth, Singh Vinita, Gupta Sanjiv Kumar, Vinod Kumar B M.Vitreoushaemorrhage following inadvertent intra-ocular injection of botulinum toxin. Year : 2015 | Volume: 8 | Issue Number: 1 | Page: 79-80.
Agrawal S, Gupta SK, Singh V, Agrawal S. Nasolacrimal duct recanalization with endodiathermy bipolar probe: Response from authors . Indian J Ophthalmol 2014;62:971-2.
Sanjiv Kumar Gupta, Ajai Kumar. Temporary complete vision loss after intracameral lignocaine in a post-vitrectomy eye: A single case report. Accepted in Egyptian journal of Ophthalmology, publication pending.
Sanjiv Kumar Gupta, Dr. Ajai Kumar, Dr. Arun Sharma, Dr. Siddharth Agrawal, Dr. Vishal Katiyar. "Android Smartphone as an Alternative to Operating Microscope Camera for Recording High Definition Surgical Videos: Setup and Results." journal of mobile technology in medicine 4.3 (2015): 39-42.
Katiyar V, Sinha S, Gupta SK, Agrawal S, Kishore P, Singh V. Macular spectral domain optical coherence tomography data in Indian subjects with cataract. Egypt Retina J 2014;2:102-7.
Katiyar V, Yadav A, Gupta SK. Endogenous endophthalmitis after prolong use of methotrexates Egypt Retina J 2014 Ahead Of Publication.
Katiyar V, Bangwal S, Mugdha K, Gupta SK, Kishore P, Singh V. Ocular Trauma In Indian Pediatric Polpulation. JCOR Ahead Of Publication.
Gupta SK, Kumar A, Sharma A, Katiyar V, Agrawal S. Query to the author of retinoblastoma: Achieving new standards with methods of chemotherapy. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2015 Jul;63(7):625. doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.167111. PubMed PMID: 26458487.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Gupta SK, Misra N, Srivastava RM. Transscleral fixation of closed loop haptic acrylic posterior chamber intraocular lens in aphakic non-vitrectomized eyes. Indian J Ophthalmol 2015;63:649-53.
Agrawal S, Singh V, Misra N, Gupta SK, Srivatava RM. Transcleral fixation of closed loop haptic acrylic posterior chamber intraocular lens in aphakic non vitrectomised eyes. Indian J Ophthalmol, Under issue preparation.
Gupta SK, Gupta AK, Agrawal S. Phacoemulsification without preoperative topical mydriatics: Induction and sustainability of mydriasis with intracameral mydriatic solution. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014;62:333-6.
Katiyar V, Sinha S, Gupta SK, Agrawal S, Kishore P, Singh V. MacularspectraldomainopticalcoherencetomographydatainIndiansubjectswithcataract. Egyptian Retina J. 2015; 2(3)102-7.
Gupta SK , Kumar A, Katiyar V, Agrawal S. Trabeculectomy under augmented topical anaesthesia: Study on pain evaluation and surgical feasibility. Asia-Pacific J Ophthalmol, Under issue preparation.
Gupta SK , Kumar A, Agrawal S. Query to the author of 'Retinoblastoma : Achieving new standards with methods of chemotherapy. Indian J Ophthalmol, Under issue preparation.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V.