Abstract:
Systems and methods for determining if media files being submitted to a hosting site contain media to which another has rights and informing a submitter of the potential media rights conflict without first divulging such information to a potential third party rights holder. Upon submission, if the media contains material to which another has rights, the submitter will be informed which portion of the submitted media file is infringing and given the opportunity to submit a modified media file. This approach maintains the confidential nature of the submitted media while enforcing the rights of third parties. The system also automatically notifies the appropriate parties in the event that the submitter does not resolve a conflict with media files to which another has rights and includes the ability to automatically remove the offending submitted media content. A method for detecting a possible media rights conflict is also presented.

Description:
BACKGROUND 
       [0001]    1. Field of the Invention 
         [0002]    The present invention relates to detecting possibly conflicting media rights. 
         [0003]    2. Related Art 
         [0004]    The popularity of sharing, distributing, and posting electronic media on the Internet has increased dramatically in recent years. 
         [0005]    In July 2006 a popular media distribution website revealed that more than 100 million videos were being watched every day with 2.5 billion videos being watched during the month of June 2006. The website estimated that over 50,000 videos were being added per day in 2006 and that over 6.1 million videos and 50,000 user accounts were active in 2006. Furthermore, the website noted that the number of posted videos increased to over 60 million in less than twelve months during 2007. 
         [0006]    Sometimes, a submitter posts media content that includes confidential information. Moreover, such confidential media may also include content for which the submitter does not have rights. For example, a confidential video of the submitter may have a copyrighted song as the audio background. Because the media includes confidential information, it may be problematic to inform a potential third party rights holder of the existence of confidential material posted by the submitter. 
         [0007]    What are needed, therefore, are systems and/or methods to alleviate the aforementioned deficiencies. 
       BRIEF SUMMARY 
       [0008]    Consistent with the principles of the present invention as embodied and broadly described herein, the present invention includes a media analysis system, a media fingerprint generation system, and a notification system. The media analysis system accepts a media file from a submitter. From this media file, the fingerprint generation system generates a fingerprint which is an electronic representation of the contents of the media file. The fingerprint matching system then analyzes the fingerprint generated by the media fingerprint generation system against fingerprint generated from existing material known to have intellectual property rights to determine if there is a match and therefore a potential media rights conflict. 
         [0009]    The notification system informs the submitter of the results of the analysis before the submitted media file is allowed to be posted to an interne web hosting system. If the analysis reveals no potential matches then the submitter will be allowed to post the media file. However, if the analysis does reveal a potential match, the submitter will have the ability to modify the submitted media file to remove the possibly offending material. 
         [0010]    In another embodiment, if the submitter is notified that the submitted media file contains possibly infringing material and the submitter fails to either remove the submitted media file or to modify the submitted media file to remove the possibly infringing material, the media analysis system automatically removes the submitted media file from a media database. 
         [0011]    In another embodiment, if the submitter is notified that the submitted media file contains possibly infringing material and the submitter fails to either remove the submitted media file or to modify the submitted media file to remove the possibly infringing material, the notification system automatically notifies the third party rights holder and/or a service provider of the existence of a possibly infringing media file. 
         [0012]    In another embodiment, a method for detecting a possible media rights conflict involves generating a fingerprint from a media file submitted by a submitter. The method analyzes the fingerprint against fingerprints of existing media files for the existence of matches indicating possible conflicts and notifies the submitter of the results of the analysis. The notification would indicate to the submitter areas of the media file which contain the matches. 
         [0013]    The method would also accept a submission of a modified media file for further fingerprint analysis to allow the submitter the ability to submit a media file without matching material. However, the method would also permit the automatic removal of the submitted media file where the submitter has not withdrawn the submitted media file within a specified timeframe after notification of a match. In an alternate embodiment, the method includes notification to the submitter of the removal of the submitted media file, notifying a service provider of the removal of the submitted media file, and notifying a third party rights holder of the removal of the submitted media file. 
         [0014]    In another embodiment, a system for detecting a possible media rights conflict involves a processor, and a memory in communication with the processor for storing a plurality of processing instructions for directing the processor to generate a fingerprint from a media file submitted by a submitter. The system would then analyze the fingerprint against fingerprints of existing media files for the existence of matches indicating a possible media rights conflict and notify the submitter of the results of the analysis. The system would have the ability to indicate to the submitter areas of the media file which contain the matches. The method would also accept submission of a modified media file for further fingerprint analysis in order to remove the matches. The system could also remove the submitted media file where the submitter has not withdrawn the submitted media file within a specified timeframe after notification of a possible media rights conflict and then notify the submitter of the removal of the submitted media file, notify a service provider of the removal of the submitted media file, and notify a third party rights holder of the removal of the submitted media file. 
         [0015]    In this way, a submitter of a media file can insure that the media content sought to be uploaded to a media provider does not violate the rights of a third party rights holder whose media fingerprints are contained in the fingerprint database. This approach encourages a submitter to upload media files while protecting the rights of both the submitter and of currently known third party rights holders within the database. 
         [0016]    Further embodiments, features, and advantages of the invention, as well as the structure and operation of the various embodiments of the invention are described in detail below with reference to accompanying drawings. 
     
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES 
         [0017]    The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute part of the specification, illustrate embodiments of the invention and, together with the general description given above and the detailed description of the embodiment given below, serve to explain the principles of the present invention. In the drawings: 
           [0018]      FIG. 1  is a system diagram depicting an implementation of a system for enforcing copyrights within media files, according to an embodiment of the invention. 
           [0019]      FIG. 2  is a flowchart depicting an implementation a system for enforcing copyrights within media files, according to an embodiment of the invention. 
           [0020]      FIG. 3  is a flowchart depicting a method for enforcing copyrights within media files, according to an embodiment of the invention. 
       
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
       [0021]    The present invention relates to the detection and notification of possible media rights conflicts involving media files being sought to be uploaded to a media provider. In embodiments of this invention, the submitted media file is analyzed for possible media rights conflicts and the submitter is given the opportunity to remove any possibly infringing portion of the media file prior to posting the media file to the media provider or informing a third party rights holder of any possible media rights conflict. 
         [0022]    While specific configurations, arrangements, and steps are discussed, it should be understood that this is done for illustrative purposes only. A person skilled in the pertinent art(s) will recognize that other configurations, arrangements, and steps may be used without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. It will be apparent to a person skilled in the pertinent art(s) that this invention may also be employed in a variety of other applications. 
         [0023]    It is noted that references in the specification to “one embodiment”, “an embodiment”, “an example embodiment”, etc., indicate that the embodiment described may include a particular feature, structure, or characteristic, but every embodiment may not necessarily include the particular feature, structure, or characteristic. Moreover, such phrases are not necessarily referring to the same embodiment. Further, when a particular feature, structure, or characteristic is described in connection with an embodiment, it would be within the knowledge of one skilled in the art to incorporate such a feature, structure, or characteristic in connection with other embodiments whether or not explicitly described. 
         [0024]    While the present invention is described herein with reference to illustrative embodiments for particular applications, it should be understood that the invention is not limited thereto. Those skilled in the art with access to the teachings provided herein will recognize additional modifications, applications, and embodiments within the scope thereof and additional fields in which the invention would be of significant utility. 
         [0025]      FIG. 1  is an illustration of a system  100 , according to an embodiment of the invention. Such a system allows for the detection and notification that a submitted media file uploaded to a media provider by a submitter may have material infringing the rights of others. System  100  contains a media analysis system  104 , a fingerprint generation system  105 , a conflict detecting system  106 , and a notification system  114 . The process is initiated when a submitter  102  decides to post some type of media file  103  via a network to a media provider  108  which typically hosts content for distribution and access by registered or unregistered users. However, a submitted media file may contain material to which another has rights and that has intentionally or unintentionally been included within the submitted media file. In order to protect the rights of this other rights holder, a profile of the submitted media file  103  is generated and analyzed by a media analysis system  104 . In one embodiment, the conflict detecting system  106  is a media fingerprint generation system. This analysis is accomplished by having a media fingerprint generation system produce a digital profile or “fingerprint” of the submitted media file. The fingerprint is a digital representation of the submitted media file, or portion thereof, according to an embodiment of the invention. Generally, the fingerprint can be some function of the submitted media file, such that any two different media files are statistically unlikely to have identical fingerprints. The technology to produce a fingerprint from a media file is commercially available, e.g. from Guba Inc., of San Francisco, with a system designated as “Johnny,” and from Philips Content Identification of Eindhoven, Netherlands, and well known to persons of ordinary skill in the relevant art. 
         [0026]    Once a fingerprint is generated by the fingerprint generation system  105  from a submitted media file, the conflict detecting system  106  will compare the resultant fingerprint with fingerprints of known copyrighted material. The known fingerprints may be stored within the fingerprint database  110 . A database, as referred to herein, can be a table, list, or any other collection or organization of information known to one of ordinary skill in the art, whether represented, for example, as a flat file or a set of relational tables, lists, or records. In one embodiment, a fingerprint may be created for various parts of the submitted media. For example, the soundtrack, or portion thereof, might be fingerprinted separately, the video might be fingerprinted separately, etc. 
         [0027]    The conflict detecting system  106  compares the fingerprint associated with the submitted media file  103  with fingerprints that are contained within the fingerprint database  110 . 
         [0028]    If the conflict detecting system  106  does not find any match then the submitted media file may be accepted for storage within the media database  112  and subsequently allowed to post via a media provider  108 . In this case the media analysis system  104 , via the notification system  114 , may inform the submitter of the results of the analysis in that the fingerprint of the submitted media file does not match any known fingerprints contained within the fingerprint database  110 . Alternately, no such notification may be issued in an alternative embodiment. 
         [0029]    However, if the conflict detecting system  106  determines that there is a match between the fingerprint of the submitted media file and one or more fingerprints of existing media files in the fingerprint database  110 , then the notification system  114  will notify the submitter of the results of the analysis. A possible rights holder is not generally notified that a submitted media file contains a fingerprint match as the identity of a rights holder are not known for certain. 
         [0030]    In another embodiment, conflict detecting system  106  is a system that reviews metatdata associated with the media file, such as its title, artist, length, etc. 
         [0031]    In an embodiment of the invention, the notification system  114  would inform the submitter  102  which portions of the submitted media file  103  indicate a detected right conflict, including the nature of the match (e.g. video and/or audio). 
         [0032]    Once the submitter  102  has been notified by the notification system  114  of a detected right conflict, the submitter  102 , must somehow deal with the notification and has the option to withdraw the submitted media file  103  within a certain time frame. In addition, the submitter  102  may have the ability to re-submit a new modified media file for analysis. In this manner the submitter has the opportunity to remove or modify a media file without the third party rights holders  116  being notified of the possible media rights conflict. 
         [0033]    In one embodiment, if the submitter  102  does not respond, within an allotted time frame, the media file  103  is automatically removed. In addition, any known third party rights holders may also be informed of the possible rights conflict by the media file, but would not be allowed to access the media file without specific authorization from the submitter. 
         [0034]      FIG. 2  is a flowchart of an operation  200  according to an embodiment of the invention in which a submitter presents a media file for uploading to a media provider where the system analyzes the submitted media file for possible media rights conflict. The operation starts with step  202  where a media file is submitted by a submitter for upload to a media provider. In step  204  the submitted media file is digitally fingerprinted which produces a fingerprint associated with the submitted media file. In step  206  the fingerprint is analyzed and compared to fingerprints of known media material in a fingerprint database  110 . In step  210  a determination is made as to whether the submitted media file contains material that is considered a possible match with media associated with a third party rights holder. 
         [0035]    If the analysis of the submitted media file results in the decision that there is no match with known fingerprints in the fingerprint database  110 , then in step  224  the fingerprint of the submitted media file is stored in the fingerprint database  110 , in one embodiment, and the submitted media file is stored in a media database  112  and forwarded to the media provider as being acceptable to post under step  226 . 
         [0036]    However, if the analysis of the submitted media file results in a match, or multiple matches, with one or more known fingerprints in the fingerprint database  110 , then in step  212  the submitter is notified of the match. The notification is done prior to any type of notification to a possible third party rights holder in order to allow for the submitter to remove the matching material within the submitted media file. Notifying the submitter allows the submitter to rectify the potential problem without having the contents of the media file revealed to third parties. 
         [0037]    In one embodiment, media files can be posted as “private” media files that can be viewed only by a predetermined group. In such as situation, it is preferable to notify the submitter of a potential rights conflict because the “private” file is not intended to be viewed outside of the predetermined group. 
         [0038]    A match can be defined, as an example, where there is a submission of a media file containing, as an example, a 30 minute home video being filmed by the submitter of a two year old&#39;s birthday party where somewhere within the video, in the background, the recording captures 30 seconds of a copyrighted song being played from a compact disc. While the original home video would not otherwise represent a possible media rights conflict, the unauthorized reproduction of a portion of the song could be a media rights conflict. In the above case the system would notify the submitter of the match as well as where in the media file the match occurred, i.e. in the 30 second portion of the home video, and the type of match that was found, i.e., audio and video in the example of the motion picture and just audio in the example of the home video. 
         [0039]    The submitter has three possible actions in response to a match. These actions are represented by steps  214 ,  216 , and  218 . In step  214  the submitter decides to withdraw the submitted media at which point the process terminates. However, the submitter may decide to modify the submitted media file. In step  218  the submitter modifies the submitted media file to remove the matching material. Then in step  204  a new fingerprint is generated from the modified media file. The modified media file in step  206  is then analyzed for possible matches in steps  206  and  210 . 
         [0040]    The third possibility, after notification that there is a match with the submitted media file, is where the submitter does not modify the submitted media file to remove the matching content under step  216  within a specified time period. In this situation, under step  220  the submitted media file is removed from the system after the expiration of the specified time period. In step  222  the known third party rights holders and service providers can be notified of the existence of the matching media file and its subsequent removal from the system. However, access to the submitted media file by a third party rights holder would not be granted unless the submitter specifically authorized such an action. 
         [0041]      FIG. 3  is a flowchart depicting a method  300  for the detection of possible media rights conflict, according to an embodiment of the present invention. Method  300  begins at step  302 . In step  304 , a fingerprint is generated from a media file that has been submitted by a submitter to a media provider website for example. In step  306  the fingerprint generated in step  304  is analyzed against the fingerprints of existing media files in order to ascertain if the submitted media file contains any matches. In step  308  the submitter is notified of the results of the matching analysis of step  306 . In step  310 , if the analysis concludes that there are portions of the submitted media file which match existing fingerprinted content, then the details of which areas of the media file contain the matches are indicated to the submitter. Such details may include the location of the matches and the type and attributes of the matching media content. In step  312  the submitter is given the opportunity to submit a modified media file for further fingerprint matching analysis. In step  314  any submitted media file that contains matches which has not been withdrawn within a specified timeframe after notification may be automatically withdrawn. This is done if the submitter does not withdraw the submitted media file according to a set of specified criteria (e.g., within a certain time period) after being notified that the analysis indicated a match. In step  316 , notification of the removal of the submitted media file is given to the submitter and optionally to any applicable service providers and known rights holders. However, access to the submitted media file is not allowed unless the submitter specifically authorizes such action. Method  300  ends at step  318 . 
         [0042]    The processes of  FIGS. 2 and 3  can be implemented in software, firmware, or hardware, or using any combination thereof. If programmable logic is used, such logic can execute on a commercially available processing platform or a special purpose device. 
         [0043]    It is to be appreciated that the Detailed Description section, and not the 
         [0044]    Summary and Abstract sections, is intended to be used to interpret the claims. The Summary and Abstract sections may set forth one or more but not all exemplary embodiments of the present invention as contemplated by the inventor(s), and thus, are not intended to limit the present invention and the appended claims in any way. 
         [0045]    The present invention has been described above with the aid of functional building blocks illustrating the implementation of specified functions and relationships thereof. The boundaries of these functional building blocks have been arbitrarily defined herein for the convenience of the description. Alternate boundaries can be defined so long as the specified functions and relationships thereof are appropriately performed. 
         [0046]    The foregoing description of the specific embodiments will so fully reveal the general nature of the invention that others can, by applying knowledge within the skill of the art, readily modify and/or adapt for various applications such specific embodiments, without undue experimentation, without departing from the general concept of the present invention. Therefore, such adaptations and modifications are intended to be within the meaning and range of equivalents of the disclosed embodiments, based on the teaching and guidance presented herein. It is to be understood that the phraseology or terminology herein is for the purpose of description and not of limitation, such that the terminology or phraseology of the present specification is to be interpreted by the skilled artisan in light of the teachings and guidance. 
         [0047]    While various embodiments of the present invention have been described above, it should be understood that they have been presented by way of example only, and not limitation. It will be apparent to persons skilled in the relevant art that various changes in form and detail can be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Thus, the breadth and scope of the present invention should not be limited by any of the above-described exemplary embodiments, but should be defined only in accordance with the following claims and their equivalents.