Abstract:
The aim of this invention is to propose a process allowing the application of a spatial marking, that is to say invisible to the eye, on a support. A constraint consists in authorizing the reading of this marking by an acquisition apparatus of the image of a lower resolution. This aim is achieved by a generation and application process on a support of a digital spatial marking of X×Y points according to a resolution of d1x by d1y points per surface unit, and intended to be read by a reading device with resolution d2x by d2y points by surface unit, taking into account that the ratio d1x/d2x and/or d1y/d2y is larger than 1, this process comprising the following steps: sub-sampling of the digital spatial marking in X according to a factor nx=d1x/d2x and in Y according to a factor ny=d1y/d2y, erosion of the points intended to be applied so as to allow one point every nx points in X and a point every nx points in Y, application of the spatial marking on the support.

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION  
       [0001]     1. Field of the Invention  
         [0002]     This invention relates to a method and system for software protection through identification of unauthorized copying of software. More particularly, it relates to tracking down unauthorized copies of software through identification of documents generated by the unauthorized software copy on which a unique identifying code is imprinted by a high resolution printer.  
         [0003]     2. Background Information  
         [0004]     Software piracy is one of the biggest problems facing the software industry. It is estimated that only about 40% (by value) of the software in the United States is legal. That is only about 40% of the software has been purchased. The remainder is copied from legal software. As low as this may sound, it is a higher percentage of any other country. In Britain the estimate is that only about 20% of the software is legal. The Far East and Russia are known as one diskette countries, meaning that almost no legal software exists. According to a recent estimate, the cost to the software industry of piracy is $10-12 Billion a year.  
         [0005]     Present techniques for protecting software are principally directed toward making it more difficult to copy the software. However, there is considerable consumer resistance to this approach, and computer hackers take great pride in meeting the challenge of defeating the lock. Other approaches such as placing a “time bomb” in the program which is activated if a license fee is not timely paid are also not received favorably by purchasers and can lead to possible liability for destroying a user&#39;s data.  
         [0006]     The software industry has recently tried to stem the tide of piracy through legal remedies. However, this is a costly and time-consuming approach, which generally requires access to the host computer, and could backfire if suspicions turn out to be unfounded. Generally, legal redress is only suitable for large scale piracy.  
         [0007]     There is a need, therefore, for an improved technique for protecting software from piracy.  
         [0008]     There is a need for such a technique which does not require access to the host computer on which the software is run.  
         [0009]     There is also a need for such a technique which is sufficiently secure that attempts to defeat it are discouraged.  
         [0010]     There is an additional need for such a technique which allows identification of unauthorized software copies without noticeably affecting the performance of the software or even the ability to copy it, again, so that the incentive to by-pass the technique is minimized.  
       SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION  
       [0011]     These needs and others are satisfied by the invention which is directed to uniquely identifying each authorized software copy by an essentially invisible signature applied to the documents generated by that software copy. In particular, the signature which is basically invisible to the unaided human eye, is a unique identifying code pattern which is imprinted on the document. The invention is designed to be used with a high resolution printer, which for the purposes of this application is defined as a printer having a resolution at least as great as about 300 dpi (dots per inch). The unique identifying code pattern is made up of non-contiguous marks, preferably single dots, generated by such a high resolution printer, however, when printers with a higher resolution are used, each mark may comprise multiple adjacent dots as long as they collectively constitute a mark having a size no greater than about 300 dpi.  
         [0012]     The unique identifying code pattern is automatically applied to each document made by the software. Unauthorized copies of the software will also generate documents with the same unique identifying code pattern thereon. Printers commonly used today have at least 300 dpi resolution and some have resolutions of 600 or 1000 dpi. Even at 300 dpi, the non-contiguous marks constituting the invisible signature are barely visible and go unnoticed by the casual, observer. Documents produced by software incorporating the invention, can be scanned with a high resolution scanner which extracts the unique identifying code pattern for identification. Documents produced by a party not having a licensed copy of the software thus can be traced.  
         [0013]     The unique identifying code can be placed on the document in the an area in which the software application will typically not print. Preferably, however, multiple replications of the unique identifying code pattern are spaced across the document so that the likelihood is increased that the “invisible signature” will not be obscured by other matter printed on the document. Also, the signature should be imprinted using an error correcting code so that imperfections in the paper and “smears” of the printer will not affect it.  
         [0014]     The invention embraces both a method and a system for printing a unique identifying code pattern on the document using a high resolution printer. In a broader respect, the invention is directed to a method of identifying a medium used to generate an image by employing the medium to generate an image incorporating the unique identifying code pattern, and scanning the image to extract and identify that pattern.  
         [0015]     While the invention is only applicable to a medium which generates an image, such as software which generates a document, it has many advantages over present techniques. It does not require access to the equipment which generated the document or image. It does not prevent full use, or even copying, of the software or medium. Preferably, in software which generates a print file containing commands for the printer, print commands for the unique identifying code pattern are interspersed in the print file which makes it very arduous and time-consuming to attempt to extract those commands. The incentive is clearly to discourage attempts to defeat the system which leaves the user of an unauthorized copy open to detection. 
     
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS  
       [0016]     A full understanding of the invention can be gained from the following description of the preferred embodiments when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which:  
         [0017]      FIG. 1  is a schematic diagram in block form of a system for implementing the invention.  
         [0018]      FIG. 2  is an illustration of a document generated by the system of  FIG. 1  and incorporating a unique identifying code in accordance with the invention and with one replication of the code magnified.  
         [0019]      FIG. 3  is an example of a code which can be imprinted on the document of  FIG. 2  by the system of  FIG. 1  in accordance with the invention.  
         [0020]      FIG. 4  is a flow chart of a routine used to generate a print file used by the system of  FIG. 1  in accordance with the invention. 
     
    
     DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT  
       [0021]     The invention will be described as applied to protecting software, for which it is particularly suitable. The software is utilized in the computerized document production system  1  illustrated in  FIG. 1 . This system includes a digital computer  3  which includes a central processing unit (CPU)  5  and random access memory (RAM)  7  which stores the software program  9  for use by the CPU  5 , and a print file  11 . The CPU  5  implements the program  9  in accordance with instructions entered by the user through an input device  13  which can include one or more of a keyboard, a mouse, a track ball or a touch screen, for instance. The program  9  to which the invention applies has the capability of generating a printed document. This can be in addition to a display generated on a monitor  15 . In fact, it is not necessary that the program always generate a document, but only that it is capable of generating a printed document. A high resolution printer  17  generates the document  19  in accordance with the information provided to it by the computer  3 . Typically, the computer generates the print file  11  which contains detailed commands to the printer of the matter to be printed on the document  19 . This matter could be text, numeric, alphanumeric, a pictorial image or any other matter. By high resolution printer, is meant that the printer has resolution of at least 300 dots per inch (dpi). Currently available laser printers have at least this resolution and are also available with resolutions of 600 dpi and 1000 dpi. Also, it is not necessary that the computer generate a print file  11  for transmittal to the high resolution printer. Where the printer has its own software for generating the print instructions, the computer need only send to the printer the information to be printed.  
         [0022]     As will be discussed in more detail, embedded in the printed document is a unique identifying code pattern assigned to the particular authorized copy of the software. The identity of the authorized owner can be recorded at the time of purchase of the software, or incentives can be provided to the purchaser to register the software after purchase such as by offering updates to the program only to those who register their name and address. The unique identifying code pattern is in essence a serial number or identifier for the authorized copy which becomes an invisible signature on the printed document  19 .  
         [0023]     While this “invisible signature” is not readily apparent to the casual observer of the document, and indeed with very high resolution printers may be imperceptible, the unique identifying code pattern can be extracted from the document  19  by a high resolution scanner  21 . Such a scanner must have a resolution of at least as great as that of the printer. Scanners with such resolution are readily available, and in fact there are commercial models with resolutions as high as 2400 dpi.  
         [0024]      FIG. 2  illustrates a document  19  generated by the system of  FIG. 1  in accordance with the invention. The exemplary document  19  is a printed document with lines of text  23  surrounded by clear margins  25 . The unique identifying code pattern  27  is printed on the document simultaneously with the text  23 . A single pattern  27   1  can be printed at a location where it will be clear of the text  23 . However, where the program prints selected matter other than printed text, such as, for example an image, there is no guarantee that any area on the document will always be free of selected matter  23 . Therefore, it is preferred that multiple replications  27   1 - 27   5  be printed at spaced apart locations across the face of the document  19 . The number of replications shown in  FIG. 2  and their locations are exemplary only. It is within the contemplation of the invention that a wide variety of the number of replications and their locations could be utilized. The selection of the number of replications and their locations could also be a function of the particular application program, with the selection being made to maximize the number of replications likely to appear in clear space on the document. As can be seen in  FIG. 2 , some of the replications of the unique identifying code pattern such as  27   1  and  27   5  appear in the margins. Others such as  27   2  appear in the field of the printed text but between lines so that they are not obscured by the text. Still others such as  27   3  and  27   4  are at least partially obscured by the matter  23  selected by the program for the image to be generated on the document.  
         [0025]     The replication  27   1  of the unique identifying pattern is shown magnified in  FIG. 2  to illustrate that it is composed of a pattern of non-contiguous marks  29  each having a resolution at least as great as 300 dpi. Where the printer  17  is a 300 dpi printer, each of the marks  29  is a single dot. If a higher resolution printer is used, for instance, a 1000 dpi printer, each of the marks  29  may be formed by adjacent dots, just so that collectively they have a resolution at least as great as 300 dpi. Thus, for instance, for a 1000 dpi printer each of the marks  29  could be 1, 2, or 3 dots. Preferably, however, single dots with a higher resolution printer are used, such as, for example single dots at 1000 dpi, so that the unique identifying code pattern  27  is imperceptible to the human eye, but can be read by a scanner  21  with at least a 1000 dpi resolution.  
         [0026]     While any code pattern could be utilized, the exemplary unique identifying code  27  is a series of binary coded decimal numbers. For example, as shown in  FIG. 3  such binary coded decimal numbers can be represented in columns having rows indicating by dots the powers of 2 which make up the number represented by that column. Thus, for the representative number 607958, the six is represented by the left most column with dots  29  in the two row and four row. An odd parity check sum column, CK, to the right of the least significant number provides a measure of reliability in reading the code. Preferably, a error correcting code can be used.  
         [0027]     An example of a simple error correcting code is shown in  FIG. 3 . In addition to the odd parity check sum column, CK, an odd parity check sum row, RW, can also be provided in the unique identifying code pattern. Assume for purposes of illustration that the detected pattern has an error in that a dot  29 ′ is erroneously detected in the first power of two row for the right hand column so that the detected least, significant digit is 9 rather than 8. In this instance, the first power of two row odd parity check computed by the scanner from the detected pattern will not agree with that printed in the detected pattern. In addition, the parity check for the right-hand column will also not check in that a dot is found in the right-hand column odd parity check while the detected dot pattern would predict a 0 in this column. Hence, the row and column parity bits which intersect at the first power of two location in the least significant bit indicate that this dot  29 ′ is an error and should not be there. Thus, the scanner can correct the detected code. If multiple dots are in error, such as could occur if the unique identifying code pattern overlaps printed matter selected by the program, it may not be possible to correct the code. However, with the multiple replications of the code, similarities between detected patterns can be used to verify the code. In its simplest form, if two patterns are the same, the code is verified.  
         [0028]     If the replications  27  of the unique identifying code are always placed in the same location on the document, the scanner  21  can be programmed to interrogate those locations. However, if the locations of the unique identifying code  27  are random, or vary with different manufacturers or programs, each replication of the code, can be preceeded by a marker such as the symbol  31  shown in  FIG. 3  to indicate to the scanner the beginning of a replication of the unique identifying code pattern. Of course, any other symbol can be used as the marker to indicate the location of the unique identifying code patterns.  
         [0029]     The unique identifying code pattern  27  with the marker  31  if provided, is placed in the print file by a routine  33  such as that illustrated by the flow chart of  FIG. 4 . The routine reads the input of the “invisible signature” at  35 . For, instance, in the pattern illustrated in  FIG. 3  the program would read the number “607,958”. The signature is then encoded, for instance in binary coded decimal, at 37. A print function for the binary coded decimal pattern plus the marker (such as  31  shown in  FIG. 3 ) is then generated at  39 . This print function contains commands, for instance in the postscript language where the print file is in postscript, telling the printer how to print the desired pattern and marker. Each time the print file is generated by the software for printing a document, the print function generated at  39  is inserted into the print file. In the exemplary routine, the unique identifying code pattern is inserted at random into the print file. While this command is inserted at random into the print file it could be printed at a fixed location in the document depending upon the command. The printer when reading the print file sorts out the various commands and arranges them in order for printing on the document. In the example, multiple replications of the unique identifying code pattern  27  are inserted in the document, hence, the routine loops back at  43  until all replications have been inserted into the print file. The routine is then exited at  45 .  
         [0030]     The unique identifying code pattern or “invisible signature” can be added to any document produced by a specific software. This will make it possible to detect the particular software copy that produced the document by checking the hard copy itself. As access to a document should be much easier than to the computer on which the software produced it resides, it will become easier to identify software pirates. If a producer of software suspects that someone has an unauthorized copy of its software, it could send an inquiry to the user which would require a response using the software, such as, for example a letter. The letter could then be scanned with a high resolution scanner to extract the unique identifying code pattern which could then be checked against the registered owner of that copy of the software. If the sender of the document is not the registered owner, then an investigation could be made into how the user gained access to the program copy used. The invisible signature will be reproduced by copying of the document using a copier of reasonable quality. In fact, depending upon the quality of the copier, even copies of the copies should retain the signature. After several generations of copies on a good printer or even the first copy of a printer with poor resolution, the “invisible signature” will probably be degraded to the point that it could not be extracted by scanner, but then again, the overall quality of the document will also be seriously degraded.  
         [0031]     While specific embodiments of the invention have been described in detail, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that various modifications and alternatives to those details could be developed in light of the overall teachings of the disclosure. Accordingly, the particular arrangements disclosed are meant to be illustrative only and not limiting as to the scope of invention which is to be given the full breadth of the claims appended and any and all equivalents thereof.