IconFind, Inc. v. Google, Inc.

Filing 66

SECOND AMENDED ANSWER to 1 Complaint with Jury Demand, COUNTERCLAIM against IconFind, Inc. by Google, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Appendix A, # 3 Appendix B, # 4 Appendix C, # 5 Appendix D, # 6 Appendix E, # 7 Appendix F, # 8 Appendix G, # 9 Appendix H, # 10 Appendix I, # 11 Appendix J, # 12 Appendix K)(Malecek, Michael)

APPENDIX I
U.S. Pat. No. 7,181,459

Hailpern in view of Daviel

1. A computer implemented method
of categorizing a network page,
comprising:

Hailpern discloses applying META tags to an Internet Web page
(i.e., “network page”) using the PICS specification:
“An aspect of the current invention is a method to specify
particular information, which for the described embodiments
employs placing information in the META element specified in
the HTTP protocol, which may be called META-tags. In an
exemplary Internet implementation, the Platform for Internet
Content Selection (PICS) provides a specification for sending
META-information concerning electronic content. PICS is a
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Protocol Recommendation,
and is described, for example, in Rating Services and Rating
Systems (and Their Machine Readable Descriptions), version 1.1,
W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996, and in PICS Label
Distribution Label Syntax and Communication Protocols, version
1.1, W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996 (see also
http://www.w3.org/PICS).” Hailpern at col. 5, ll. 46-60.
Daviel also discloses a method for categorizing network pages:
“This memo describes a simple syntax for describing the
copyright status of a World-Wide-Web document in a machinereadable way. When implemented in a Web browser it provides
an unambiguous notification when permission must be sought to
print or copy material obtained from the network.” Daviel at
Abstract.
The motivation to combine the references may be found in the
common knowledge of those skilled in the art, the prior art as a
whole, and/or the nature of the purported problem itself. Hailpern
and Khare both disclose using the PICS system to categorize
network pages and Khare cites to Daviel. Khare at Using PICS
for Copyright Notice and Control, footnote 1. Therefore, the
motivation to combine the references in inherent in the references.

[a] providing a list of categories,
wherein said list of categories
include a category for transacting
business and a category for
providing information, and wherein
said list of categories include a
category based on copyright status
of material on a page;

-1-

Hailpern discloses that PICS labels can be used to
classify/categorize the content of web pages:
“For PICS, META-information about electronic content is
grouped according to the "rating service" or producer-andintended-usage of the information, and within one such group, any
number of categories or dimensions of information may be
transmitted. Each category has a range of permitted values, and

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

for a specific piece of content, a particular category may have a
single value or multiple values. In addition, the METAinformation group, known as a "PICS label", may contain
expiration information.” Hailpern at col. 5, l. 65 – col. 6, l. 2.
Using META tags to categorize a network page as one that
“transacts business” or “provides information” was well-known in
the art. See, e.g., HTML 4.0 at § 7.4.4; HTML 4.0 at B.4.
Furthermore, since Hailpern discloses that all web pages can be
classified, and it was well known that web pages existed in the
categories of “transacting business” and “providing information”,
it is inherent that Hailpern provides a list of categories that
includes “transacting business” and “providing information”.
Daviel discloses that META tags (i.e., labels) can be used to
provide a category on copyright status:
“Documents on the World-Wide-Web may have varied copyright
status. While a human-readable copyright notice is usually
included in copyrighted documents, this is usually transparent to
automated retrieval agents. This memo describes a simple syntax
for defining the copyright status of a document using an HTTP
header or HTML META tag. Agents implementing this protocol
may refuse to print or save a tagged document, or may display an
informational message.” Daviel at § 1.
[b] assigning said network page to
one or more of said list of
categories;

Hailpern discloses assigning a network page by including a
META tag on an Internet Web page (i.e., “network page”) using
the PICS specification:
“An aspect of the current invention is a method to specify
particular information, which for the described embodiments
employs placing information in the META element specified in
the HTTP protocol, which may be called META-tags. In an
exemplary Internet implementation, the Platform for Internet
Content Selection (PICS) provides a specification for sending
META-information concerning electronic content. PICS is a
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Protocol Recommendation,
and is described, for example, in Rating Services and Rating
Systems (and Their Machine Readable Descriptions), version 1.1,
W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996, and in PICS Label
Distribution Label Syntax and Communication Protocols, version
1.1, W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996 (see also
http://www.w3.org/PICS).” Hailpern at col. 5, ll. 46-60.
Daviel also discloses that META tags can be used to assign

-2-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

network pages to categories:
“This memo describes a simple syntax for defining the copyright
status of a document using an HTTP header or HTML META
tag.” Daviel at § 1.
[c] providing a categorization label
for the network page using the
copyright status of material on the
network page; and

Hailpern discloses displaying the information contained in the
META tags on the network page:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
Daviel also discloses that META tags (i.e., categorization labels)
are provided to a network page based on the copyright status:

[d] controlling usage of the network
page using the categorization label
and the copyright status of the
network page.

“This memo describes a simple syntax for defining the copyright
status of a document using an HTTP header or HTML META
tag.” Daviel at § 1.
Hailpern discloses “providing indicia” of the information
contained in the META tags in the network page:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
Daviel describes controlling usage of the network page using the
META tags:
“2.1 Protocol
A protocol version is defined. This memo defines version 1.0.
Three copyright-significant actions are defined: print, save and
quote. "Print" refers to making a hard copy of a document, or
saving a printer-ready version. "Save" refers to saving a source
version of a document to non-volatile media. "Quote" refers to
including a portion of a document in a new document. Three
numeric levels are defined: 0 - disallowed, 1 - conditionally
allowed, 2 - unconditionally allowed.

-3-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

The copy-control directive consists of a list of actions and levels,
together with a URL. The URL points to a document describing
the copyright status in detail. Action names may be abbreviated to
one character. The directive may be given as an HTTP header or
as an HTML META tag. The following are valid directives:
Copy-Control: version 1.0 print 2 save 2 quote 2
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 0 s 0 q 1 URL http://some.org/copy.html
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 1 s 1 q 2 u http://some.org/copy.html
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="v 1.0 p 2 s
2 q 2">
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="version
1.0 print 0 save 0 quote 1 url http://some.org/nocopy.html">
2.2 Implementation
In a user agent such as a Web browser, the copy-control actions
would correspond to the browser actions of printing, saving to
file, and transferring to clipboard. If the level defined for the
requested action is zero, the browser should refuse to perform the
action. If the level is one, the browser should generate a warning
message. If the level is two, no message is generated. Where a
message is generated, it should contain a hyperlink to the URL
given in the directive, if any. Typical messages might be:
"This document is copyright. You are not allowed to print it. See
http://some.org/nocopy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to save it subject to
certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to quote portions of
it subject to certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for
details."
The URL would normally also be included in a readable copyright
notice.” Daviel at §2.1-2.2.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein
said plurality of categories based on
the copyright status of material on a
page comprise categories related to
public domain, fair use only, use
with attribution, and permission of
copyright owner needed.

-4-

Daviel lists typical examples of copyright statuses that inherently
include the claimed categories:
“2.1 Protocol
A protocol version is defined. This memo defines version 1.0.
Three copyright-significant actions are defined: print, save and
quote. "Print" refers to making a hard copy of a document, or
saving a printer-ready version. "Save" refers to saving a source
version of a document to non-volatile media. "Quote" refers to
including a portion of a document in a new document. Three
numeric levels are defined: 0 - disallowed, 1 - conditionally
allowed, 2 - unconditionally allowed.

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

The copy-control directive consists of a list of actions and levels,
together with a URL. The URL points to a document describing
the copyright status in detail. Action names may be abbreviated to
one character. The directive may be given as an HTTP header or
as an HTML META tag. The following are valid directives:
Copy-Control: version 1.0 print 2 save 2 quote 2
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 0 s 0 q 1 URL http://some.org/copy.html
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 1 s 1 q 2 u http://some.org/copy.html
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="v 1.0 p 2 s
2 q 2">
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="version
1.0 print 0 save 0 quote 1 url http://some.org/nocopy.html">
2.2 Implementation
In a user agent such as a Web browser, the copy-control actions
would correspond to the browser actions of printing, saving to
file, and transferring to clipboard. If the level defined for the
requested action is zero, the browser should refuse to perform the
action. If the level is one, the browser should generate a warning
message. If the level is two, no message is generated. Where a
message is generated, it should contain a hyperlink to the URL
given in the directive, if any. Typical messages might be:
"This document is copyright. You are not allowed to print it. See
http://some.org/nocopy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to save it subject to
certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to quote portions of
it subject to certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for
details."
The URL would normally also be included in a readable copyright
notice.” Daviel at §2.1-2.2.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein
said categories include: a plurality
of categories based on the copyright
status of the material on a page.

-5-

Daviel lists a plurality of categories based on the copyright status
of the material on a page:
“2.1 Protocol
A protocol version is defined. This memo defines version 1.0.
Three copyright-significant actions are defined: print, save and
quote. "Print" refers to making a hard copy of a document, or
saving a printer-ready version. "Save" refers to saving a source
version of a document to non-volatile media. "Quote" refers to
including a portion of a document in a new document. Three
numeric levels are defined: 0 - disallowed, 1 - conditionally
allowed, 2 - unconditionally allowed.

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

The copy-control directive consists of a list of actions and levels,
together with a URL. The URL points to a document describing
the copyright status in detail. Action names may be abbreviated to
one character. The directive may be given as an HTTP header or
as an HTML META tag. The following are valid directives:
Copy-Control: version 1.0 print 2 save 2 quote 2
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 0 s 0 q 1 URL http://some.org/copy.html
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 1 s 1 q 2 u http://some.org/copy.html
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="v 1.0 p 2 s
2 q 2">
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="version
1.0 print 0 save 0 quote 1 url http://some.org/nocopy.html">
2.2 Implementation
In a user agent such as a Web browser, the copy-control actions
would correspond to the browser actions of printing, saving to
file, and transferring to clipboard. If the level defined for the
requested action is zero, the browser should refuse to perform the
action. If the level is one, the browser should generate a warning
message. If the level is two, no message is generated. Where a
message is generated, it should contain a hyperlink to the URL
given in the directive, if any. Typical messages might be:
"This document is copyright. You are not allowed to print it. See
http://some.org/nocopy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to save it subject to
certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to quote portions of
it subject to certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for
details."
The URL would normally also be included in a readable copyright
notice.” Daviel at §2.1-2.2.
16. The method of claim 1, further
comprising providing an indicium
for each of said categories.

Daviel and Hailpern disclose indicating the information contained
in the META tags on the network page:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
“This memo describes a simple syntax for defining the copyright
status of a document using an HTTP header or HTML META

-6-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

tag.” Daviel at § 1.
17. The method of claim 16,
wherein said indicium comprises an
icon.

Hailpern discloses indicating the information contained in the
META tags on the network page:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
An indicium comprised of an icon would have been obvious to
one skilled in the art in because icons were commonly used to
represent text in computer applications and web pages in 2001.

19. The method of claim 1, further
comprising providing a
categorization code that can be used
to label the page with the
categorization label that indicates
the categories to which the page is
assigned.

Hailpern discloses indicating the information contained in the
META tags on the network page:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
Daviel discloses a categorization code used to label the page.
Daviel at § 2.1-2.2.

20. The method of claim 19,
wherein said categorization code
comprises an indicium for each of
said categories.

Hailpern discloses a categorization code comprised of indicium
for each category:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
Daviel discloses a categorization code comprised of indicium for
each category. Daviel at § 2.1-2.2.

-7-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

21. The method of claim 20,
wherein said indicium comprises
two letters.

Hailpern and Daviel do not limit the metadata indium to less than
two letters.

22. The method of claim 20,
wherein said categorization label
includes the indicia for each
category to which a page is
assigned.

Hailpern discloses indicating the information contained in the
META tags on the network page:

27. The method of claim 19, further
comprising making said
categorization label recognizable by
a search engine.

It is well known in the art that META tags are recognizable by a
search engine. See, e.g., HTML 4.0 at § 7.4.4; HTML 4.0 at B.4.

“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.

Furthermore, Hailpern discloses that META tags are used by
search engines:
“Finally, those skilled in the art will appreciate that a search
engine may use the META-tags (AMTs) maintained in
accordance with the current invention to increase the efficiency of
searches it performs.” Hailpern at col. 18, ll. 1-4.

28. The method of claim 1, further
comprising making said categories
to which a page is assigned
recognizable by a search engine.

It is well known in the art that META tags are recognizable by a
search engine. See, e.g., HTML 4.0 at § 7.4.4; HTML 4.0 at B.4.
Furthermore, Hailpern discloses that META tags are used by
search engines:
“Finally, those skilled in the art will appreciate that a search
engine may use the META-tags (AMTs) maintained in
accordance with the current invention to increase the efficiency of
searches it performs.” Hailpern at col. 18, ll. 1-4.

29. The method of claim 1, wherein
said list of categories is provided on
a graphical user interface.

-8-

The categories described in Hailpern are displayed in a web
browser, which is a graphical user interface. “Internet Browser or
Web browser: A graphical interface tool that runs Internet
protocols such as HTTP, and display results on the customers
screen.” Hailpern at col. 2, ll. 1-3.

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

30. A computer implemented
method for categorizing a network
page, comprising:

Hailpern discloses applying a META element/tag/label to an
Internet Web page (i.e., “network page”) using the PICS
specification:
“An aspect of the current invention is a method to specify
particular information, which for the described embodiments
employs placing information in the META element specified in
the HTTP protocol, which may be called META-tags. In an
exemplary Internet implementation, the Platform for Internet
Content Selection (PICS) provides a specification for sending
META-information concerning electronic content. PICS is a
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Protocol Recommendation,
and is described, for example, in Rating Services and Rating
Systems (and Their Machine Readable Descriptions), version 1.1,
W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996, and in PICS Label
Distribution Label Syntax and Communication Protocols, version
1.1, W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996 (see also
http://www.w3.org/PICS).” Hailpern at col. 5, ll. 46-60.
Daviel also discloses a method for categorizing network pages:
“This memo describes a simple syntax for describing the
copyright status of a World-Wide-Web document in a machinereadable way. When implemented in a Web browser it provides
an unambiguous notification when permission must be sought to
print or copy material obtained from the network.” Daviel at
Abstract.

[a] providing a list of categories,
wherein said list of categories
include a category for transacting
business and a category for
providing information, and wherein
said list of categories include a
plurality of categories based on the
copyright status of material on a
page;

Hailpern discloses that PICS labels can be used to
classify/categorize the content of web pages:
“For PICS, META-information about electronic content is
grouped according to the "rating service" or producer-andintended-usage of the information, and within one such group, any
number of categories or dimensions of information may be
transmitted. Each category has a range of permitted values, and
for a specific piece of content, a particular category may have a
single value or multiple values. In addition, the METAinformation group, known as a "PICS label", may contain
expiration information.” Hailpern at col. 5, l. 65 – col. 6, l. 2.
Using META tags to categorize a network page as one that
“transacts business” or “provides information” was well-known in
the art. See, e.g., HTML 4.0 at § 7.4.4; HTML 4.0 at B.4.
Furthermore, since Hailpern discloses that all web pages can be

-9-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

classified, and it was well known that web pages existed in the
categories of “transacting business” and “providing information”,
it is inherent that Hailpern provides a list of categories that
includes “transacting business” and “providing information”.
Daviel discloses that META tags/labels can be used to provide a
category on copyright status:
“Documents on the World-Wide-Web may have varied copyright
status. While a human-readable copyright notice is usually
included in copyrighted documents, this is usually transparent to
automated retrieval agents. This memo describes a simple syntax
for defining the copyright status of a document using an HTTP
header or HTML META tag. Agents implementing this protocol
may refuse to print or save a tagged document, or may display an
informational message.” Daviel at § 1.
[b] providing a categorization code
for labeling the network page with a
categorization label, wherein said
categorization label indicates a set
of categories and subcategories to
which the network page is assigned,
and wherein said categorization
label indicates the copyright status
of material on the network page;
and

Hailpern discloses a system for categorizing documents (i.e., a
categorization code):
“RSAC's rating system can be retrieved from
http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv0l.html, r (n 4 s 3 v 2 10) is the
rating field. 'n' 's' 'v' '1' are transmit names for various METAinformation types; and the applicable values for this content are 4
(for n=nudity), 3 (for s=sex), 2 (for v=violence) and 0 (for
l=language).” Hailpern at col. 6, ll. 37-42. Cole also discloses
how to label a page using that system. Hailpern at col. 6, ll. 2636.
Hailpern discloses displaying the information contained in the
META tags in the network page:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
Daviel also discloses that META tags/labels are provided to a
network page based on the copyright status:
“This memo describes a simple syntax for defining the copyright
status of a document using an HTTP header or HTML META
tag.” Daviel at § 1.

-10-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

[c] controlling usage of the network
page using the categorization label
and the copyright status of the
network page.

Daviel describes the categorization code in § 2.1-2.2.
Hailpern discloses “providing indicia” of the information
contained in the META tags in the network page:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
Daviel describes controlling usage of the network page:
“2.1 Protocol
A protocol version is defined. This memo defines version 1.0.
Three copyright-significant actions are defined: print, save and
quote. "Print" refers to making a hard copy of a document, or
saving a printer-ready version. "Save" refers to saving a source
version of a document to non-volatile media. "Quote" refers to
including a portion of a document in a new document. Three
numeric levels are defined: 0 - disallowed, 1 - conditionally
allowed, 2 - unconditionally allowed.
The copy-control directive consists of a list of actions and levels,
together with a URL. The URL points to a document describing
the copyright status in detail. Action names may be abbreviated to
one character. The directive may be given as an HTTP header or
as an HTML META tag. The following are valid directives:
Copy-Control: version 1.0 print 2 save 2 quote 2
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 0 s 0 q 1 URL http://some.org/copy.html
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 1 s 1 q 2 u http://some.org/copy.html
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="v 1.0 p 2 s
2 q 2">
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="version
1.0 print 0 save 0 quote 1 url http://some.org/nocopy.html">
2.2 Implementation
In a user agent such as a Web browser, the copy-control actions
would correspond to the browser actions of printing, saving to
file, and transferring to clipboard. If the level defined for the
requested action is zero, the browser should refuse to perform the
action. If the level is one, the browser should generate a warning
message. If the level is two, no message is generated. Where a
message is generated, it should contain a hyperlink to the URL
given in the directive, if any. Typical messages might be:

-11-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

"This document is copyright. You are not allowed to print it. See
http://some.org/nocopy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to save it subject to
certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to quote portions of
it subject to certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for
details."
The URL would normally also be included in a readable copyright
notice.” Daviel at §2.1-2.2.

31. A computer implemented
method of categorizing a network
page, comprising:

Hailpern discloses applying a META element/tag/label to an
Internet Web page (i.e., “network page”) using the PICS
specification:
“An aspect of the current invention is a method to specify
particular information, which for the described embodiments
employs placing information in the META element specified in
the HTTP protocol, which may be called META-tags. In an
exemplary Internet implementation, the Platform for Internet
Content Selection (PICS) provides a specification for sending
META-information concerning electronic content. PICS is a
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Protocol Recommendation,
and is described, for example, in Rating Services and Rating
Systems (and Their Machine Readable Descriptions), version 1.1,
W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996, and in PICS Label
Distribution Label Syntax and Communication Protocols, version
1.1, W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996 (see also
http://www.w3.org/PICS).” Hailpern at col. 5, ll. 46-60.
Daviel also discloses a method for categorizing network pages:
“This memo describes a simple syntax for describing the
copyright status of a World-Wide-Web document in a machinereadable way. When implemented in a Web browser it provides
an unambiguous notification when permission must be sought to
print or copy material obtained from the network.” Daviel at
Abstract.

[a] providing a list of categories,
wherein said categories include a
category based on the copyright
status of material on a page, and
wherein the copyright status
comprises categories related to

-12-

Hailpern discloses that META tags can be used to
classify/categorize the content of web pages:
“For PICS, META-information about electronic content is
grouped according to the "rating service" or producer-andintended-usage of the information, and within one such group, any

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

public domain, fair use only, use
with attribution, and permission of
copyright owner needed;

number of categories or dimensions of information may be
transmitted. Each category has a range of permitted values, and
for a specific piece of content, a particular category may have a
single value or multiple values. In addition, the METAinformation group, known as a "PICS label", may contain
expiration information.” Hailpern at col. 5, l. 65 – col. 6, l. 2.
Daviel discloses that META tags (i.e., labels) can be used to
provide a category on copyright status:
“Documents on the World-Wide-Web may have varied copyright
status. While a human-readable copyright notice is usually
included in copyrighted documents, this is usually transparent to
automated retrieval agents. This memo describes a simple syntax
for defining the copyright status of a document using an HTTP
header or HTML META tag. Agents implementing this protocol
may refuse to print or save a tagged document, or may display an
informational message.” Daviel at § 1.
Daviel lists typical examples of copyright statuses that inherently
include the claimed categories:
“Typical messages might be:
"This document is copyright. You are not allowed to print it. See
http://some.org/nocopy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to save it subject to
certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to quote portions of
it subject to certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for
details."” Daviel at § 2.2.

[b] assigning said network page to
Hailpern discloses assigning a network page by including a
one or more of a plurality of said list META tag on an Internet Web page (i.e., “network page”) using
of categories;
the PICS specification:
“An aspect of the current invention is a method to specify
particular information, which for the described embodiments
employs placing information in the META element specified in
the HTTP protocol, which may be called META-tags. In an
exemplary Internet implementation, the Platform for Internet
Content Selection (PICS) provides a specification for sending
META-information concerning electronic content. PICS is a
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Protocol Recommendation,
and is described, for example, in Rating Services and Rating
Systems (and Their Machine Readable Descriptions), version 1.1,
W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996, and in PICS Label

-13-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

Distribution Label Syntax and Communication Protocols, version
1.1, W3C Recommendation Oct. 31, 1996 (see also
http://www.w3.org/PICS).” Hailpern at col. 5, ll. 46-60.
Daviel also discloses that META tags/labels can be used to assign
network pages to categories:
“This memo describes a simple syntax for defining the copyright
status of a document using an HTTP header or HTML META
tag.” Daviel at § 1.
[c] providing a categorization label
for the network page using the
copyright status of material on the
network page; and

Hailpern discloses displaying the information contained in the
META tags on the network page:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
Daviel also discloses that META tags/labels are provided to a
network page based on the copyright status:
“This memo describes a simple syntax for defining the copyright
status of a document using an HTTP header or HTML META
tag.” Daviel at § 1.

[d] controlling usage of the network
page using the categorization label
and the copyright status of the
network page.

Hailpern discloses “providing indicia” of the information
contained in the META tags in the network page:
“The present invention also provides a method whereby the
META-tagged links of a retrieved web page (if available) can be
annotated to display their corresponding META-tags. This method
involves the steps of: 1) using a client-side proxy to examine the
META-tag of a Web page or objects and 2) displaying the
associated META-tag information with each link (e.g., HTTP
link) in the web page, if available.” Hailpern at col. 16, ll. 15-21.
Daviel describes controlling usage of the network page:
“2.1 Protocol
A protocol version is defined. This memo defines version 1.0.
Three copyright-significant actions are defined: print, save and
quote. "Print" refers to making a hard copy of a document, or

-14-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I

saving a printer-ready version. "Save" refers to saving a source
version of a document to non-volatile media. "Quote" refers to
including a portion of a document in a new document. Three
numeric levels are defined: 0 - disallowed, 1 - conditionally
allowed, 2 - unconditionally allowed.
The copy-control directive consists of a list of actions and levels,
together with a URL. The URL points to a document describing
the copyright status in detail. Action names may be abbreviated to
one character. The directive may be given as an HTTP header or
as an HTML META tag. The following are valid directives:
Copy-Control: version 1.0 print 2 save 2 quote 2
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 0 s 0 q 1 URL http://some.org/copy.html
Copy-Control: v 1.0 p 1 s 1 q 2 u http://some.org/copy.html
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="v 1.0 p 2 s
2 q 2">
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Copy-Control" CONTENT="version
1.0 print 0 save 0 quote 1 url http://some.org/nocopy.html">
2.2 Implementation
In a user agent such as a Web browser, the copy-control actions
would correspond to the browser actions of printing, saving to
file, and transferring to clipboard. If the level defined for the
requested action is zero, the browser should refuse to perform the
action. If the level is one, the browser should generate a warning
message. If the level is two, no message is generated. Where a
message is generated, it should contain a hyperlink to the URL
given in the directive, if any. Typical messages might be:
"This document is copyright. You are not allowed to print it. See
http://some.org/nocopy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to save it subject to
certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for details."
"This document is copyright. You are allowed to quote portions of
it subject to certain restrictions. See http://some.org/copy.html for
details."
The URL would normally also be included in a readable copyright
notice.” Daviel at §2.1-2.2.

-15-

GOOGLE’S INVALIDITY CONTENTIONS - APPENDIX I