This Patent Application received a non-final rejection by the US Patent Office that was based in part on Ask Patents contributions! An initial rejection is part of the typical course of a patent application.
Thanks to the YOU, the Ask Patents community, overly-broad claims have at least been narrowed. Follow @askpatents to block more overly-broad patent applications.
A method comprising:
- receiving from a first user interface a first input from a first user specifying a first particular instant in a video other than a beginning of the video;
- in response to the first input, generating by one or more computer systems first data for inclusion in a link to the video, the first data representing the first particular instant in the video and being operable automatically to direct playback of the video at a second user interface to start at the first particular instant in the video in response to a second user selecting the link at the second user interface;
- and communicating the first data to a link generator for inclusion in the link to the video
or in human speak, something to generate links like blah#t=43s
(plus later, claim 12, that must then be processed by the system, and a lot of minor dependent claims about all of the above, etc)
However, there doesn't seem to be anything particularly non-obvious about this, given that URLs are designed to convey context about a resource. Conveying time as part of a URL does not seem any kind of invention. Can anyone think of prior art for this? Perhaps for audio, if video is elusive?
Note that under the AIA it is not be possible for Ask Patents to submit prior art under the pre-grant process used by Ask Patents due to the window having closed. Prior art which is found below would need to submitted under the six-month post-grant process or the ex-parte rexamination process. (This could be done by a company or an individual.)