US20080313026A1 - System and method for voting in online competitions - Google Patents
System and method for voting in online competitions Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20080313026A1 US20080313026A1 US11/893,839 US89383907A US2008313026A1 US 20080313026 A1 US20080313026 A1 US 20080313026A1 US 89383907 A US89383907 A US 89383907A US 2008313026 A1 US2008313026 A1 US 2008313026A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- voter
- server
- vote
- information concerning
- computer
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
- G06Q30/0241—Advertisements
- G06Q30/0273—Determination of fees for advertising
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
- G06Q30/0241—Advertisements
- G06Q30/0277—Online advertisement
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/04—Billing or invoicing
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q40/00—Finance; Insurance; Tax strategies; Processing of corporate or income taxes
- G06Q40/12—Accounting
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G07—CHECKING-DEVICES
- G07C—TIME OR ATTENDANCE REGISTERS; REGISTERING OR INDICATING THE WORKING OF MACHINES; GENERATING RANDOM NUMBERS; VOTING OR LOTTERY APPARATUS; ARRANGEMENTS, SYSTEMS OR APPARATUS FOR CHECKING NOT PROVIDED FOR ELSEWHERE
- G07C13/00—Voting apparatus
Definitions
- the present invention relates generally to voting and more specifically to detecting attempts to cast votes in violation of a set of voting rules and modifying the value attributed to individual votes based upon the past and current behavior of the voter.
- the Internet enables the rapid exchange of information over vast distances.
- the potential of the Internet to reach a large audience has prompted many people to use the Internet to conduct competitions and surveys.
- a competition or a survey is posted upon an interactive web site and visitors to the web site can cast votes or select between different options for responding. The votes and responses can then be tallied and the information used for a variety of purposes including determining the winner of the competition, a finalist for the competition or the most popular survey response.
- a problem that can be encountered when conducting a competition or a survey via the Internet is the potential for a person to submit multiple votes or responses and unfairly influence the outcome of the competition or survey.
- Many interactive web sites (such as Bopsta.com) require users to establish a profile in order to participate in a competition or survey and in order to limit the number of votes that can be cast by a user.
- the limit can be an absolute limit or a limit on the number of votes that can be cast within a predetermined time period.
- most sites do not prevent an individual from establishing multiple profiles and submitting a vote or a survey response from each profile.
- Systems and methods are enabling people to vote online are disclosed that involve detecting attempts to violate voting rules and attributing different values to each vote as a function of information collected concerning the person that cast the vote.
- the value of each vote is impacted by a voter's previous violations of the voting rules.
- the value of each vote is impacted by a variety of factors including the reputation of the voter, the activities of a voter with respect to a web site or online community, and/or the extent to which a voter propagates information across the Internet.
- other factors that reward behavior that positively impacts an online community and/or that discourage behavior that is detrimental to an online community are used in determining the value to attribute to a vote.
- One embodiment of the invention includes a server connected to a network, a database connected to the server and a voter computer connected to the network.
- the server is configured to provide a plurality of options to the voter computer
- the voter computer is configured to register with the server using a profile and to communicate a current selection from one of the options to the server
- the database stores information concerning past activity associated with a voter profile
- the server is configured to determine the value of the vote as a function of at least one factor indicative of stored information concerning the past activity associated with the voter profile.
- the server is configured to provide a plurality of options to the voter computer in accordance with at least one voting rule and the information concerning past activity includes information indicative of attempts to violate at least one voting rule.
- the server is configured to disregard selections that violate any of the voting rules.
- At least one voting rule specifies a minimum allowed time between selections from the same set of options
- the server is configured to apply a time stamp to the current selection
- the information concerning the past activity associated with the voter profile includes a time stamp of the last time an identical selection to the current selection was made by a voter using the voter profile and the server is configured to determine whether the current selection constitutes a violation of the voting rules by comparing the minimum allowed time to the time difference between the time stamp of the current selection and the time stamp of the last identical selection.
- devices connected to the network possess an IP address and the server identifies the voter computer using the IP address of the voter computer.
- the voter computer is configured with a browser application that accepts cookies and the server is configured to provide a cookie that identifies the voter computer to the browser application.
- the minimum allowed time is measured in units of minutes.
- the server is configured to interact with the voter computer, the server is configured to associate interactions with the voter computer with the voter profile in the database and at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is indicative of the recorded interactions.
- the server is configured to determine a reputation factor using at least the recorded interactions associated with the voter profile and at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is the reputation factor.
- the server is configured to determine an activity factor using at least the recorded interactions associated with the voter profile and at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is the reputation factor.
- Another additional embodiment also includes a plurality of member computers.
- the database stores a profile with respect to each member computer
- the server is configured to interact with the voter computer by enabling the voter computer to establish an association with a member computer
- the server is configured to record associations between the voter profile of the voter computer and the profiles of the member computers in the database and at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is indicative of the recorded associations.
- One embodiment of the method of the invention includes maintaining information concerning the activity of each voter, receiving a vote from one of the voters, verifying that the vote does not violate at least one voting rule, determining a value to attribute to the verified vote using a function of at least one factor that is indicative of the stored information concerning the activity of the voter and adding the value of the vote to the tally.
- a further embodiment of the method of the invention also includes determining that a second vote violates at least one voting rule, and including the violation of the voting rules in the voting record of the voter that cast the second vote.
- Another embodiment of the method of the invention also includes soliciting votes in response to a plurality of options, where the solicitation includes at least one voting rule prohibiting casting more than one vote within a predetermined time period.
- determining whether a vote violates any of the voting rules includes reviewing the stored information concerning the activity of the voter to determine when the voter last cast a vote with respect to the plurality of options and determining whether the time between the received vote and the last vote is greater than the predetermined time period.
- determining whether a vote violates any of the voting rules includes detecting attempts by a single voter to cast multiple votes under a plurality of identities.
- detecting attempts by a single voter to cast multiple votes under a plurality of identities includes logging the IP address of votes cast by voters and comparing the IP address of the received vote to previous votes cast by voters.
- a yet further embodiment of the method of the invention also includes recording information concerning the actions of the voter and determining the reputation of a voter based upon the recorded actions of the voter.
- at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is indicative of the stored information concerning the reputation of the voter.
- Yet another embodiment of the method of the invention also includes recording information concerning associations between voters.
- the reputation factor of a voter is indicative of the recorded actions of the voter and the recorded associations between the voter and other voters.
- Another further embodiment includes a server connected to a network, a database connected to the server and a user computer connected to the network.
- the server is configured to provide a candidate to the user computer
- the user computer is configured to register with the server using a profile and to communicate a rating of the candidate to the server
- the database stores information concerning past activity associated with a voter profile and wherein the server is configured to determine the value of the rating as a function of at least one factor indicative of the stored information concerning the past activity associated with the voter profile.
- FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram showing a system for hosting online competitions.
- FIG. 2 is a flow chart showing a process for conducting a competition involving online voting in which each vote is given a value that is based upon information known about the source of the vote in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.
- FIG. 3 is a flow chart showing a process for detecting a violation of a voting rule prohibiting the casting of multiple votes within a predetermined time period in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.
- FIG. 4 is a flow chart showing another process for detecting a violation of a voting rule prohibiting the casting of multiple votes within a predetermined time period in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.
- FIG. 5 is a flow chart showing a process for attributing values to votes according to information known about a voter in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.
- FIG. 6 is a flow chart showing a process for calculating a value to give to a vote in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.
- FIG. 7 is a flow chart showing a process for calculating a cheating factor in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.
- FIG. 8 is a flow chart showing a process for calculating a reputation factor in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.
- the systems enable voters to cast a vote or provide a survey response. Instead of attributing equal weight to each vote or response, the impact of each vote on the overall score is based upon any of a number of factors that are typically related to the identity of the voter and information collected about the voter.
- the systems detect attempts by a voter to violate voting rules. Violations of voting rules are recorded and can be one factor used when determining the value that should be given to a vote or survey response.
- the voter's positive involvement with a competition, survey or broader online community is another factor that is considered when determining the value given to a vote or survey response.
- factors considered when determining the value of a vote or survey response include the number of times a voter has legitimately voted for or responded to a survey, the number of selections viewed and/or engaged with when casting a vote, and the user's efforts to propagate a selection or competition throughout the Internet.
- factors considered when determining the value of a vote or survey response include the number of times a voter has legitimately voted for or responded to a survey, the number of selections viewed and/or engaged with when casting a vote, and the user's efforts to propagate a selection or competition throughout the Internet.
- FIG. 1 An online voting system in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is shown in FIG. 1 .
- the system 10 includes a web server 12 connected to a database 14 .
- the server 12 also communicates with a voter computer 16 via a network 18 .
- Both the server 12 and the voter computer 16 can communicate with a number of member computers 20 via the network 18 .
- the web server 12 hosts an interactive site that solicits selections between a number of options. In many embodiments, the selection can involve casting a vote between a number of different candidates. In several embodiments, the selection involves submitting an answer to a survey question. In a number of embodiments, the web server 12 hosts an interactive site that solicits ranking, rating and/or scoring of candidates. A group of embodiments include at least one voting rule and the server 12 is configured to detect violations of voting rules. A number of different examples of voting rules and techniques for detecting violations of voting rules are discussed below.
- a voter can use a voter computer 16 to submit a selection and/or ranking.
- Voter computers are typically computing devices such as personal computers, mobile phone handsets and consumer electronics devices that are capable of connecting to a data network and viewing data via a browsing application.
- the server 12 is configured to receive votes from voter computers and to attribute values to each vote according to information about the voter stored in the database.
- information concerning the voting history of the voter and the voter computer is recorded in the database.
- information concerning the reputation of the voter, interactions between the voter and the web site, and efforts by the voter to propagate the opportunity to vote to other locations throughout the Internet are recorded in the database. Propagation is an example of one-to-many viral distribution of content that typically involves posting the content on another website.
- individual votes are recognized due to the server requiring the voter to register using a voter profile prior to casting a vote.
- Activity associated with the voter profile can be stored in the database 14 and used when determining the impact of a vote on a total score.
- a number of member computers 20 are connected to the network.
- Members of an online community can use the member computers to interact with each other and to interact with the interactive site hosted by the server 12 .
- information concerning interactions between a voter and other members of an online community is stored in the database 14 and the information is another factor that can be considered when determining the value of a user's vote.
- the process 30 includes commencing ( 32 ) the competition, receiving ( 34 ) votes until the competition has ended.
- the source of the vote is identified ( 36 ).
- the identity of the source of the vote is determined using an address associated with the voter that can be derived from the transmission used to communicate the vote.
- the source of the vote is identified using an IP address.
- a voter must log in using a user profile or guest profile and the profile is used to identify the source of the vote.
- information concerning the source can be retrieved and used to both determine ( 37 ) whether the vote constitutes a violation of the voting rules and to determine ( 38 ) the value to give to the source's vote.
- a vote that violates the voting rules is rejected (i.e., effectively assigned a weighting of zero).
- a vote that is cast in violation of the voting rules is not rejected outright. Instead, the violation is recorded on the voter's voting record, which negatively impacts the value of the current vote and future votes cast by the voter. The receipt and weighting of votes continues until the competition is determined ( 40 ) to be over.
- the weighted votes can be tallied to determine a “winner” of the vote. In other embodiments, multiple “winners” are selected based upon the tallied vote. In many embodiments, there are no “winners” or “winners” are determined based on factors that may or may not include the tallied vote. As discussed above, the method outlined in FIG. 2 is also applicable in applications that do not involve competitions, but involve tallying selections of one of a number of options by respondents.
- voting rules include a restriction on the number of votes that can be cast within a specified time period.
- voters are often able to cast votes in a number of different competitions, but voting rules limit the number of votes they can cast with respect to a single entry in the competition within a specified time period.
- other voting rules limit the manner in which votes can be cast and/or the ranking, rating and/or scoring of individual submissions.
- the process 50 includes detecting ( 52 ) the identity of the voter and determining ( 54 ) whether the voter has cast the same vote previously.
- the identity of the voter is determined by extracting information from a cookie on the voter's browser application. A cookie can be placed in the browser during a first visit by the voter and used to detect repeat visits, even if the voter changes user accounts. As is discussed further below, other techniques can be used to identify the user. When the voter has not cast the same vote previously, then the process terminates.
- the process determines ( 56 ) whether the time between the current vote and the most recent vote is less than the specified period. When the time is not less than the specified period, then the process terminates. When the time is less than the specified period, then a violation of the voting rules is detected ( 58 ).
- the time period and the number of identical votes required to be flagged as a violation of the voting rules can vary depending upon observed voting patterns and the requirements of an application.
- the process 60 includes detecting ( 62 ) the identity of the voter.
- the identity of the voter is detected using a network address to prevent attempts to violate voting rules by using different user accounts from the same voter computer.
- a determination ( 64 ) is made as to whether a predetermined minimum number of consecutive logins have occurred from different accounts having the same IP address. When the predetermined minimum number of logins from different accounts having the same IP address has not occurred, then the process terminates.
- the number of logins is typically determined based upon observed patterns of voter behavior and the requirements of the application.
- a determination ( 66 ) is made as to whether each of the logins occurred over a predetermined time period. When the logins occurred over a period longer than the predetermined time period, then the process terminates. When the logins occurred within the predetermined time period, then a determination ( 68 ) is made as to whether identical votes were cast from any two of the accounts. When identical votes were not cast, then the process terminates. When identical votes were cast, then a violation of the voting rules is detected ( 70 ).
- the parameters used in a process designed to detect violations of voting rules can be modified as observations are made concerning attempts to violate voting rules. For example, more than two identical votes could be required for a violation of the voting rules to be found.
- a voter computer can include a unique CPUID that is used to determine whether a single user is using multiple accounts to cast multiple votes in violation of voting rules.
- the system monitors logins from blocks of IP addresses controlled by an ISP as opposed to monitoring a single IP address.
- geographic location can be used to monitor voting patterns and prevent abuses such as paying voters in low wage countries to vote on behalf of a particular selection (i.e. activity analogous to “gold farming” in MMORPGs).
- communication between users and voting patterns can be monitored to detect vote swapping by users. For example, reviews and/or comments could be automatically scanned to detect activity indicative of vote swapping.
- Systems in accordance with embodiments of the invention not only detect attempts to violate voting rules, but are able to diminish the value of future votes cast by voters that attempt to violate voting rules.
- a number of different factors are used in determining the value attributed to each vote and the factors are chosen to encourage certain behaviors and discourage other behaviors. Examples of behaviors that an administrator might wish to encourage are active positive participation in an online community, review of many selections prior to casting a vote, a diversity of activity, active social participation (i.e., having many friends), and propagating information to other web sites to increase the reach of a poll, survey or competition.
- the process 80 includes determining ( 82 ) whether any information is known concerning the source of the selection. When no information is known about the source, a default value is selected ( 84 ) and a voting record can be established concerning the source. When information is known concerning the source, a vote value is selected ( 86 ) based upon information collected about the source and the vote can be added to the source's voting record. The selection's value is then added ( 88 ) to the voting tally.
- the process 90 includes determining ( 92 ) a voter cheating factor from information concerning past violations of the voting rules by the voter, determining ( 93 ) an activeness factor based upon the amount of activity that the voter has performed within an online community, determining ( 94 ) a voter reputation factor based upon information concerning the diversity of a voter's activities within an online community and the number of friends the voter has within the community, determining ( 95 ) a support factor based upon the number of times the voter has voted for a particular selection, determining ( 96 ) a propagation factor based upon the number of times the voter has propagated and/or engaged with propagated content and using each of these factors to determine ( 97 ) the value to be give to the vote in accordance with a predetermined formula.
- the various factors determined in the process outlined above are simply values that are determined from information maintained about a voter. These factors can then be combined into a formula using any of a variety of functions that are designed to encourage particular activity and discourage other activities according to the significance of the activity.
- the formula is a product of various factors.
- the formula is a weighted sum of the factors.
- the formula is a combination of products and sums of the factors.
- a single factor or multiple factors are included in the formula and the factors included in the formula are not limited to those factors described above.
- Other factors that can be considered include factors that reflect the extent to which votes are received from a diverse group of voters (i.e.
- the pier review activity rating of activity i.e. activity receiving favorable pier reviews increases the value of a vote
- nested propagation i.e. propagation from a propagated site
- a voter's success in predicting the winner of previous campaigns status awarded to the voter by the administrators of a web site, promotion of other user's entries, the number of selections reviewed prior to voting, the number of “internal” views (i.e. views from within the web site hosting the poll, competition or survey), and the number of “external” views (i.e. views from propagated sites).
- a cheating factor is one of a number of factors that can be considered in determining the value of a vote.
- the cheating factor can be used to incorporate a voter's propensity to violate voting rules into the value attributed to the vote cast by a voter.
- a process for determining a cheating factor in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is shown in FIG. 7 .
- the process 110 includes ( 112 ) initializing a cheating factor and setting a timer.
- a determination ( 114 ) is then made as to whether a violation of the voting rules has been detected (see discussion above).
- the cheating factor is increased ( 116 ).
- the timer is compared ( 118 ) to a timer threshold. When the timer is not yet greater than the timer threshold, then the process continues to determine whether a violation of the voting rules has occurred.
- the cheating factor is decremented ( 120 ).
- the process described above with respect to FIG. 7 increases the cheating index of a voter in response to violations of the voting rules and rewards the voter for periods in which violations do not occur.
- the rate at which the impact of a violation of the voting rules diminishes can be determined in accordance with the requirements of the application.
- activities that influence the factors used to calculate the value of a vote include creating a user account, adding a blog entry to a profile, adding a picture to a profile, adding an album to a profile, adding a video to a profile, adding a series of videos to a profile, adding audio to a profile, rating another user's profile or content, voting, commenting on any aspect of another user's profile or content, nominating another user for an award, receiving an award based upon other user's nominations, logging in to the site, updating a profile, referring a friend to the site, having the friend sign up, and/or reporting abuse.
- the factors that determine the value of a vote can also be decreased for activity that is perceived as detrimental.
- many embodiments include a reputation factor that is reduced in response to a report of abuse.
- diversity of activity is rewarded.
- reputation index is increased by voting for a number of different selections, reviewing a number of different selections, and viewing a number of different selections.
- large amounts of activity centered on a small number of entries results in a reduced reputation factor due to the lack of diversity of activity.
- a reputation index can also be impacted by the number of friends that a voter has within an online community. The larger the number of friends the greater the reputation factor of the voter.
- the process 130 includes converting ( 132 ) diversity of voter activity within an online community into a reputation factor score, converting ( 134 ) the number of associations a voter has with other voters into a reputation factor score and calculating ( 136 ) a reputation factor.
Abstract
Description
- The present invention claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60,944,467 entitled “Online Content Marketing Platform” to Rose et al., filed Jun. 15, 2007, U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/958,219 entitled “Online Content Marketing Platform” to Rose et al., filed on Jul. 3, 2007, U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/961,899 entitled “Content Distribution System Including Cost-Per-Engagement Based Advertising” to Rose et al., filed Jul. 24, 2007, and U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/962,184 entitled “System and Method for Voting in Online Competitions” to Rose et al., filed Jul. 27, 2007, the disclosure of which is expressly incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. The present application is also related to the U.S. patent application entitled “Online Marketing Platform” to Rose et al., filed Aug. 17, 2007 and the U.S. patent application entitled “Content Distribution System Including Cost-Per-Engagement Based Advertising” to Rose et al., filed Aug. 17, 2007, the disclosure of which is also expressly incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
- The present invention relates generally to voting and more specifically to detecting attempts to cast votes in violation of a set of voting rules and modifying the value attributed to individual votes based upon the past and current behavior of the voter.
- The Internet enables the rapid exchange of information over vast distances. The potential of the Internet to reach a large audience has prompted many people to use the Internet to conduct competitions and surveys. In a number of instances a competition or a survey is posted upon an interactive web site and visitors to the web site can cast votes or select between different options for responding. The votes and responses can then be tallied and the information used for a variety of purposes including determining the winner of the competition, a finalist for the competition or the most popular survey response.
- A problem that can be encountered when conducting a competition or a survey via the Internet is the potential for a person to submit multiple votes or responses and unfairly influence the outcome of the competition or survey. Many interactive web sites (such as Bopsta.com) require users to establish a profile in order to participate in a competition or survey and in order to limit the number of votes that can be cast by a user. The limit can be an absolute limit or a limit on the number of votes that can be cast within a predetermined time period. Despite the limits placed on the number of votes a user can cast using a single profile, most sites do not prevent an individual from establishing multiple profiles and submitting a vote or a survey response from each profile. Several sites do not require a user to login, preferring a CAPTCHA to verify that a human and not a machine is casting a vote. Sites that use CAPTCHA verification often log the IP address of the voter and prevent recurrent votes from the same IP address.
- Systems and methods are enabling people to vote online are disclosed that involve detecting attempts to violate voting rules and attributing different values to each vote as a function of information collected concerning the person that cast the vote. In many embodiments, the value of each vote is impacted by a voter's previous violations of the voting rules. In a number of embodiments, the value of each vote is impacted by a variety of factors including the reputation of the voter, the activities of a voter with respect to a web site or online community, and/or the extent to which a voter propagates information across the Internet. In other embodiments, other factors that reward behavior that positively impacts an online community and/or that discourage behavior that is detrimental to an online community are used in determining the value to attribute to a vote.
- One embodiment of the invention includes a server connected to a network, a database connected to the server and a voter computer connected to the network. In addition, the server is configured to provide a plurality of options to the voter computer, the voter computer is configured to register with the server using a profile and to communicate a current selection from one of the options to the server, the database stores information concerning past activity associated with a voter profile and the server is configured to determine the value of the vote as a function of at least one factor indicative of stored information concerning the past activity associated with the voter profile.
- In a further embodiment, the server is configured to provide a plurality of options to the voter computer in accordance with at least one voting rule and the information concerning past activity includes information indicative of attempts to violate at least one voting rule.
- In another embodiment, the server is configured to disregard selections that violate any of the voting rules.
- In a still further embodiment, at least one voting rule specifies a minimum allowed time between selections from the same set of options, the server is configured to apply a time stamp to the current selection, the information concerning the past activity associated with the voter profile includes a time stamp of the last time an identical selection to the current selection was made by a voter using the voter profile and the server is configured to determine whether the current selection constitutes a violation of the voting rules by comparing the minimum allowed time to the time difference between the time stamp of the current selection and the time stamp of the last identical selection.
- In still another embodiment, devices connected to the network possess an IP address and the server identifies the voter computer using the IP address of the voter computer.
- In a yet further embodiment, the voter computer is configured with a browser application that accepts cookies and the server is configured to provide a cookie that identifies the voter computer to the browser application.
- In yet another embodiment, the minimum allowed time is measured in units of minutes.
- In a further embodiment again, the server is configured to interact with the voter computer, the server is configured to associate interactions with the voter computer with the voter profile in the database and at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is indicative of the recorded interactions.
- In another embodiment again, the server is configured to determine a reputation factor using at least the recorded interactions associated with the voter profile and at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is the reputation factor.
- In a further additional embodiment, the server is configured to determine an activity factor using at least the recorded interactions associated with the voter profile and at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is the reputation factor.
- Another additional embodiment also includes a plurality of member computers. In addition, the database stores a profile with respect to each member computer, the server is configured to interact with the voter computer by enabling the voter computer to establish an association with a member computer, the server is configured to record associations between the voter profile of the voter computer and the profiles of the member computers in the database and at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is indicative of the recorded associations.
- One embodiment of the method of the invention includes maintaining information concerning the activity of each voter, receiving a vote from one of the voters, verifying that the vote does not violate at least one voting rule, determining a value to attribute to the verified vote using a function of at least one factor that is indicative of the stored information concerning the activity of the voter and adding the value of the vote to the tally.
- A further embodiment of the method of the invention also includes determining that a second vote violates at least one voting rule, and including the violation of the voting rules in the voting record of the voter that cast the second vote.
- Another embodiment of the method of the invention also includes soliciting votes in response to a plurality of options, where the solicitation includes at least one voting rule prohibiting casting more than one vote within a predetermined time period. In addition, determining whether a vote violates any of the voting rules includes reviewing the stored information concerning the activity of the voter to determine when the voter last cast a vote with respect to the plurality of options and determining whether the time between the received vote and the last vote is greater than the predetermined time period.
- In a still further embodiment of the method of the invention, determining whether a vote violates any of the voting rules includes detecting attempts by a single voter to cast multiple votes under a plurality of identities.
- In still another embodiment of the method of the invention, detecting attempts by a single voter to cast multiple votes under a plurality of identities includes logging the IP address of votes cast by voters and comparing the IP address of the received vote to previous votes cast by voters.
- A yet further embodiment of the method of the invention also includes recording information concerning the actions of the voter and determining the reputation of a voter based upon the recorded actions of the voter. In addition, at least one of the factors indicative of the stored information concerning past activity is indicative of the stored information concerning the reputation of the voter.
- Yet another embodiment of the method of the invention also includes recording information concerning associations between voters. In addition, the reputation factor of a voter is indicative of the recorded actions of the voter and the recorded associations between the voter and other voters.
- Another further embodiment includes a server connected to a network, a database connected to the server and a user computer connected to the network. In addition, the server is configured to provide a candidate to the user computer, the user computer is configured to register with the server using a profile and to communicate a rating of the candidate to the server, the database stores information concerning past activity associated with a voter profile and wherein the server is configured to determine the value of the rating as a function of at least one factor indicative of the stored information concerning the past activity associated with the voter profile.
-
FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram showing a system for hosting online competitions. -
FIG. 2 is a flow chart showing a process for conducting a competition involving online voting in which each vote is given a value that is based upon information known about the source of the vote in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. -
FIG. 3 is a flow chart showing a process for detecting a violation of a voting rule prohibiting the casting of multiple votes within a predetermined time period in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. -
FIG. 4 is a flow chart showing another process for detecting a violation of a voting rule prohibiting the casting of multiple votes within a predetermined time period in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. -
FIG. 5 is a flow chart showing a process for attributing values to votes according to information known about a voter in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. -
FIG. 6 is a flow chart showing a process for calculating a value to give to a vote in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. -
FIG. 7 is a flow chart showing a process for calculating a cheating factor in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. -
FIG. 8 is a flow chart showing a process for calculating a reputation factor in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. - Turning now to the drawings, systems for conducting online competitions and surveys in accordance with embodiments of the invention are disclosed. The systems enable voters to cast a vote or provide a survey response. Instead of attributing equal weight to each vote or response, the impact of each vote on the overall score is based upon any of a number of factors that are typically related to the identity of the voter and information collected about the voter. In several embodiments, the systems detect attempts by a voter to violate voting rules. Violations of voting rules are recorded and can be one factor used when determining the value that should be given to a vote or survey response. In many embodiments, the voter's positive involvement with a competition, survey or broader online community is another factor that is considered when determining the value given to a vote or survey response. In a number of embodiments, factors considered when determining the value of a vote or survey response include the number of times a voter has legitimately voted for or responded to a survey, the number of selections viewed and/or engaged with when casting a vote, and the user's efforts to propagate a selection or competition throughout the Internet. Although many of the embodiments presented below are discussed with respect to the tallying of votes, the systems and methods described herein are equally applicable in any application that involves tallying user responses. As a result, any reference to voting should be considered to include submitting a vote and any other submission involving a choice between a number of options and/or the ranking, rating and/or scoring of a submission.
- An online voting system in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is shown in
FIG. 1 . Thesystem 10 includes aweb server 12 connected to adatabase 14. Theserver 12 also communicates with avoter computer 16 via anetwork 18. Both theserver 12 and thevoter computer 16 can communicate with a number ofmember computers 20 via thenetwork 18. - In a number of embodiments, the
web server 12 hosts an interactive site that solicits selections between a number of options. In many embodiments, the selection can involve casting a vote between a number of different candidates. In several embodiments, the selection involves submitting an answer to a survey question. In a number of embodiments, theweb server 12 hosts an interactive site that solicits ranking, rating and/or scoring of candidates. A group of embodiments include at least one voting rule and theserver 12 is configured to detect violations of voting rules. A number of different examples of voting rules and techniques for detecting violations of voting rules are discussed below. - A voter can use a
voter computer 16 to submit a selection and/or ranking. Voter computers are typically computing devices such as personal computers, mobile phone handsets and consumer electronics devices that are capable of connecting to a data network and viewing data via a browsing application. Theserver 12 is configured to receive votes from voter computers and to attribute values to each vote according to information about the voter stored in the database. In many embodiments, information concerning the voting history of the voter and the voter computer is recorded in the database. In several embodiments, information concerning the reputation of the voter, interactions between the voter and the web site, and efforts by the voter to propagate the opportunity to vote to other locations throughout the Internet are recorded in the database. Propagation is an example of one-to-many viral distribution of content that typically involves posting the content on another website. Propagation is discussed in more detail in U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/958,219 entitled “Online Content Marketing Platform” to Rose et al., filed on Jul. 3, 2007, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference above. As is discussed below, any factors related to the source of the vote can be used to determine the value of a vote using any appropriate function of the factors in accordance with embodiments of the invention. - In many embodiments, individual votes are recognized due to the server requiring the voter to register using a voter profile prior to casting a vote. Activity associated with the voter profile can be stored in the
database 14 and used when determining the impact of a vote on a total score. - In the illustrated embodiment, a number of
member computers 20 are connected to the network. Members of an online community can use the member computers to interact with each other and to interact with the interactive site hosted by theserver 12. In many embodiments, information concerning interactions between a voter and other members of an online community is stored in thedatabase 14 and the information is another factor that can be considered when determining the value of a user's vote. - Although a specific architecture is shown above with respect to
FIG. 1 , a number of different architectures can be used to receive voter selections, detect violations of the voting rules and to determine the value to give to a vote in accordance with embodiments of the invention. For example, the Online Marketing Platforms disclosed in U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/958,219 entitled “Online Marketing Platform” to Rose et al., filed on Jul. 3, 2007, can be used to implement a voting system in accordance with embodiments of the invention. - A process for conducting a competition in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is shown in
FIG. 2 . Theprocess 30 includes commencing (32) the competition, receiving (34) votes until the competition has ended. When a vote is received, the source of the vote is identified (36). In many embodiments, the identity of the source of the vote is determined using an address associated with the voter that can be derived from the transmission used to communicate the vote. In several embodiments, the source of the vote is identified using an IP address. In many embodiments, a voter must log in using a user profile or guest profile and the profile is used to identify the source of the vote. Once the source of the vote has been identified, information concerning the source can be retrieved and used to both determine (37) whether the vote constitutes a violation of the voting rules and to determine (38) the value to give to the source's vote. In a number of embodiments, a vote that violates the voting rules is rejected (i.e., effectively assigned a weighting of zero). In other embodiments, a vote that is cast in violation of the voting rules is not rejected outright. Instead, the violation is recorded on the voter's voting record, which negatively impacts the value of the current vote and future votes cast by the voter. The receipt and weighting of votes continues until the competition is determined (40) to be over. When the competition is over, the weighted votes can be tallied to determine a “winner” of the vote. In other embodiments, multiple “winners” are selected based upon the tallied vote. In many embodiments, there are no “winners” or “winners” are determined based on factors that may or may not include the tallied vote. As discussed above, the method outlined inFIG. 2 is also applicable in applications that do not involve competitions, but involve tallying selections of one of a number of options by respondents. - The processes used to detect attempts to violate voting rules or “cheat” depend upon the nature of the voting rules. In many embodiments, the voting rules include a restriction on the number of votes that can be cast within a specified time period. In embodiments where a web site includes multiple competitions, voters are often able to cast votes in a number of different competitions, but voting rules limit the number of votes they can cast with respect to a single entry in the competition within a specified time period. In other embodiments, other voting rules limit the manner in which votes can be cast and/or the ranking, rating and/or scoring of individual submissions.
- A process for detecting attempts to violate voting rules limiting the number of votes that can be cast by a voter with respect to a selection within a specified time period is shown in
FIG. 3 . Theprocess 50 includes detecting (52) the identity of the voter and determining (54) whether the voter has cast the same vote previously. In many embodiments, the identity of the voter is determined by extracting information from a cookie on the voter's browser application. A cookie can be placed in the browser during a first visit by the voter and used to detect repeat visits, even if the voter changes user accounts. As is discussed further below, other techniques can be used to identify the user. When the voter has not cast the same vote previously, then the process terminates. When the voter has cast the same vote previously, then the process determines (56) whether the time between the current vote and the most recent vote is less than the specified period. When the time is not less than the specified period, then the process terminates. When the time is less than the specified period, then a violation of the voting rules is detected (58). The time period and the number of identical votes required to be flagged as a violation of the voting rules can vary depending upon observed voting patterns and the requirements of an application. - Another process for detecting attempts to violate voting rules limiting the number of votes that can be cast by a voter with respect to a selection within a specified time period is shown in
FIG. 4 . Theprocess 60 includes detecting (62) the identity of the voter. The identity of the voter is detected using a network address to prevent attempts to violate voting rules by using different user accounts from the same voter computer. Each time a voter logs on to a site, the IP address of the voter and the time of the login can be detected. A determination (64) is made as to whether a predetermined minimum number of consecutive logins have occurred from different accounts having the same IP address. When the predetermined minimum number of logins from different accounts having the same IP address has not occurred, then the process terminates. The number of logins is typically determined based upon observed patterns of voter behavior and the requirements of the application. - When the predetermined minimum number of logins from different accounts having the same IP address has occurred, a determination (66) is made as to whether each of the logins occurred over a predetermined time period. When the logins occurred over a period longer than the predetermined time period, then the process terminates. When the logins occurred within the predetermined time period, then a determination (68) is made as to whether identical votes were cast from any two of the accounts. When identical votes were not cast, then the process terminates. When identical votes were cast, then a violation of the voting rules is detected (70). The parameters used in a process designed to detect violations of voting rules can be modified as observations are made concerning attempts to violate voting rules. For example, more than two identical votes could be required for a violation of the voting rules to be found.
- A variety of other processes can also be used in determining whether a vote constituted a violation of voting rules. For example, a voter computer can include a unique CPUID that is used to determine whether a single user is using multiple accounts to cast multiple votes in violation of voting rules. In many embodiments, the system monitors logins from blocks of IP addresses controlled by an ISP as opposed to monitoring a single IP address. In several embodiments, geographic location can be used to monitor voting patterns and prevent abuses such as paying voters in low wage countries to vote on behalf of a particular selection (i.e. activity analogous to “gold farming” in MMORPGs). In a number of embodiments, communication between users and voting patterns can be monitored to detect vote swapping by users. For example, reviews and/or comments could be automatically scanned to detect activity indicative of vote swapping.
- Systems in accordance with embodiments of the invention not only detect attempts to violate voting rules, but are able to diminish the value of future votes cast by voters that attempt to violate voting rules. In many embodiments, a number of different factors are used in determining the value attributed to each vote and the factors are chosen to encourage certain behaviors and discourage other behaviors. Examples of behaviors that an administrator might wish to encourage are active positive participation in an online community, review of many selections prior to casting a vote, a diversity of activity, active social participation (i.e., having many friends), and propagating information to other web sites to increase the reach of a poll, survey or competition.
- A process for determining the value of a selection in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is shown in
FIG. 5 . Theprocess 80 includes determining (82) whether any information is known concerning the source of the selection. When no information is known about the source, a default value is selected (84) and a voting record can be established concerning the source. When information is known concerning the source, a vote value is selected (86) based upon information collected about the source and the vote can be added to the source's voting record. The selection's value is then added (88) to the voting tally. - As can readily be appreciated, the processes used to determine the value attributed to a vote are entirely dependent on the actions that the operator of an interactive site wishes to encourage and the actions the operator of the site wishes to discourage. A process for determining a value to give to a vote using information concerning a voter is shown in
FIG. 6 . Theprocess 90 includes determining (92) a voter cheating factor from information concerning past violations of the voting rules by the voter, determining (93) an activeness factor based upon the amount of activity that the voter has performed within an online community, determining (94) a voter reputation factor based upon information concerning the diversity of a voter's activities within an online community and the number of friends the voter has within the community, determining (95) a support factor based upon the number of times the voter has voted for a particular selection, determining (96) a propagation factor based upon the number of times the voter has propagated and/or engaged with propagated content and using each of these factors to determine (97) the value to be give to the vote in accordance with a predetermined formula. - The various factors determined in the process outlined above are simply values that are determined from information maintained about a voter. These factors can then be combined into a formula using any of a variety of functions that are designed to encourage particular activity and discourage other activities according to the significance of the activity. In many embodiments, the formula is a product of various factors. In several embodiments, the formula is a weighted sum of the factors. In a number of embodiments, the formula is a combination of products and sums of the factors. In many embodiments, a single factor or multiple factors are included in the formula and the factors included in the formula are not limited to those factors described above. Other factors that can be considered include factors that reflect the extent to which votes are received from a diverse group of voters (i.e. as opposed to a small number of voters casting repeated votes), the pier review activity rating of activity (i.e. activity receiving favorable pier reviews increases the value of a vote), nested propagation (i.e. propagation from a propagated site), a voter's success in predicting the winner of previous campaigns, status awarded to the voter by the administrators of a web site, promotion of other user's entries, the number of selections reviewed prior to voting, the number of “internal” views (i.e. views from within the web site hosting the poll, competition or survey), and the number of “external” views (i.e. views from propagated sites).
- As is discussed above, a cheating factor is one of a number of factors that can be considered in determining the value of a vote. The cheating factor can be used to incorporate a voter's propensity to violate voting rules into the value attributed to the vote cast by a voter. A process for determining a cheating factor in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is shown in
FIG. 7 . Theprocess 110 includes (112) initializing a cheating factor and setting a timer. A determination (114) is then made as to whether a violation of the voting rules has been detected (see discussion above). When a violation is detected, the cheating factor is increased (116). When no violations of the voting rules are detected, the timer is compared (118) to a timer threshold. When the timer is not yet greater than the timer threshold, then the process continues to determine whether a violation of the voting rules has occurred. When the time is greater than the timer threshold, then the cheating factor is decremented (120). - The process described above with respect to
FIG. 7 increases the cheating index of a voter in response to violations of the voting rules and rewards the voter for periods in which violations do not occur. In other embodiments, the rate at which the impact of a violation of the voting rules diminishes can be determined in accordance with the requirements of the application. - In general, the manner in which voter activity (either with respect to a single competition/survey or with respect to an online community more broadly) can be factored into the value attributed to a vote depends upon the capability of a server to track voter activity and the number of associations that a voter has with other voters. U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/958,219 entitled “Online Marketing Platform” to Rose et al., filed on Jul. 3, 2007, which is incorporated by reference above, describes systems for tracking user activity and relationships between users. In many embodiments, activities that influence the factors used to calculate the value of a vote include creating a user account, adding a blog entry to a profile, adding a picture to a profile, adding an album to a profile, adding a video to a profile, adding a series of videos to a profile, adding audio to a profile, rating another user's profile or content, voting, commenting on any aspect of another user's profile or content, nominating another user for an award, receiving an award based upon other user's nominations, logging in to the site, updating a profile, referring a friend to the site, having the friend sign up, and/or reporting abuse. The factors that determine the value of a vote can also be decreased for activity that is perceived as detrimental. For example, many embodiments include a reputation factor that is reduced in response to a report of abuse. In a number of embodiments, diversity of activity is rewarded. For example, reputation index is increased by voting for a number of different selections, reviewing a number of different selections, and viewing a number of different selections. In many embodiments, large amounts of activity centered on a small number of entries results in a reduced reputation factor due to the lack of diversity of activity. A reputation index can also be impacted by the number of friends that a voter has within an online community. The larger the number of friends the greater the reputation factor of the voter.
- A process for determining a reputation factor in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is shown in
FIG. 8 . Theprocess 130 includes converting (132) diversity of voter activity within an online community into a reputation factor score, converting (134) the number of associations a voter has with other voters into a reputation factor score and calculating (136) a reputation factor. - Although the above discussion refers to specific processes for determining a number of factors including cheating factor, activity factor and reputation factor. Similar processes can be used to determine other factors. As discussed above, many factors used to determine the value of a vote are simply numbers that reflect particular information collected about a voter, which is indicative of positive or negative behavior. Consequently, any process that proportionately reflects the extent of the positive or negative behavior can be used to generate a factor for determining the value of a vote in accordance with embodiments of the invention.
- While the above description contains many specific embodiments of the invention, these should not be construed as limitations on the scope of the invention, but rather as an example of one embodiment thereof. Accordingly, the scope of the invention should be determined not by the embodiments illustrated, but by the appended claims and their equivalents.
Claims (19)
Priority Applications (4)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US11/893,839 US20080313026A1 (en) | 2007-06-15 | 2007-08-17 | System and method for voting in online competitions |
EP08781304A EP2174220A4 (en) | 2007-07-03 | 2008-07-02 | System and method for voting in online competitions |
CN200880101878A CN101779191A (en) | 2007-07-03 | 2008-07-02 | System and method for voting in online competitions |
PCT/US2008/069097 WO2009006552A1 (en) | 2007-07-03 | 2008-07-02 | System and method for voting in online competitions |
Applications Claiming Priority (5)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US94446707P | 2007-06-15 | 2007-06-15 | |
US95821907P | 2007-07-03 | 2007-07-03 | |
US96189907P | 2007-07-24 | 2007-07-24 | |
US96218407P | 2007-07-27 | 2007-07-27 | |
US11/893,839 US20080313026A1 (en) | 2007-06-15 | 2007-08-17 | System and method for voting in online competitions |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20080313026A1 true US20080313026A1 (en) | 2008-12-18 |
Family
ID=40226537
Family Applications (2)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US11/893,839 Abandoned US20080313026A1 (en) | 2007-06-15 | 2007-08-17 | System and method for voting in online competitions |
US11/893,766 Active 2030-05-30 US8788335B2 (en) | 2007-06-15 | 2007-08-17 | Content distribution system including cost-per-engagement based advertising |
Family Applications After (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US11/893,766 Active 2030-05-30 US8788335B2 (en) | 2007-06-15 | 2007-08-17 | Content distribution system including cost-per-engagement based advertising |
Country Status (4)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (2) | US20080313026A1 (en) |
EP (1) | EP2174220A4 (en) |
CN (1) | CN101779191A (en) |
WO (2) | WO2009006552A1 (en) |
Cited By (15)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20090150229A1 (en) * | 2007-12-05 | 2009-06-11 | Gary Stephen Shuster | Anti-collusive vote weighting |
US20090173777A1 (en) * | 2008-01-03 | 2009-07-09 | Jim L. Ward | System and Method for scoring politicians based on an interactive online political system. |
CN101789114A (en) * | 2010-03-02 | 2010-07-28 | 河海大学常州校区 | Data source anti-counterfeiting method for network questionnaire survey |
US20100257030A1 (en) * | 2009-04-01 | 2010-10-07 | Howard Crocker | Method and system for conducting a contest |
US20110010227A1 (en) * | 2009-07-08 | 2011-01-13 | Aulac Technologies Inc. | Anti-rigging Voting System and Its Software Design |
US20110060628A1 (en) * | 2009-09-03 | 2011-03-10 | Olaf STOERMER | Method for assessing candidates by voting and a system intended for this purpose and a program product comprising a computer-readable medium |
US20120143914A1 (en) * | 2010-12-01 | 2012-06-07 | Richard Lang | Real time and dynamic voting |
WO2013091022A1 (en) * | 2011-12-23 | 2013-06-27 | Doshmosh Pty Limited | An improved computer based ballot system and process |
US20130185645A1 (en) * | 2012-01-18 | 2013-07-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | Determining repeat website users via browser uniqueness tracking |
US8510385B1 (en) | 2012-06-29 | 2013-08-13 | Mobio Technologies, Inc. | System and method for user polling over a network |
US20140358637A1 (en) * | 2013-05-31 | 2014-12-04 | TGG Ventures LLC | Method and system for graphically presenting a survey interface to a user |
US20150215325A1 (en) * | 2014-01-30 | 2015-07-30 | Marketwired L.P. | Systems and Methods for Continuous Active Data Security |
US9635426B2 (en) | 2013-02-28 | 2017-04-25 | Fox Broadcasting Company | Method and apparatus for batch voting on live broadcasts |
CN109093617A (en) * | 2017-06-20 | 2018-12-28 | 株式会社日立大厦系统 | robot management system and robot management method |
CN109167665A (en) * | 2018-07-05 | 2019-01-08 | 佛山市新里图信息技术有限公司 | A kind of robot competition rule management system |
Families Citing this family (47)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20020116283A1 (en) | 2001-02-20 | 2002-08-22 | Masayuki Chatani | System and method for transfer of disc ownership based on disc and user identification |
US10862994B1 (en) | 2006-11-15 | 2020-12-08 | Conviva Inc. | Facilitating client decisions |
US9549043B1 (en) | 2004-07-20 | 2017-01-17 | Conviva Inc. | Allocating resources in a content delivery environment |
US9264780B1 (en) | 2006-11-15 | 2016-02-16 | Conviva Inc. | Managing synchronized data requests in a content delivery network |
US8751605B1 (en) | 2006-11-15 | 2014-06-10 | Conviva Inc. | Accounting for network traffic |
US8874725B1 (en) | 2006-11-15 | 2014-10-28 | Conviva Inc. | Monitoring the performance of a content player |
US8566436B1 (en) | 2006-11-15 | 2013-10-22 | Conviva Inc. | Data client |
US7831455B2 (en) * | 2007-03-08 | 2010-11-09 | Salesforce.Com, Inc. | Method and system for posting ideas and weighting votes |
US7818194B2 (en) * | 2007-04-13 | 2010-10-19 | Salesforce.Com, Inc. | Method and system for posting ideas to a reconfigurable website |
US7840413B2 (en) | 2007-05-09 | 2010-11-23 | Salesforce.Com, Inc. | Method and system for integrating idea and on-demand services |
US8788334B2 (en) | 2007-06-15 | 2014-07-22 | Social Mecca, Inc. | Online marketing platform |
US20080313026A1 (en) | 2007-06-15 | 2008-12-18 | Robert Rose | System and method for voting in online competitions |
US20090055538A1 (en) * | 2007-08-21 | 2009-02-26 | Microsoft Corporation | Content commentary |
US8656298B2 (en) | 2007-11-30 | 2014-02-18 | Social Mecca, Inc. | System and method for conducting online campaigns |
US8402494B1 (en) | 2009-03-23 | 2013-03-19 | Conviva Inc. | Switching content |
US8032413B2 (en) * | 2009-04-22 | 2011-10-04 | Visa U.S.A. Inc. | Auctioning of announcements |
US10325266B2 (en) * | 2009-05-28 | 2019-06-18 | Sony Interactive Entertainment America Llc | Rewarding classes of purchasers |
US8510247B1 (en) | 2009-06-30 | 2013-08-13 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Recommendation of media content items based on geolocation and venue |
US9153141B1 (en) | 2009-06-30 | 2015-10-06 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Recommendations based on progress data |
US9390402B1 (en) | 2009-06-30 | 2016-07-12 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Collection of progress data |
US9100288B1 (en) | 2009-07-20 | 2015-08-04 | Conviva Inc. | Augmenting the functionality of a content player |
US20110016182A1 (en) | 2009-07-20 | 2011-01-20 | Adam Harris | Managing Gifts of Digital Media |
GB2474074A (en) * | 2009-10-05 | 2011-04-06 | Your View Ltd | Electronic voting |
US8595064B1 (en) | 2010-06-01 | 2013-11-26 | cWyze, Inc. | Host system and method for facilitating viewer engagement of digital content from the host and/or third-party providers |
CN102087761A (en) * | 2010-12-03 | 2011-06-08 | 深圳市大明通信有限公司 | Electronic voting method and system of mobile terminal |
JP2012159975A (en) * | 2011-01-31 | 2012-08-23 | Sony Corp | Information processor, method, and program |
US20130013450A1 (en) * | 2011-07-08 | 2013-01-10 | Mark Sears | E-commerce content management system for dynamic vendor substitution |
US10061860B2 (en) * | 2011-07-29 | 2018-08-28 | Oath Inc. | Method and system for personalizing web page layout |
US8996650B2 (en) | 2011-08-26 | 2015-03-31 | Accenture Global Services Limited | Preparing content packages |
US8204977B1 (en) * | 2011-11-08 | 2012-06-19 | Google Inc. | Content access analytics |
US8856141B1 (en) * | 2011-12-15 | 2014-10-07 | Google Inc. | Providing posts from an extended network |
GB2499021A (en) * | 2012-02-03 | 2013-08-07 | Secondsync Ltd | Reporting the impact of broadcasts |
US10148716B1 (en) | 2012-04-09 | 2018-12-04 | Conviva Inc. | Dynamic generation of video manifest files |
US9628573B1 (en) | 2012-05-01 | 2017-04-18 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Location-based interaction with digital works |
US10182096B1 (en) | 2012-09-05 | 2019-01-15 | Conviva Inc. | Virtual resource locator |
US9246965B1 (en) | 2012-09-05 | 2016-01-26 | Conviva Inc. | Source assignment based on network partitioning |
US20140089082A1 (en) * | 2012-09-21 | 2014-03-27 | Xerox Corporation | Method and system for online advertising |
US10580036B2 (en) * | 2012-10-18 | 2020-03-03 | Mack Craft | Universal consumer-driven centralized marketing system |
US9531985B2 (en) * | 2013-03-15 | 2016-12-27 | Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | Measuring user engagement of content |
MY174581A (en) * | 2013-04-03 | 2020-04-28 | Chuah Seng Chew Wesley | A ranking system |
WO2015071118A1 (en) | 2013-11-15 | 2015-05-21 | Sabic Global Technologies B.V. | Process for producing a glass fibre-reinforced thermoplastic polymer composition |
US9432712B2 (en) * | 2014-01-22 | 2016-08-30 | Zefr, Inc. | Updating channel appearance |
US10178043B1 (en) | 2014-12-08 | 2019-01-08 | Conviva Inc. | Dynamic bitrate range selection in the cloud for optimized video streaming |
US10305955B1 (en) | 2014-12-08 | 2019-05-28 | Conviva Inc. | Streaming decision in the cloud |
US10387559B1 (en) * | 2016-11-22 | 2019-08-20 | Google Llc | Template-based identification of user interest |
CN111416709B (en) * | 2020-03-18 | 2021-07-30 | 腾讯科技(深圳)有限公司 | Voting method, device, equipment and storage medium based on block chain system |
US11907196B1 (en) * | 2023-05-31 | 2024-02-20 | Intuit Inc. | Generating observability metrics for data lake usage based on data layer activity logs |
Citations (69)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US6233618B1 (en) * | 1998-03-31 | 2001-05-15 | Content Advisor, Inc. | Access control of networked data |
US20020038819A1 (en) * | 2000-08-18 | 2002-04-04 | Akira Ushioda | Evaluation apparatus with voting system, evaluation method with voting system, and a computer product |
US20020062393A1 (en) * | 2000-08-10 | 2002-05-23 | Dana Borger | Systems, methods and computer program products for integrating advertising within web content |
US20020120501A1 (en) * | 2000-07-19 | 2002-08-29 | Bell Christopher Nathan | Systems and processes for measuring, evaluating and reporting audience response to audio, video, and other content |
US20020147645A1 (en) * | 2001-02-02 | 2002-10-10 | Open Tv | Service platform suite management system |
US20020198933A1 (en) * | 2001-06-20 | 2002-12-26 | Dusic Kwak | Method of lowering labor and marketing cost of a commercial website |
US20030032409A1 (en) * | 2001-03-16 | 2003-02-13 | Hutcheson Stewart Douglas | Method and system for distributing content over a wireless communications system |
US6578008B1 (en) * | 2000-01-12 | 2003-06-10 | Aaron R. Chacker | Method and system for an online talent business |
US20030171990A1 (en) * | 2001-12-19 | 2003-09-11 | Sabre Inc. | Methods, systems, and articles of manufacture for managing the delivery of content |
US6631404B1 (en) * | 1998-09-11 | 2003-10-07 | Lv Partners, L.P. | Method and system for conducting a contest using a network |
US20040015401A1 (en) * | 2001-02-08 | 2004-01-22 | In Lee | Systems and methods for distributing template-based multimedia presentations over a network |
US20040024643A1 (en) * | 2001-02-08 | 2004-02-05 | David Pollock | Systems and methods for distributing multimedia presentations over a network with integration of local data |
US20040034559A1 (en) * | 2001-02-12 | 2004-02-19 | Harris Michele J. | Method and system for providing web-based marketing |
US20040244029A1 (en) * | 2003-05-28 | 2004-12-02 | Gross John N. | Method of correlating advertising and recommender systems |
US20050044413A1 (en) * | 2003-02-05 | 2005-02-24 | Accenture Global Services Gmbh | Secure electronic registration and voting solution |
US6874024B2 (en) * | 1999-11-30 | 2005-03-29 | International Business Machines Corporation | Visualizing access to a computer resource |
US20050071218A1 (en) * | 2003-06-30 | 2005-03-31 | Long-Ji Lin | Methods to attribute conversions for online advertisement campaigns |
US20050108107A1 (en) * | 2003-11-14 | 2005-05-19 | Grayson Timothy R.D. | Systems and methods of providing marketing campaign management services |
US20050216300A1 (en) * | 2004-03-15 | 2005-09-29 | Barry Appelman | Sharing social network information |
US20060004627A1 (en) * | 2004-06-30 | 2006-01-05 | Shumeet Baluja | Advertisements for devices with call functionality, such as mobile phones |
US7020635B2 (en) * | 2001-11-21 | 2006-03-28 | Line 6, Inc | System and method of secure electronic commerce transactions including tracking and recording the distribution and usage of assets |
US7020781B1 (en) * | 2000-05-03 | 2006-03-28 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Digital content distribution systems |
US20060074751A1 (en) * | 2004-10-01 | 2006-04-06 | Reachlocal, Inc. | Method and apparatus for dynamically rendering an advertiser web page as proxied web page |
US20060282336A1 (en) * | 2005-06-08 | 2006-12-14 | Huang Ian T | Internet search engine with critic ratings |
US20060282283A1 (en) * | 2005-06-13 | 2006-12-14 | Monahan Brian F | Media network |
US7162433B1 (en) * | 2000-10-24 | 2007-01-09 | Opusone Corp. | System and method for interactive contests |
US20070027762A1 (en) * | 2005-07-29 | 2007-02-01 | Collins Robert J | System and method for creating and providing a user interface for optimizing advertiser defined groups of advertisement campaign information |
US20070033105A1 (en) * | 2005-07-29 | 2007-02-08 | Yahoo! Inc. | Architecture for distribution of advertising content and change propagation |
US20070067297A1 (en) * | 2004-04-30 | 2007-03-22 | Kublickis Peter J | System and methods for a micropayment-enabled marketplace with permission-based, self-service, precision-targeted delivery of advertising, entertainment and informational content and relationship marketing to anonymous internet users |
US20070094076A1 (en) * | 1999-11-17 | 2007-04-26 | Bks Networks, Inc. | Inernet-based brand marketing communication network for enabling commission-based e-commerce transactions along the fabric of the world wide web (WWW) using server-side driven multi-mode virtual kiosks (MMVKs) |
US20070106551A1 (en) * | 2005-09-20 | 2007-05-10 | Mcgucken Elliot | 22nets: method, system, and apparatus for building content and talent marketplaces and archives based on a social network |
US20070143750A1 (en) * | 2004-08-05 | 2007-06-21 | Quark, Inc. | Systems and methods for multi-format media production |
US20070162761A1 (en) * | 2005-12-23 | 2007-07-12 | Davis Bruce L | Methods and Systems to Help Detect Identity Fraud |
US20070168216A1 (en) * | 2007-02-13 | 2007-07-19 | Lemelson Greg M | Social networking and e-commerce integration |
US20070180468A1 (en) * | 2006-01-13 | 2007-08-02 | Gogo Mobile, Inc. | Universal digital code for unique content identification |
US20070192863A1 (en) * | 2005-07-01 | 2007-08-16 | Harsh Kapoor | Systems and methods for processing data flows |
US20070191040A1 (en) * | 2006-02-13 | 2007-08-16 | Airwide Solutions Inc. | Measuring media distribution and impact in a mobile communication network |
US20070233564A1 (en) * | 2005-10-25 | 2007-10-04 | Arnold Jeffrey T | Method and system for distributing revenue among user-authors |
US20070244634A1 (en) * | 2006-02-21 | 2007-10-18 | Koch Edward L | System and method for geo-coding user generated content |
US20070265915A1 (en) * | 2005-11-17 | 2007-11-15 | 2B Wireless, Inc. | Method and system for encouraging wireless device users to send marketing messages via a wireless communications network |
US20080070209A1 (en) * | 2006-09-20 | 2008-03-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Identifying influential persons in a social network |
US7353239B2 (en) * | 2001-01-24 | 2008-04-01 | Fredrik Allard | Online interactive voting system for live interactive evaluation and comparison of proposals |
US20080082381A1 (en) * | 2006-09-28 | 2008-04-03 | Demand Media, Inc. | User generated content publishing system |
US20080091555A1 (en) * | 2006-10-13 | 2008-04-17 | Ashley Heather | User generated style content |
US20080109296A1 (en) * | 2006-09-08 | 2008-05-08 | Leach Andrew K | Contingent rights exchange associated with a social network |
US20080133488A1 (en) * | 2006-11-22 | 2008-06-05 | Nagaraju Bandaru | Method and system for analyzing user-generated content |
US20080140786A1 (en) * | 2006-12-07 | 2008-06-12 | Bao Tran | Systems and methods for commercializing ideas or inventions |
US20080167947A1 (en) * | 2007-01-08 | 2008-07-10 | Supervirals Pty Ltd | Consumer generated media content |
US20080172288A1 (en) * | 2007-01-02 | 2008-07-17 | Washington State University Research Foundation | Method and system of determining and issuing user incentives on a web server via assessment of user-generated content relevance and value |
US20080201218A1 (en) * | 2007-02-20 | 2008-08-21 | Andrei Zary Broder | Methods of dynamically creating personalized internet advertisements based on content |
US20080244038A1 (en) * | 2007-03-30 | 2008-10-02 | Yahoo! Inc. | Point of Presence Distribution Mechanism for Digital Content Objects |
US20080256233A1 (en) * | 2006-11-27 | 2008-10-16 | Richard Hall | System and method for tracking the network viral spread of a digital media content item |
US20080262908A1 (en) * | 2007-04-17 | 2008-10-23 | Yahoo, Inc. | Methods for promoting brand-centric advertising and managing the same |
US20080270223A1 (en) * | 2005-07-29 | 2008-10-30 | Yahoo! Inc. | System and Method for Creating and Providing a User Interface for Displaying Advertiser Defined Groups of Advertisement Campaign Information |
US20080320075A1 (en) * | 2007-06-22 | 2008-12-25 | Microsoft Corporation | Detecting data propagation in a distributed system |
US20090043654A1 (en) * | 2007-05-30 | 2009-02-12 | Bates Daniel L | Method And System For Enabling Advertising And Transaction Within User Generated Video Content |
US20090064005A1 (en) * | 2007-08-29 | 2009-03-05 | Yahoo! Inc. | In-place upload and editing application for editing media assets |
US7526545B2 (en) * | 2003-01-17 | 2009-04-28 | Relevant Media Llc | Content distribution system |
US20090119173A1 (en) * | 2006-02-28 | 2009-05-07 | Buzzlogic, Inc. | System and Method For Advertisement Targeting of Conversations in Social Media |
US20090125391A1 (en) * | 2007-01-08 | 2009-05-14 | Toutonghi Michael J | Sharing and monetization of content |
US20090164271A1 (en) * | 2007-12-21 | 2009-06-25 | Johnson Bradley G | System and Method for Tracking Syndication of Internet Content |
US7574364B2 (en) * | 2000-09-13 | 2009-08-11 | Yamaha Corporation | Contents rating method |
US20090282336A1 (en) * | 2008-05-09 | 2009-11-12 | Apple Inc. | Automated Digital Media Presentations |
US7640181B2 (en) * | 2000-02-17 | 2009-12-29 | Hart Intercivic, Inc. | Distributed network voting system |
US20100042499A1 (en) * | 2008-08-13 | 2010-02-18 | Barton James M | Advertisement content management and distribution system |
US20100094713A1 (en) * | 2007-02-15 | 2010-04-15 | Wax Brian K | Advertisement content generation and monetization platform |
US7703611B1 (en) * | 2000-09-29 | 2010-04-27 | Aol Inc. | Targeted geographical condition notification of users based on a geographic location and device types or software of the users |
US7783622B1 (en) * | 2006-07-21 | 2010-08-24 | Aol Inc. | Identification of electronic content significant to a user |
US20110251970A1 (en) * | 2007-04-24 | 2011-10-13 | Derrick Oien | Mobile social networking system and method |
Family Cites Families (3)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20080313026A1 (en) | 2007-06-15 | 2008-12-18 | Robert Rose | System and method for voting in online competitions |
US20090006551A1 (en) * | 2007-06-29 | 2009-01-01 | Microsoft Corporation | Dynamic awareness of people |
WO2010065032A1 (en) | 2008-12-01 | 2010-06-10 | Highedge, Inc. | System and method for conducting online campaigns |
-
2007
- 2007-08-17 US US11/893,839 patent/US20080313026A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 2007-08-17 US US11/893,766 patent/US8788335B2/en active Active
-
2008
- 2008-07-02 WO PCT/US2008/069097 patent/WO2009006552A1/en active Application Filing
- 2008-07-02 CN CN200880101878A patent/CN101779191A/en active Pending
- 2008-07-02 EP EP08781304A patent/EP2174220A4/en not_active Withdrawn
- 2008-07-02 WO PCT/US2008/069093 patent/WO2009006551A2/en active Application Filing
Patent Citations (72)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US6233618B1 (en) * | 1998-03-31 | 2001-05-15 | Content Advisor, Inc. | Access control of networked data |
US6631404B1 (en) * | 1998-09-11 | 2003-10-07 | Lv Partners, L.P. | Method and system for conducting a contest using a network |
US20070094076A1 (en) * | 1999-11-17 | 2007-04-26 | Bks Networks, Inc. | Inernet-based brand marketing communication network for enabling commission-based e-commerce transactions along the fabric of the world wide web (WWW) using server-side driven multi-mode virtual kiosks (MMVKs) |
US6874024B2 (en) * | 1999-11-30 | 2005-03-29 | International Business Machines Corporation | Visualizing access to a computer resource |
US7035926B1 (en) * | 1999-11-30 | 2006-04-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | Real-time monitoring of web activities |
US6578008B1 (en) * | 2000-01-12 | 2003-06-10 | Aaron R. Chacker | Method and system for an online talent business |
US7640181B2 (en) * | 2000-02-17 | 2009-12-29 | Hart Intercivic, Inc. | Distributed network voting system |
US7020781B1 (en) * | 2000-05-03 | 2006-03-28 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Digital content distribution systems |
US20020120501A1 (en) * | 2000-07-19 | 2002-08-29 | Bell Christopher Nathan | Systems and processes for measuring, evaluating and reporting audience response to audio, video, and other content |
US20020062393A1 (en) * | 2000-08-10 | 2002-05-23 | Dana Borger | Systems, methods and computer program products for integrating advertising within web content |
US6739508B2 (en) * | 2000-08-18 | 2004-05-25 | Fujitsu Limited | Evaluation apparatus with voting system, evaluation method with voting system, and a computer product |
US20020038819A1 (en) * | 2000-08-18 | 2002-04-04 | Akira Ushioda | Evaluation apparatus with voting system, evaluation method with voting system, and a computer product |
US7574364B2 (en) * | 2000-09-13 | 2009-08-11 | Yamaha Corporation | Contents rating method |
US7703611B1 (en) * | 2000-09-29 | 2010-04-27 | Aol Inc. | Targeted geographical condition notification of users based on a geographic location and device types or software of the users |
US7162433B1 (en) * | 2000-10-24 | 2007-01-09 | Opusone Corp. | System and method for interactive contests |
US7353239B2 (en) * | 2001-01-24 | 2008-04-01 | Fredrik Allard | Online interactive voting system for live interactive evaluation and comparison of proposals |
US20020147645A1 (en) * | 2001-02-02 | 2002-10-10 | Open Tv | Service platform suite management system |
US20040024643A1 (en) * | 2001-02-08 | 2004-02-05 | David Pollock | Systems and methods for distributing multimedia presentations over a network with integration of local data |
US20040015401A1 (en) * | 2001-02-08 | 2004-01-22 | In Lee | Systems and methods for distributing template-based multimedia presentations over a network |
US20040034559A1 (en) * | 2001-02-12 | 2004-02-19 | Harris Michele J. | Method and system for providing web-based marketing |
US20030032409A1 (en) * | 2001-03-16 | 2003-02-13 | Hutcheson Stewart Douglas | Method and system for distributing content over a wireless communications system |
US20020198933A1 (en) * | 2001-06-20 | 2002-12-26 | Dusic Kwak | Method of lowering labor and marketing cost of a commercial website |
US7020635B2 (en) * | 2001-11-21 | 2006-03-28 | Line 6, Inc | System and method of secure electronic commerce transactions including tracking and recording the distribution and usage of assets |
US20030171990A1 (en) * | 2001-12-19 | 2003-09-11 | Sabre Inc. | Methods, systems, and articles of manufacture for managing the delivery of content |
US7526545B2 (en) * | 2003-01-17 | 2009-04-28 | Relevant Media Llc | Content distribution system |
US20050044413A1 (en) * | 2003-02-05 | 2005-02-24 | Accenture Global Services Gmbh | Secure electronic registration and voting solution |
US20040244029A1 (en) * | 2003-05-28 | 2004-12-02 | Gross John N. | Method of correlating advertising and recommender systems |
US20050071218A1 (en) * | 2003-06-30 | 2005-03-31 | Long-Ji Lin | Methods to attribute conversions for online advertisement campaigns |
US20050108107A1 (en) * | 2003-11-14 | 2005-05-19 | Grayson Timothy R.D. | Systems and methods of providing marketing campaign management services |
US20050216300A1 (en) * | 2004-03-15 | 2005-09-29 | Barry Appelman | Sharing social network information |
US20070067297A1 (en) * | 2004-04-30 | 2007-03-22 | Kublickis Peter J | System and methods for a micropayment-enabled marketplace with permission-based, self-service, precision-targeted delivery of advertising, entertainment and informational content and relationship marketing to anonymous internet users |
US20060004627A1 (en) * | 2004-06-30 | 2006-01-05 | Shumeet Baluja | Advertisements for devices with call functionality, such as mobile phones |
US20070143750A1 (en) * | 2004-08-05 | 2007-06-21 | Quark, Inc. | Systems and methods for multi-format media production |
US20060074751A1 (en) * | 2004-10-01 | 2006-04-06 | Reachlocal, Inc. | Method and apparatus for dynamically rendering an advertiser web page as proxied web page |
US20060282336A1 (en) * | 2005-06-08 | 2006-12-14 | Huang Ian T | Internet search engine with critic ratings |
US20060282283A1 (en) * | 2005-06-13 | 2006-12-14 | Monahan Brian F | Media network |
US20070192863A1 (en) * | 2005-07-01 | 2007-08-16 | Harsh Kapoor | Systems and methods for processing data flows |
US20080270223A1 (en) * | 2005-07-29 | 2008-10-30 | Yahoo! Inc. | System and Method for Creating and Providing a User Interface for Displaying Advertiser Defined Groups of Advertisement Campaign Information |
US20070033105A1 (en) * | 2005-07-29 | 2007-02-08 | Yahoo! Inc. | Architecture for distribution of advertising content and change propagation |
US20070027762A1 (en) * | 2005-07-29 | 2007-02-01 | Collins Robert J | System and method for creating and providing a user interface for optimizing advertiser defined groups of advertisement campaign information |
US20070106551A1 (en) * | 2005-09-20 | 2007-05-10 | Mcgucken Elliot | 22nets: method, system, and apparatus for building content and talent marketplaces and archives based on a social network |
US20070233564A1 (en) * | 2005-10-25 | 2007-10-04 | Arnold Jeffrey T | Method and system for distributing revenue among user-authors |
US20070265915A1 (en) * | 2005-11-17 | 2007-11-15 | 2B Wireless, Inc. | Method and system for encouraging wireless device users to send marketing messages via a wireless communications network |
US20070162761A1 (en) * | 2005-12-23 | 2007-07-12 | Davis Bruce L | Methods and Systems to Help Detect Identity Fraud |
US20070180468A1 (en) * | 2006-01-13 | 2007-08-02 | Gogo Mobile, Inc. | Universal digital code for unique content identification |
US20070191040A1 (en) * | 2006-02-13 | 2007-08-16 | Airwide Solutions Inc. | Measuring media distribution and impact in a mobile communication network |
US20070244634A1 (en) * | 2006-02-21 | 2007-10-18 | Koch Edward L | System and method for geo-coding user generated content |
US20090119173A1 (en) * | 2006-02-28 | 2009-05-07 | Buzzlogic, Inc. | System and Method For Advertisement Targeting of Conversations in Social Media |
US7783622B1 (en) * | 2006-07-21 | 2010-08-24 | Aol Inc. | Identification of electronic content significant to a user |
US20080109296A1 (en) * | 2006-09-08 | 2008-05-08 | Leach Andrew K | Contingent rights exchange associated with a social network |
US20080070209A1 (en) * | 2006-09-20 | 2008-03-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Identifying influential persons in a social network |
US8359276B2 (en) * | 2006-09-20 | 2013-01-22 | Microsoft Corporation | Identifying influential persons in a social network |
US20080082381A1 (en) * | 2006-09-28 | 2008-04-03 | Demand Media, Inc. | User generated content publishing system |
US20080091555A1 (en) * | 2006-10-13 | 2008-04-17 | Ashley Heather | User generated style content |
US20080133488A1 (en) * | 2006-11-22 | 2008-06-05 | Nagaraju Bandaru | Method and system for analyzing user-generated content |
US20080256233A1 (en) * | 2006-11-27 | 2008-10-16 | Richard Hall | System and method for tracking the network viral spread of a digital media content item |
US20080140786A1 (en) * | 2006-12-07 | 2008-06-12 | Bao Tran | Systems and methods for commercializing ideas or inventions |
US20080172288A1 (en) * | 2007-01-02 | 2008-07-17 | Washington State University Research Foundation | Method and system of determining and issuing user incentives on a web server via assessment of user-generated content relevance and value |
US20080167947A1 (en) * | 2007-01-08 | 2008-07-10 | Supervirals Pty Ltd | Consumer generated media content |
US20090125391A1 (en) * | 2007-01-08 | 2009-05-14 | Toutonghi Michael J | Sharing and monetization of content |
US20070168216A1 (en) * | 2007-02-13 | 2007-07-19 | Lemelson Greg M | Social networking and e-commerce integration |
US20100094713A1 (en) * | 2007-02-15 | 2010-04-15 | Wax Brian K | Advertisement content generation and monetization platform |
US20080201218A1 (en) * | 2007-02-20 | 2008-08-21 | Andrei Zary Broder | Methods of dynamically creating personalized internet advertisements based on content |
US20080244038A1 (en) * | 2007-03-30 | 2008-10-02 | Yahoo! Inc. | Point of Presence Distribution Mechanism for Digital Content Objects |
US20080262908A1 (en) * | 2007-04-17 | 2008-10-23 | Yahoo, Inc. | Methods for promoting brand-centric advertising and managing the same |
US20110251970A1 (en) * | 2007-04-24 | 2011-10-13 | Derrick Oien | Mobile social networking system and method |
US20090043654A1 (en) * | 2007-05-30 | 2009-02-12 | Bates Daniel L | Method And System For Enabling Advertising And Transaction Within User Generated Video Content |
US20080320075A1 (en) * | 2007-06-22 | 2008-12-25 | Microsoft Corporation | Detecting data propagation in a distributed system |
US20090064005A1 (en) * | 2007-08-29 | 2009-03-05 | Yahoo! Inc. | In-place upload and editing application for editing media assets |
US20090164271A1 (en) * | 2007-12-21 | 2009-06-25 | Johnson Bradley G | System and Method for Tracking Syndication of Internet Content |
US20090282336A1 (en) * | 2008-05-09 | 2009-11-12 | Apple Inc. | Automated Digital Media Presentations |
US20100042499A1 (en) * | 2008-08-13 | 2010-02-18 | Barton James M | Advertisement content management and distribution system |
Cited By (27)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20090150229A1 (en) * | 2007-12-05 | 2009-06-11 | Gary Stephen Shuster | Anti-collusive vote weighting |
US20090173777A1 (en) * | 2008-01-03 | 2009-07-09 | Jim L. Ward | System and Method for scoring politicians based on an interactive online political system. |
US20100257030A1 (en) * | 2009-04-01 | 2010-10-07 | Howard Crocker | Method and system for conducting a contest |
US20110010227A1 (en) * | 2009-07-08 | 2011-01-13 | Aulac Technologies Inc. | Anti-rigging Voting System and Its Software Design |
US20110060628A1 (en) * | 2009-09-03 | 2011-03-10 | Olaf STOERMER | Method for assessing candidates by voting and a system intended for this purpose and a program product comprising a computer-readable medium |
CN101789114A (en) * | 2010-03-02 | 2010-07-28 | 河海大学常州校区 | Data source anti-counterfeiting method for network questionnaire survey |
US9009194B2 (en) * | 2010-12-01 | 2015-04-14 | Democrasoft, Inc. | Real time and dynamic voting |
US20120143914A1 (en) * | 2010-12-01 | 2012-06-07 | Richard Lang | Real time and dynamic voting |
US20160063787A1 (en) * | 2010-12-01 | 2016-03-03 | Democrasoft, Inc. | Real time and dynamic voting |
WO2013091022A1 (en) * | 2011-12-23 | 2013-06-27 | Doshmosh Pty Limited | An improved computer based ballot system and process |
US20130185645A1 (en) * | 2012-01-18 | 2013-07-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | Determining repeat website users via browser uniqueness tracking |
US10740411B2 (en) | 2012-01-18 | 2020-08-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Determining repeat website users via browser uniqueness tracking |
US9934310B2 (en) * | 2012-01-18 | 2018-04-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Determining repeat website users via browser uniqueness tracking |
US8510385B1 (en) | 2012-06-29 | 2013-08-13 | Mobio Technologies, Inc. | System and method for user polling over a network |
US10277949B2 (en) | 2013-02-28 | 2019-04-30 | Fox Broadcasting Company | Method and apparatus for batch voting on live broadcasts |
US9635426B2 (en) | 2013-02-28 | 2017-04-25 | Fox Broadcasting Company | Method and apparatus for batch voting on live broadcasts |
US20140358637A1 (en) * | 2013-05-31 | 2014-12-04 | TGG Ventures LLC | Method and system for graphically presenting a survey interface to a user |
US20150215325A1 (en) * | 2014-01-30 | 2015-07-30 | Marketwired L.P. | Systems and Methods for Continuous Active Data Security |
US10484409B2 (en) * | 2014-01-30 | 2019-11-19 | Nasdaq, Inc. | Systems, methods, and computer-readable media for data security |
US20200045072A1 (en) * | 2014-01-30 | 2020-02-06 | Nasdaq, Inc. | Systems, methods, and computer-readable media for data security |
US9652464B2 (en) * | 2014-01-30 | 2017-05-16 | Nasdaq, Inc. | Systems and methods for continuous active data security |
US10972492B2 (en) * | 2014-01-30 | 2021-04-06 | Nasdaq, Inc. | Systems, methods, and computer-readable media for data security |
US20210211449A1 (en) * | 2014-01-30 | 2021-07-08 | Nasdaq, Inc. | Systems, methods, and computer-readable media for data security |
US11706232B2 (en) * | 2014-01-30 | 2023-07-18 | Nasdaq, Inc. | Systems, methods, and computer-readable media for data security |
US20230328090A1 (en) * | 2014-01-30 | 2023-10-12 | Nasdaq, Inc. | Systems, methods, and computer-readable media for data security |
CN109093617A (en) * | 2017-06-20 | 2018-12-28 | 株式会社日立大厦系统 | robot management system and robot management method |
CN109167665A (en) * | 2018-07-05 | 2019-01-08 | 佛山市新里图信息技术有限公司 | A kind of robot competition rule management system |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
WO2009006552A1 (en) | 2009-01-08 |
WO2009006551A3 (en) | 2009-12-30 |
US8788335B2 (en) | 2014-07-22 |
WO2009006551A2 (en) | 2009-01-08 |
EP2174220A1 (en) | 2010-04-14 |
CN101779191A (en) | 2010-07-14 |
EP2174220A4 (en) | 2012-08-01 |
US20080313040A1 (en) | 2008-12-18 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US20080313026A1 (en) | System and method for voting in online competitions | |
Fan et al. | Digital juries: A civics-oriented approach to platform governance | |
Anderson et al. | Corruption, political allegiances, and attitudes toward government in contemporary democracies | |
US6996444B2 (en) | Rating method, program product and apparatus | |
Han et al. | User's willingness to pay on social network sites | |
US10475100B1 (en) | Online marketing service system | |
Cantú | Groceries for votes: The electoral returns of vote buying | |
Friedman et al. | Manipulation-resistant reputation systems | |
US20090319363A1 (en) | Activity verification system and method | |
Argyres et al. | Franchisee associations as sources of bargaining power? Some evidence | |
Sharma et al. | Competitors' envy, gamers' pride: An exploration of gamers' divergent behavior | |
Shi et al. | Social commerce beyond word of mouth: Role of social distance and social norms in online referral incentive systems | |
WO2017114550A1 (en) | Method for managing the reputation of members of an online community | |
Brazhkin | “I have just returned from the moon:” online survey fraud | |
Thiel et al. | Why so serious? The Role of Gamification on Motivation and Engagement in e-Participation. | |
US20150006274A1 (en) | Lifestyle Rewards System and Method | |
Herron | Normalizing Corruption: Failures of Accountability in Ukraine | |
US20140200969A1 (en) | Rating items | |
Wu et al. | The perspective of information system success with social interaction on online game continuance: the moderating role of gender, age, and play frequency | |
JP2001043278A (en) | Game to be played on communication network and point calculation system utilizing world wide web | |
Ioannou et al. | An experimental study of uncertainty in coordination games | |
Ahn et al. | What’s your real age? an empirical analysis of identity fraud in online game | |
Schmierer | Better late than never: How the online advertising industry’s response to proposed privacy legislation eliminates the need for regulation | |
Bitting et al. | Protecting e-commerce agents from defamation | |
Setterstrom | Social influence and willingness to pay for online video games |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: HIGHEDGE, INC., CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:ROSE, ROBERT;MATTHEWS, CAMILLE;HUNG, KELVIN;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:020287/0348 Effective date: 20071210 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: ODK CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC, FLORIDA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:HIGHEDGE, INC.;REEL/FRAME:030879/0307 Effective date: 20110502 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: SOCIAL MECCA, INC., ILLINOIS Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:ODK CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC;REEL/FRAME:030896/0074 Effective date: 20110701 |
|
STCB | Information on status: application discontinuation |
Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION |