Appeal 2007-0635
Application 10/176,598
suggests ranking media files found on media playback devices according to how
long a user has played a media file, notwithstanding that it indisputably discloses
ranking media files according to the number of times a file has been played. This
comes through in the debate over the difference between the claimed method and
Ward. See below.
Differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
6. The Examiner characterizes the difference between Ward and the claimed
method as follows:
Ward does not expressly disclose the popularity metric being proportional to
a total duration of time the media file is played back. However, since Ward
does teach monitoring user play patterns of media files, particularly, whether
or not a user listens to a media file, Ward does teach the popularity metrics
being proportional to a total amount of times a user plays back a media file.
Therefore, Ward already has the means with which to measure a total
amount of playback time.
Answer 7-8. Emphasis added.
7. Appellant argues that
Ward is directed towards an operation of modifying play lists (for the
playback of audio and video files) in view of how popular such files are. The
reference discloses that the system reports to a user, "that a user has listened
to an item," (Ward, col. 7, lines 40-42), which such an item is on the play
list. The specifics of what is reported to is determined by, "when the user
expresses a dislike for a particular content item, either by skipping the item
or through a rating system, the system records such instances in the meta-
data associated with the user," (Ward, col. 8, lines 27-31). Hence, the system
of Ward keeps track of media files in a generalized manner where a metric is
developed in view of whether a song or video was played back or not.
…
… a user may play back an entire song (1 minute and 20 seconds long) and
20
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013