CA2272516C - Collection of images in web use reporting system - Google Patents
Collection of images in web use reporting system Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CA2272516C CA2272516C CA002272516A CA2272516A CA2272516C CA 2272516 C CA2272516 C CA 2272516C CA 002272516 A CA002272516 A CA 002272516A CA 2272516 A CA2272516 A CA 2272516A CA 2272516 C CA2272516 C CA 2272516C
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- image
- checksum
- content recipient
- data collection
- url
- 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.)
- Expired - Lifetime
Links
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
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F16/00—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor
- G06F16/90—Details of database functions independent of the retrieved data types
- G06F16/95—Retrieval from the web
- G06F16/958—Organisation or management of web site content, e.g. publishing, maintaining pages or automatic linking
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99951—File or database maintenance
- Y10S707/99952—Coherency, e.g. same view to multiple users
- Y10S707/99953—Recoverability
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99951—File or database maintenance
- Y10S707/99952—Coherency, e.g. same view to multiple users
- Y10S707/99954—Version management
Abstract
A checksum is extracted from an image downloaded to a content recipient. The content recipient transmits the extracted checksum to a data collection site. The data collection site compares the received checksum to a refer-ence checksum. If the received checksum and the reference checksum match, the data collection site uses an image corresponding to the reference checksum as the downloaded image. If the received checksum and the reference checksum do not match, the data collection site retrieves the down-loaded image from the content recipient.
Description
COLLECTION OF IMAGES IN WEB USE REPORTING SYSTEM
Technical Field of the Invention The present invention relates to an arrangement for collecting images that are viewed by content recipients so that Web use reporting may include copies of images.
Backaround of the Invention The Internet has proven to be an efficient and popular mechanism for the dissemination of content from content providers to content recipients. Content providers in many cases are organizations, such as businesses, govern-mental agencies, educational institutions, and the like, who operate Web sites in order to offer content that can be downloaded by content recipients. The content recipients are often consumers who use computers typically located in their dwellings in order to access the content offered by content providers. However, content recipients may also be other businesses, governmental agencies, educational insti-tutions, and the like, and in many cases, a content provider is also a content recipient.
Content is typically provided directly by a Web site to content recipients. However, in many instances, Attorney Docket additional information is accessible from one Web site by way of click-through URLs contained in the content directly provided by another Web site. Also, content provided by content providers to content recipients either directly, or indirectly through click-through URLs, frequently includes IMAGES such as advertisements in which organizations adver-tise their goods and/or services.
The operators of Web sites offering content such as advertisements to content recipients, as well as those who create and place such content as offerings by Web sites, generally desire information about Web use. This informa-tion includes the number of times that the content is ac-cessed, the amount of exposure of the content, the demo-graphics of those who access the content, and the like. Web site owners, and those who create and place content, may then draw market relevant conclusions from this Web use information.
Several arrangements have been proposed as at-tempts to acquire Web use information. For example, it is known for a Web site to itself measure the number of times that content recipients access its content offerings.
However, such an arrangement provides little information Attorney Docket about exposure and demographics. Also, this measurement at a single Web site provides little information with respect to the content offered by other Web sites, such as competi-tive Web sites. Moreover, even if measurements are made at a plurality of Web sites, it is difficult to extrapolate the resulting data over relevant segments of the population.
Therefore, it has also been proposed to install software meters on the computers of panelists so that ac-cess, exposure, and demographic information relative to the content downloaded by the panelists can be measured and extrapolated over the population as a whole, in much the same way that TV ratings are generated. According to this proposal, the software meters track operating system mes-sages in order to detect communications of interest. When the software meters detect communications of interest, the software meters log the titles of the corresponding windows which are displayed to a computer user because Internet content, as well as application software interfaces, are typically provided to the user in a window format. However, logging titles of windows is not particularly useful because such titles can be very generic. For example, one such title which is popular with many content providers is simply Attorney Docket "Home Page." This title provides little indication of the information supplied to the content recipient.
Tagging of Internet content has been broadly suggested in the context of requiring widespread industry cooperation. However, it is unlikely that such widespread industry cooperation is attainable.
In addition, known arrangements which collect information, particularly survey information, relative to content offered by Web sites are not able to accurately determine the specific content that is accessed by panelists at any particular time because the content changes depending upon the class of content recipient, the type of browser used by the content recipient, the time of day, the day of the month, the month of the year, and so on. Moreover, many of those who are provided Web use information request that copies of the accessed content be included in the reported Web use information.
The present invention accurately determines the specific content that is accessed by panelists and is able to access that content for inclusion in reports of Web usage.
Technical Field of the Invention The present invention relates to an arrangement for collecting images that are viewed by content recipients so that Web use reporting may include copies of images.
Backaround of the Invention The Internet has proven to be an efficient and popular mechanism for the dissemination of content from content providers to content recipients. Content providers in many cases are organizations, such as businesses, govern-mental agencies, educational institutions, and the like, who operate Web sites in order to offer content that can be downloaded by content recipients. The content recipients are often consumers who use computers typically located in their dwellings in order to access the content offered by content providers. However, content recipients may also be other businesses, governmental agencies, educational insti-tutions, and the like, and in many cases, a content provider is also a content recipient.
Content is typically provided directly by a Web site to content recipients. However, in many instances, Attorney Docket additional information is accessible from one Web site by way of click-through URLs contained in the content directly provided by another Web site. Also, content provided by content providers to content recipients either directly, or indirectly through click-through URLs, frequently includes IMAGES such as advertisements in which organizations adver-tise their goods and/or services.
The operators of Web sites offering content such as advertisements to content recipients, as well as those who create and place such content as offerings by Web sites, generally desire information about Web use. This informa-tion includes the number of times that the content is ac-cessed, the amount of exposure of the content, the demo-graphics of those who access the content, and the like. Web site owners, and those who create and place content, may then draw market relevant conclusions from this Web use information.
Several arrangements have been proposed as at-tempts to acquire Web use information. For example, it is known for a Web site to itself measure the number of times that content recipients access its content offerings.
However, such an arrangement provides little information Attorney Docket about exposure and demographics. Also, this measurement at a single Web site provides little information with respect to the content offered by other Web sites, such as competi-tive Web sites. Moreover, even if measurements are made at a plurality of Web sites, it is difficult to extrapolate the resulting data over relevant segments of the population.
Therefore, it has also been proposed to install software meters on the computers of panelists so that ac-cess, exposure, and demographic information relative to the content downloaded by the panelists can be measured and extrapolated over the population as a whole, in much the same way that TV ratings are generated. According to this proposal, the software meters track operating system mes-sages in order to detect communications of interest. When the software meters detect communications of interest, the software meters log the titles of the corresponding windows which are displayed to a computer user because Internet content, as well as application software interfaces, are typically provided to the user in a window format. However, logging titles of windows is not particularly useful because such titles can be very generic. For example, one such title which is popular with many content providers is simply Attorney Docket "Home Page." This title provides little indication of the information supplied to the content recipient.
Tagging of Internet content has been broadly suggested in the context of requiring widespread industry cooperation. However, it is unlikely that such widespread industry cooperation is attainable.
In addition, known arrangements which collect information, particularly survey information, relative to content offered by Web sites are not able to accurately determine the specific content that is accessed by panelists at any particular time because the content changes depending upon the class of content recipient, the type of browser used by the content recipient, the time of day, the day of the month, the month of the year, and so on. Moreover, many of those who are provided Web use information request that copies of the accessed content be included in the reported Web use information.
The present invention accurately determines the specific content that is accessed by panelists and is able to access that content for inclusion in reports of Web usage.
Summary of the Invention In accordance with one aspect of the present invention, a data collection server is arranged to collect Web use data from a panel of content recipients. The Web use data is of the type that provides a statistical basis for extrapolating the Web use data over at least a relevant population segment, and the Web use data includes information about use of an image downloaded from a Web site to a member of the panel. The data collection server is arranged to retrieve the image from the member of the panel.
In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, a method of metering web use comprises receiving, from a content recipient, a checksum computed for an image downloaded from a Web site to the content recipient; and retrieving the image from the content recipient when the retrieved checksum does not match a reference checksum.
In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention, a method performed at a content recipient comprises receiving an image from a Web site; computing a checksum for the image at the content recipient;
transmitting the checksum from the content recipient to a data collection site; and transmitting the image from the content,recipient to the data collection site in response to a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the image.
In accordance with a further aspect of the present invention, a method performed at a data collection site comprises receiving a checksum from a content recipient, wherein the checksum is related to an image transmitted to the content recipient; comparing a reference checksum to the received checksum; if the received and reference checksums do not match, transmitting to the content recipient a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the image; and receiving the image from the content recipient in response to the message.
In accordance with a further aspect of the present invention, a method performed at a data collection site comprises receiving a first checksum and a URL from a content recipient, wherein the first checksum and the URL
are related to a first image transmitted to the content recipient; retrieving a second image from a Web site based upon the URL; computing a second checksum corresponding to the second image; saving the second image if the first and second checksums match; if the first and second checksums do not match, transmitting to the content recipient a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the first image; and receiving the first image from the content recipient in response to the message.
Brief Description of the Drawings These and other features and advantages of the present invention will become more apparent from a detailed consideration of the invention when taken in conjunction with the drawings in which:
Figure 1 illustrates a metering system which is in accordance with the present invention and which includes a plurality of meters each of which is resident on a computer at a corresponding statistically selected site;
Figure 2 illustrates a first exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be used for the meters shown in Figure 1;
Figure 3 illustrates a second exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be used for the meters shown in Figure 1;
In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, a method of metering web use comprises receiving, from a content recipient, a checksum computed for an image downloaded from a Web site to the content recipient; and retrieving the image from the content recipient when the retrieved checksum does not match a reference checksum.
In accordance with yet another aspect of the present invention, a method performed at a content recipient comprises receiving an image from a Web site; computing a checksum for the image at the content recipient;
transmitting the checksum from the content recipient to a data collection site; and transmitting the image from the content,recipient to the data collection site in response to a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the image.
In accordance with a further aspect of the present invention, a method performed at a data collection site comprises receiving a checksum from a content recipient, wherein the checksum is related to an image transmitted to the content recipient; comparing a reference checksum to the received checksum; if the received and reference checksums do not match, transmitting to the content recipient a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the image; and receiving the image from the content recipient in response to the message.
In accordance with a further aspect of the present invention, a method performed at a data collection site comprises receiving a first checksum and a URL from a content recipient, wherein the first checksum and the URL
are related to a first image transmitted to the content recipient; retrieving a second image from a Web site based upon the URL; computing a second checksum corresponding to the second image; saving the second image if the first and second checksums match; if the first and second checksums do not match, transmitting to the content recipient a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the first image; and receiving the first image from the content recipient in response to the message.
Brief Description of the Drawings These and other features and advantages of the present invention will become more apparent from a detailed consideration of the invention when taken in conjunction with the drawings in which:
Figure 1 illustrates a metering system which is in accordance with the present invention and which includes a plurality of meters each of which is resident on a computer at a corresponding statistically selected site;
Figure 2 illustrates a first exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be used for the meters shown in Figure 1;
Figure 3 illustrates a second exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be used for the meters shown in Figure 1;
Attorney Docket Figure 4 illustrates a software routine which may be executed by the central facility shown in Figure 1 in conjunction with the software routine shown in Figure 3;
Figure 5 illustrates a third exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be used for the meters shown in Figure 1;
Figure 6 illustrates a software routine which may be executed by the central facility shown in Figure 1 in conjunction with the software routine shown in Figure 5;
Figure 7 illustrates a fourth exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be used for the meters shown in Figure 1; and, Figures 8A and 8B, taken together, illustrate a software routine which may be executed by the central facil-ity shown in Figure 1 in conjunction with the software routine shown in Figure 7.
Detailed Description A metering system 10 is shown in Figure 1 as an exemplary application of the present invention. The meter-ing system 10 includes a plurality of software meters 12 each of which is installed on a corresponding computer 14.
Figure 5 illustrates a third exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be used for the meters shown in Figure 1;
Figure 6 illustrates a software routine which may be executed by the central facility shown in Figure 1 in conjunction with the software routine shown in Figure 5;
Figure 7 illustrates a fourth exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be used for the meters shown in Figure 1; and, Figures 8A and 8B, taken together, illustrate a software routine which may be executed by the central facil-ity shown in Figure 1 in conjunction with the software routine shown in Figure 7.
Detailed Description A metering system 10 is shown in Figure 1 as an exemplary application of the present invention. The meter-ing system 10 includes a plurality of software meters 12 each of which is installed on a corresponding computer 14.
Attorney Docket Each of the computers 14 is located at a corresponding content recipient location 16. The content recipient loca-tions 16 may be statistically selected, such as by a data collection site 18, in order to participate in a Web use survey. In this case, these statistically selected content recipient locations 16 may be referred to as a panel.
Personnel at the data collection site 18 or elsewhere may implement random digit dialing, for example, in order to find the users of the computers 14 for participation in the Web use survey as members of the panel. The data collection site 18, in some instances, may be referred to as a central facility. As described below, the software meters 12 moni-tor use of Web sites 20 by corresponding users and provide the resulting metered use data to the data collection site 18 where the data may be assembled into reports for dissemi-nation to interested parties.
As shown in Figure 1, one or more of the Web sites may be reached through an Internet Service Provider 22.
As is typical, the users of the computers 14 reach the Web 20 sites 20 through browsers (not shown) operating on the computers 14. The computers 14, the data collection site 18, the Web sites 20, and the Internet Service Provider 22 Attorney Docket are interconnected by a network 24 which, for example, may be a public telephone system, an internal network, or the like.
A software routine 100, which may be used in one embodiment for each of the software meters 12, is shown in Figure 2. When an HTML page is received at a corresponding computer 14 as indicated by a block 102, the software rou-tine 100 at a block 104 meters appropriate data with regard to a user's use of the received HTML page. For example, if the received HTML page includes an advertising banner, the software routine 100 at the block 104 may determine the size of the banner and the location of the banner in the HTML
page. Also, the software routine 100 may be arranged at the block 104 to copy the URL of the received HTML page and the URL associated with any image contained in the received HTML
page. If the received HTML page has a URL corresponding to a click-through location (which indicates material at one or more Web sites 20 that may be accessed through the received HTML page), the software routine 100 may also be arranged to copy the click-through URL at the block 104. If the re-ceived page has a tag which identifies content in the re-ceived HTML page, the tag may be copied at the block 104.
Personnel at the data collection site 18 or elsewhere may implement random digit dialing, for example, in order to find the users of the computers 14 for participation in the Web use survey as members of the panel. The data collection site 18, in some instances, may be referred to as a central facility. As described below, the software meters 12 moni-tor use of Web sites 20 by corresponding users and provide the resulting metered use data to the data collection site 18 where the data may be assembled into reports for dissemi-nation to interested parties.
As shown in Figure 1, one or more of the Web sites may be reached through an Internet Service Provider 22.
As is typical, the users of the computers 14 reach the Web 20 sites 20 through browsers (not shown) operating on the computers 14. The computers 14, the data collection site 18, the Web sites 20, and the Internet Service Provider 22 Attorney Docket are interconnected by a network 24 which, for example, may be a public telephone system, an internal network, or the like.
A software routine 100, which may be used in one embodiment for each of the software meters 12, is shown in Figure 2. When an HTML page is received at a corresponding computer 14 as indicated by a block 102, the software rou-tine 100 at a block 104 meters appropriate data with regard to a user's use of the received HTML page. For example, if the received HTML page includes an advertising banner, the software routine 100 at the block 104 may determine the size of the banner and the location of the banner in the HTML
page. Also, the software routine 100 may be arranged at the block 104 to copy the URL of the received HTML page and the URL associated with any image contained in the received HTML
page. If the received HTML page has a URL corresponding to a click-through location (which indicates material at one or more Web sites 20 that may be accessed through the received HTML page), the software routine 100 may also be arranged to copy the click-through URL at the block 104. If the re-ceived page has a tag which identifies content in the re-ceived HTML page, the tag may be copied at the block 104.
Attorney Docket Moreover, any ALT text associated with the page, and the duration of exposure of the HTML page may also be metered at the block 104. (Exposure may be defined as (i) the amount of the received HTML page that is displayed on the screen of a corresponding computer 14 and (ii) the duration of time that the HTML page is displayed.) ALT text is the text that is displayed in the small pop-up window that appears when a mouse cursor is stopped over an image. The same text is used in place of an image in text-only browsers.
The software routine 100 at a block 106 stores the data metered at the block 104 and also stores any image contained in the received HTML page. Indeed, this data and image may be stored in a portion of the memory of the corre-sponding computer 14 that is referred to herein as local cache memory. This local cache memory may be under the remote control of the data collection site 18. Accordingly, the data collection server 18, for example, may purge old data and images from the local cache memory of the computer 14. When it is time to transmit the stored data and IMAGES
to the data collection site 18 as indicated at a block 108, the software routine 100 at a block 110 transmits the stored data and IMAGES. If it is not time to transmit the stored Attorney Docket data and IMAGES, or after the stored data and IMAGES have been transmitted at the block 110, program flow returns to the block 102 to await the reception of another HTML page.
The software routine 100 at the blocks 108 and 110 may transmit the stored data and IMAGES to the data collec-tion site 18 periodically, such as once a day or once a week. Alternatively, the software routine 100 may be ar-ranged to transmit the stored data and IMAGES in response to a poll from the data collection site 18. However, other initiating events may be used at the block 108 in order to determine when to transmit the stored data and IMAGES to the data collection site 18.
Generally, the upstream channel (i.e., the channel from content recipients to content providers) is fairly empty, at least as compared to the downstream channel.
However, the transmission to the data collection site 18 of every image of every web page that is viewed by the panel-ists may over tax the network 24, depending upon the number of panelists and the use they make of the Web. Accordingly, the software routine 100 may be impractical in certain circumstances. Therefore, a software routine 200 as shown Attorney Docket in Figure 3 may instead be provided for the software meters 12.
When an HTML page is received as indicated at a block 202 of the software routine 200, appropriate data are metered at a block 204. This metered data may be of the type described above in connection with the block 104. The software routine 200 at the block 204 is specifically ar-ranged to at least copy the URL which is associated with the received HTML page.
The software routine 200 at a block 206 stores the metered data including the copied URL. When it is time to transmit the stored data as indicated by a block 208, the software routine 200 at a block 210 transmits this data.
The timing of the data transmission may be similar to that described above. If it is not time to transmit the stored data and URLs, or after the stored data and URLs have been transmitted at the block 210, program flow returns to the block 202 to await the reception of another HTML page.
The data collection site 18 may execute a software routine 300 in response to the data transmitted by the software routine 200. As indicated by a block 302 of the software routine 300, when it is time to collect the data Attorney Docket metered at the content recipient locations 16, the software routine 300 collects that data at a block 304. As discussed above, the timing of data collection imposed at the block 302 may be determined by the corresponding software meter 12, in which case the functions performed at the blocks 302 and 304 by the software routine 300 are passive, i.e., the software routine 300 simply waits for the data to be trans-mitted by the corresponding software meter 12 and collects that data in an appropriate database. On the other hand, the software routine 300 at the blocks 302 and 304 can itself initiate the data collection (e.g., by polling the software meters 12).
When the data from the content recipient locations 16 corresponding to the software meters 12 have been re-ceived, the software routine 300 at a block 306 determines whether there are any URLs in the collected data. If so, the software routine 300 then retrieves from the appropriate Web sites 20 the IMAGES corresponding to each different received URL and stores the retrieved IMAGES in conjunction with the metered data collected from the corresponding content recipient locations 16. In performing this func-tion, the data collection site 18 may sort all URLs received Attorney Docket from all content recipient locations 16. Accordingly, if duplicate URLs corresponding to one of the Web sites 20 are received from the content recipient locations 16, the data collection site 18 need only visit this Web site 20 once in order to receive the corresponding image. Thus, the band-width necessary to transmit IMAGES to the data collection site 18 is materially reduced.
However, when the software routine 300 requests IMAGES from one of the Web sites 20 in accordance with the URLs received from the content recipient locations 16, it may or may not get the same IMAGES that were previously provided to the content recipient locations 16 and that were identified by the same URLs. Web site servers sometimes respond with different IMAGES based on the cookie informa-tion of the content recipient locations 16, or based on the type of browser used on the computers 14 at the content recipient locations 16, or the IP address of the users at the content recipient locations 16, etc. However, if header information (such as cookie information or browser type) is part of the data metered and stored by the software meters 12 operating on the computers 14 and if this header informa-tion is provided to the data collection site 18 by the Attorney Docket software meters 12, the data collection site 18 may be arranged to provide the corresponding Web sites with header information, allowing the data collection site 18 to re-trieve the same IMAGES that were accessed by the users.
Accordingly, the chances of the data collection site 18 retrieving the same IMAGES that were download to the appro-priate computer 14 increase.
Thus, the software routine 200 at the block 204 may be arranged to copy header information in conjunction with the metering of the received HTML page. Accordingly, the software routine 300 at the data collection site 18 uses this header information together with the URL of the Web page in order to retrieve the appropriate IMAGES from the Web sites 20.
However, the Web sites 20 may even use the time of day of the content requests from the users at the content recipient locations 16 in order to decide what pages and ad banners to download. Thus, the IMAGES retrieved by the data collection site 18 from the Web sites 20 may not correspond to the IMAGES that were provided by the Web sites 20 to the users at the content recipient locations 16. Also, this image correspondence problem can be exacerbated because the Attorney Docket request for the download of an image may come from a machine at the data collection site 18 that has a different IP
address than the IP address of the computer 14 operated by the user making the original request.
Accordingly, the software meters 12 may execute a software routine 400 shown in Figure S. The software rou-tine 400 at a block 402 receives an HTML page. As before, the software routine at a block 404 meters appropriate data, including the URLs corresponding to the received pages. The software meter 400 at a block 406 also computes a checksum of any image contained in the received HTML page. This checksum may be computed in any well known manner and is, in effect, a signature uniquely identifying a corresponding image. The software routine 400 at a block 408 stores the metered data together with the corresponding computed check-sums. When it is time to transmit the stored data and computed checksums as indicated by a block 410, this infor-mation is transmitted at a block 412.
In connection with the software routine 400, the data collection site 18 executes a software routine 500 which is shown in Figure 6. When it is time to collect data from the content recipient locations 16 as indicated at a Attorney Docket block 502, the software routine 500 collects this data, including the checksums, at a block 504. As indicated above, data collection may be initiated by the software meters 12, by the data collection site 18, or the like.
If the collected data includes URLs as indicated by a block 506, the software routine 500 at a block 508 eliminates any duplicate URLs, as described above, and retrieves IMAGES from the Web sites 20 corresponding to the remaining URLs. The software routine 500 at a block 510 computes a reference checksum for each of the IMAGES re-trieved at the block 508 and, at a block 512, compares the reference checksums with the checksums received from the content recipient locations 16. The software routine 500, at a block 514, saves each image whose reference checksum matches a corresponding checksum received from one of the content recipient locations 16. These IMAGES are saved in a database by user and/or content recipient location identifi-cation. The software routine 500 at the block 514 also saves in the database the other collected information under the appropriate user and/or content recipient location identification. If any checksum received from the content recipient locations 16 does not match the reference check-Attorney Docket sums computed at the block 510, then a suitable notation is made in any reports generated by the data collection site 18 indicating that an image could not be retrieved for the relevant reported information.
This use of a checksum may not address all ban-ners. A banner B that is served only to the IP addresses of entity E is an example. If entity El attempts to retrieve the banner B with its own IP address, entity El will get something different than the banner B. Therefore, if a checksum computed at the block 510 does not match any check-sums received from the content recipient locations 16, the software routine 500 may be arranged to query other data-bases for banners whose checksums may equal the checksums received from the content recipient locations 16. For example, the software routine 500 may investigate the OMS
database or I-PRO's Dispatch Database in order to determine whether these databases contain IMAGES corresponding to the appropriate URLs. If so, these IMAGES can be received and likewise processed at the blocks 510, 512, and 514.
Even this approach may not address all banners.
However, by combining some of the approaches described above, the number of banners and other IMAGES covered by the Attorney Docket present invention may be significantly increased. This combined approach is indicated by the software routine 600 shown in Figure 7. The software routine 600 may be used for the software meters 12 and, at a block 602, meters exposure of images contained in HTML received by a corresponding computer 14.
In metering such exposure, the software routine 600 at the block 602 first detects images of interest, such as advertising images. If advertising images are to be detected, the software routine 600 at the block 602 may be arranged to determine whether an object in the HTML has a predetermined size. For example, if the software meters 12 are arranged to meter advertisements, the predetermined size may be any of the sizes specified by the IAB for Internet advertisements. The software routine 600 at the block 602 may also be arranged to detect other characteristics of a file image in order to determine whether the file contains an image of interest. For example, the software routine 600 at the block 602 may be arranged to determine whether the image has an HREF indicating a link to another Web site, whether the HREF is a cgi script URL, whether the HREF
contains an identification tag, and/or the like. When an Attorney Docket image of interest is so identified, the software routine 600 at the block 602 may be arranged to determine and save the coordinates of the image, to track changes in the coordi-nates, to track occlusion of the image, and the like. The software routine 600 at the block 602 can also track expo-sure over time for the image. Accordingly, as the metered content is scrolled into or out of view, the software rou-tine 600 at the block 602 may be arranged to maintain a counter of the on-screen exposure time of the metered image.
Similarly, if a window is moved so as to occlude the metered image, the time that the window is in front of the metered image can be deducted from the on-screen exposure time of the metered content. Also, if a browser window is iconi-fied, the time that the browser window is iconified can be deducted from the on-screen exposure of the metered image.
The software routine 600 at a block 604 computes a checksum of the metered image, and reports the exposure data and other data, such as the checksum and any frame URL, image URL, click-through URL, ALT text, and/or identifica-tion tag, to the data collection site 18. The software routine 600 at a block 608 then determines if the data collection site 18 needs the image. For example, the data Attorney Docket collection site 18 may first determine its need, as dis-cussed below, and then send an instruction, based on that need, to the appropriate software meter 12 requiring this software meter 12 to transmit the image to the data collec-tion site 18. If the data collection site 18 has communi-cated its need for the image to the software routine 600, the software routine 600 at a block 610 causes the image to be transmitted to the data collection site 18. If the data collection site 18 does not need the image, or after the software routine 600 at the block 610 causes the image to be transmitted to the data collection site 18, program flow returns to the block 602 to await processing of another image.
In connection with the software routine 600, the data collection site 18 executes a software routine 700 which is shown in Figures 8A and 8B. When the data collec-tion site 18 receives data transmitted at the block 610 from the computer 14 located at one of the content recipient locations 16 (i.e., the client) as indicated by a block 702, the software routine 700 at a block 704 determines whether it has already dealt with the checksum contained in this data. For example, the software routine 700 at the block Attorney Docket 704 may compare the checksum just received with the refer-ence checksums that it has previously processed and stored.
Indeed, the data collection site 18 may maintain a library of previously processed reference checksums and their corre-sponding IMAGES that it has previously retrieved.
If the software routine 700 at a block 704 deter-mines whether it has not already dealt with the checksum contained in the data just received, the software routine 700 at a block 706 retrieves the image from the Web site 20 corresponding to the URL contained in the data just re-ceived. At a block 708, the software routine 700 computes a reference checksum for any retrieved image. At a block 710, the software routine 700 compares the reference checksum computed at the block 708 with the checksum contained in the data received from the client at the block 702. If the software routine 700 at the block 704 determines that it has already dealt with the checksum contained in the data re-ceived from the client at the block 702, or if the reference checksum computed at the block 708 matches the checksum contained in the data received from the client at the block 702, the software routine 700 at a block 712 transmits a Attorney Docket message to the client indicating that the data collection site 18 does not need the image from the client.
However, if the reference checksum computed at the block 708 does not match the checksum contained in the data received from the client at the block 702, the software routine 700 at a block 714 attempts to retrieve the image from another source, i.e., a source other than the Web site corresponding to the URL. Such other source, for example, may be the OMS database or I-PRO's Dispatch Database re-ferred to above. If the image can be retrieved from another source as indicated by the block 716, the software routine 700 at a block 718 computes a checksum from this image and, at a block 720, compares the checksum computed at the block 178 to the checksum received from the client at the block 702. If the reference checksum computed at the block 718 matches the checksum just received from the client at the block 702, the software routine 700 at the block 712 trans-mits a message to the client indicating that the data col-lection site 18 does not need the image from the client.
However, if the reference checksum computed at the block 718 does not match the checksum received from the client at the block 702, or if an image could not be re-Attorney Docket trieved from another source as indicated by the block 716, the software routine 700 at a block 724 transmits a message to the client indicating that the client should transmit the image to the data collection site 18. After the software routine 700 at the block 712 transmits a message to the client indicating that the data collection site 18 does not need the image from the client, or after the software rou-tine 700 at the block 724 transmits a message to the client indicating that the client should transmit the image to the data collection site 18, program flow returns to the block 702 to process more data.
Thus, the data collection site 18 receives the correct images in all cases. Also, the bandwidth that is used to achieve the retrieval of these images is materially reduced. That is, the only time that a banner will be sent upstream from one of the content recipient locations 16 to the data collection site 18 is the very first time it is viewed by any member of the panel, and even in that case the transfer will only be necessary if the banner cannot be retrieved by the data collection site 18 directly from some other, more efficient source.
The software routine 100 at a block 106 stores the data metered at the block 104 and also stores any image contained in the received HTML page. Indeed, this data and image may be stored in a portion of the memory of the corre-sponding computer 14 that is referred to herein as local cache memory. This local cache memory may be under the remote control of the data collection site 18. Accordingly, the data collection server 18, for example, may purge old data and images from the local cache memory of the computer 14. When it is time to transmit the stored data and IMAGES
to the data collection site 18 as indicated at a block 108, the software routine 100 at a block 110 transmits the stored data and IMAGES. If it is not time to transmit the stored Attorney Docket data and IMAGES, or after the stored data and IMAGES have been transmitted at the block 110, program flow returns to the block 102 to await the reception of another HTML page.
The software routine 100 at the blocks 108 and 110 may transmit the stored data and IMAGES to the data collec-tion site 18 periodically, such as once a day or once a week. Alternatively, the software routine 100 may be ar-ranged to transmit the stored data and IMAGES in response to a poll from the data collection site 18. However, other initiating events may be used at the block 108 in order to determine when to transmit the stored data and IMAGES to the data collection site 18.
Generally, the upstream channel (i.e., the channel from content recipients to content providers) is fairly empty, at least as compared to the downstream channel.
However, the transmission to the data collection site 18 of every image of every web page that is viewed by the panel-ists may over tax the network 24, depending upon the number of panelists and the use they make of the Web. Accordingly, the software routine 100 may be impractical in certain circumstances. Therefore, a software routine 200 as shown Attorney Docket in Figure 3 may instead be provided for the software meters 12.
When an HTML page is received as indicated at a block 202 of the software routine 200, appropriate data are metered at a block 204. This metered data may be of the type described above in connection with the block 104. The software routine 200 at the block 204 is specifically ar-ranged to at least copy the URL which is associated with the received HTML page.
The software routine 200 at a block 206 stores the metered data including the copied URL. When it is time to transmit the stored data as indicated by a block 208, the software routine 200 at a block 210 transmits this data.
The timing of the data transmission may be similar to that described above. If it is not time to transmit the stored data and URLs, or after the stored data and URLs have been transmitted at the block 210, program flow returns to the block 202 to await the reception of another HTML page.
The data collection site 18 may execute a software routine 300 in response to the data transmitted by the software routine 200. As indicated by a block 302 of the software routine 300, when it is time to collect the data Attorney Docket metered at the content recipient locations 16, the software routine 300 collects that data at a block 304. As discussed above, the timing of data collection imposed at the block 302 may be determined by the corresponding software meter 12, in which case the functions performed at the blocks 302 and 304 by the software routine 300 are passive, i.e., the software routine 300 simply waits for the data to be trans-mitted by the corresponding software meter 12 and collects that data in an appropriate database. On the other hand, the software routine 300 at the blocks 302 and 304 can itself initiate the data collection (e.g., by polling the software meters 12).
When the data from the content recipient locations 16 corresponding to the software meters 12 have been re-ceived, the software routine 300 at a block 306 determines whether there are any URLs in the collected data. If so, the software routine 300 then retrieves from the appropriate Web sites 20 the IMAGES corresponding to each different received URL and stores the retrieved IMAGES in conjunction with the metered data collected from the corresponding content recipient locations 16. In performing this func-tion, the data collection site 18 may sort all URLs received Attorney Docket from all content recipient locations 16. Accordingly, if duplicate URLs corresponding to one of the Web sites 20 are received from the content recipient locations 16, the data collection site 18 need only visit this Web site 20 once in order to receive the corresponding image. Thus, the band-width necessary to transmit IMAGES to the data collection site 18 is materially reduced.
However, when the software routine 300 requests IMAGES from one of the Web sites 20 in accordance with the URLs received from the content recipient locations 16, it may or may not get the same IMAGES that were previously provided to the content recipient locations 16 and that were identified by the same URLs. Web site servers sometimes respond with different IMAGES based on the cookie informa-tion of the content recipient locations 16, or based on the type of browser used on the computers 14 at the content recipient locations 16, or the IP address of the users at the content recipient locations 16, etc. However, if header information (such as cookie information or browser type) is part of the data metered and stored by the software meters 12 operating on the computers 14 and if this header informa-tion is provided to the data collection site 18 by the Attorney Docket software meters 12, the data collection site 18 may be arranged to provide the corresponding Web sites with header information, allowing the data collection site 18 to re-trieve the same IMAGES that were accessed by the users.
Accordingly, the chances of the data collection site 18 retrieving the same IMAGES that were download to the appro-priate computer 14 increase.
Thus, the software routine 200 at the block 204 may be arranged to copy header information in conjunction with the metering of the received HTML page. Accordingly, the software routine 300 at the data collection site 18 uses this header information together with the URL of the Web page in order to retrieve the appropriate IMAGES from the Web sites 20.
However, the Web sites 20 may even use the time of day of the content requests from the users at the content recipient locations 16 in order to decide what pages and ad banners to download. Thus, the IMAGES retrieved by the data collection site 18 from the Web sites 20 may not correspond to the IMAGES that were provided by the Web sites 20 to the users at the content recipient locations 16. Also, this image correspondence problem can be exacerbated because the Attorney Docket request for the download of an image may come from a machine at the data collection site 18 that has a different IP
address than the IP address of the computer 14 operated by the user making the original request.
Accordingly, the software meters 12 may execute a software routine 400 shown in Figure S. The software rou-tine 400 at a block 402 receives an HTML page. As before, the software routine at a block 404 meters appropriate data, including the URLs corresponding to the received pages. The software meter 400 at a block 406 also computes a checksum of any image contained in the received HTML page. This checksum may be computed in any well known manner and is, in effect, a signature uniquely identifying a corresponding image. The software routine 400 at a block 408 stores the metered data together with the corresponding computed check-sums. When it is time to transmit the stored data and computed checksums as indicated by a block 410, this infor-mation is transmitted at a block 412.
In connection with the software routine 400, the data collection site 18 executes a software routine 500 which is shown in Figure 6. When it is time to collect data from the content recipient locations 16 as indicated at a Attorney Docket block 502, the software routine 500 collects this data, including the checksums, at a block 504. As indicated above, data collection may be initiated by the software meters 12, by the data collection site 18, or the like.
If the collected data includes URLs as indicated by a block 506, the software routine 500 at a block 508 eliminates any duplicate URLs, as described above, and retrieves IMAGES from the Web sites 20 corresponding to the remaining URLs. The software routine 500 at a block 510 computes a reference checksum for each of the IMAGES re-trieved at the block 508 and, at a block 512, compares the reference checksums with the checksums received from the content recipient locations 16. The software routine 500, at a block 514, saves each image whose reference checksum matches a corresponding checksum received from one of the content recipient locations 16. These IMAGES are saved in a database by user and/or content recipient location identifi-cation. The software routine 500 at the block 514 also saves in the database the other collected information under the appropriate user and/or content recipient location identification. If any checksum received from the content recipient locations 16 does not match the reference check-Attorney Docket sums computed at the block 510, then a suitable notation is made in any reports generated by the data collection site 18 indicating that an image could not be retrieved for the relevant reported information.
This use of a checksum may not address all ban-ners. A banner B that is served only to the IP addresses of entity E is an example. If entity El attempts to retrieve the banner B with its own IP address, entity El will get something different than the banner B. Therefore, if a checksum computed at the block 510 does not match any check-sums received from the content recipient locations 16, the software routine 500 may be arranged to query other data-bases for banners whose checksums may equal the checksums received from the content recipient locations 16. For example, the software routine 500 may investigate the OMS
database or I-PRO's Dispatch Database in order to determine whether these databases contain IMAGES corresponding to the appropriate URLs. If so, these IMAGES can be received and likewise processed at the blocks 510, 512, and 514.
Even this approach may not address all banners.
However, by combining some of the approaches described above, the number of banners and other IMAGES covered by the Attorney Docket present invention may be significantly increased. This combined approach is indicated by the software routine 600 shown in Figure 7. The software routine 600 may be used for the software meters 12 and, at a block 602, meters exposure of images contained in HTML received by a corresponding computer 14.
In metering such exposure, the software routine 600 at the block 602 first detects images of interest, such as advertising images. If advertising images are to be detected, the software routine 600 at the block 602 may be arranged to determine whether an object in the HTML has a predetermined size. For example, if the software meters 12 are arranged to meter advertisements, the predetermined size may be any of the sizes specified by the IAB for Internet advertisements. The software routine 600 at the block 602 may also be arranged to detect other characteristics of a file image in order to determine whether the file contains an image of interest. For example, the software routine 600 at the block 602 may be arranged to determine whether the image has an HREF indicating a link to another Web site, whether the HREF is a cgi script URL, whether the HREF
contains an identification tag, and/or the like. When an Attorney Docket image of interest is so identified, the software routine 600 at the block 602 may be arranged to determine and save the coordinates of the image, to track changes in the coordi-nates, to track occlusion of the image, and the like. The software routine 600 at the block 602 can also track expo-sure over time for the image. Accordingly, as the metered content is scrolled into or out of view, the software rou-tine 600 at the block 602 may be arranged to maintain a counter of the on-screen exposure time of the metered image.
Similarly, if a window is moved so as to occlude the metered image, the time that the window is in front of the metered image can be deducted from the on-screen exposure time of the metered content. Also, if a browser window is iconi-fied, the time that the browser window is iconified can be deducted from the on-screen exposure of the metered image.
The software routine 600 at a block 604 computes a checksum of the metered image, and reports the exposure data and other data, such as the checksum and any frame URL, image URL, click-through URL, ALT text, and/or identifica-tion tag, to the data collection site 18. The software routine 600 at a block 608 then determines if the data collection site 18 needs the image. For example, the data Attorney Docket collection site 18 may first determine its need, as dis-cussed below, and then send an instruction, based on that need, to the appropriate software meter 12 requiring this software meter 12 to transmit the image to the data collec-tion site 18. If the data collection site 18 has communi-cated its need for the image to the software routine 600, the software routine 600 at a block 610 causes the image to be transmitted to the data collection site 18. If the data collection site 18 does not need the image, or after the software routine 600 at the block 610 causes the image to be transmitted to the data collection site 18, program flow returns to the block 602 to await processing of another image.
In connection with the software routine 600, the data collection site 18 executes a software routine 700 which is shown in Figures 8A and 8B. When the data collec-tion site 18 receives data transmitted at the block 610 from the computer 14 located at one of the content recipient locations 16 (i.e., the client) as indicated by a block 702, the software routine 700 at a block 704 determines whether it has already dealt with the checksum contained in this data. For example, the software routine 700 at the block Attorney Docket 704 may compare the checksum just received with the refer-ence checksums that it has previously processed and stored.
Indeed, the data collection site 18 may maintain a library of previously processed reference checksums and their corre-sponding IMAGES that it has previously retrieved.
If the software routine 700 at a block 704 deter-mines whether it has not already dealt with the checksum contained in the data just received, the software routine 700 at a block 706 retrieves the image from the Web site 20 corresponding to the URL contained in the data just re-ceived. At a block 708, the software routine 700 computes a reference checksum for any retrieved image. At a block 710, the software routine 700 compares the reference checksum computed at the block 708 with the checksum contained in the data received from the client at the block 702. If the software routine 700 at the block 704 determines that it has already dealt with the checksum contained in the data re-ceived from the client at the block 702, or if the reference checksum computed at the block 708 matches the checksum contained in the data received from the client at the block 702, the software routine 700 at a block 712 transmits a Attorney Docket message to the client indicating that the data collection site 18 does not need the image from the client.
However, if the reference checksum computed at the block 708 does not match the checksum contained in the data received from the client at the block 702, the software routine 700 at a block 714 attempts to retrieve the image from another source, i.e., a source other than the Web site corresponding to the URL. Such other source, for example, may be the OMS database or I-PRO's Dispatch Database re-ferred to above. If the image can be retrieved from another source as indicated by the block 716, the software routine 700 at a block 718 computes a checksum from this image and, at a block 720, compares the checksum computed at the block 178 to the checksum received from the client at the block 702. If the reference checksum computed at the block 718 matches the checksum just received from the client at the block 702, the software routine 700 at the block 712 trans-mits a message to the client indicating that the data col-lection site 18 does not need the image from the client.
However, if the reference checksum computed at the block 718 does not match the checksum received from the client at the block 702, or if an image could not be re-Attorney Docket trieved from another source as indicated by the block 716, the software routine 700 at a block 724 transmits a message to the client indicating that the client should transmit the image to the data collection site 18. After the software routine 700 at the block 712 transmits a message to the client indicating that the data collection site 18 does not need the image from the client, or after the software rou-tine 700 at the block 724 transmits a message to the client indicating that the client should transmit the image to the data collection site 18, program flow returns to the block 702 to process more data.
Thus, the data collection site 18 receives the correct images in all cases. Also, the bandwidth that is used to achieve the retrieval of these images is materially reduced. That is, the only time that a banner will be sent upstream from one of the content recipient locations 16 to the data collection site 18 is the very first time it is viewed by any member of the panel, and even in that case the transfer will only be necessary if the banner cannot be retrieved by the data collection site 18 directly from some other, more efficient source.
Attorney Docket Certain modifications of the present invention have been discussed above. Other modifications will occur to those practicing in the art of the present invention.
For example, a single data collection site 18 is shown in Figure 1. However, it should be understood that more than one data collection site 18 may be used to collect data, as desired.
Also, although the term checksum is used herein, it should be understood that a checksum could be a signature or any other identifier by which content can be uniquely identified.
Moreover, the software meters 12 are installed on corresponding computers 14 at the statistically selected content recipient locations 16 which may be referred to above as a panel. Instead, the software meters 12 may be installed on the corresponding computers 14 of a subset of this panel. The remaining members of the panel may have software meters which do not have the capability of provid-ing images back to the data collection site 18.
Accordingly, the description of the present inven-tion is to be construed as illustrative only and is for the purpose of teaching those skilled in the art the best mode Attorney Docket of carrying out the invention. The details may be varied substantially without departing from the spirit of the invention, and the exclusive use of all modifications which are within the scope of the appended claims is reserved.
For example, a single data collection site 18 is shown in Figure 1. However, it should be understood that more than one data collection site 18 may be used to collect data, as desired.
Also, although the term checksum is used herein, it should be understood that a checksum could be a signature or any other identifier by which content can be uniquely identified.
Moreover, the software meters 12 are installed on corresponding computers 14 at the statistically selected content recipient locations 16 which may be referred to above as a panel. Instead, the software meters 12 may be installed on the corresponding computers 14 of a subset of this panel. The remaining members of the panel may have software meters which do not have the capability of provid-ing images back to the data collection site 18.
Accordingly, the description of the present inven-tion is to be construed as illustrative only and is for the purpose of teaching those skilled in the art the best mode Attorney Docket of carrying out the invention. The details may be varied substantially without departing from the spirit of the invention, and the exclusive use of all modifications which are within the scope of the appended claims is reserved.
Claims (37)
1. A data collection server arranged to collect Web use data from a panel of content recipients, wherein the Web use data is of the type that provides a statistical basis for extrapolating the Web use data over at least a relevant population segment, wherein the Web use data includes information about use of an image downloaded from a Web site to a member of the panel, and wherein the data collection server is arranged to retrieve the image from the member of the panel.
2. A method of metering Web use comprising:
receiving, from a content recipient, a checksum computed for an image downloaded from a Web site to the content recipient; and retrieving the image from the content recipient when the retrieved checksum does not match a reference checksum.
receiving, from a content recipient, a checksum computed for an image downloaded from a Web site to the content recipient; and retrieving the image from the content recipient when the retrieved checksum does not match a reference checksum.
3. The method of claim 2 wherein retrieving the image comprises retrieving the image from the content recipient at the time that the checksum is retrieved.
4. The method of claim 2 wherein further comprising retrieving a reference image from the Web site.
5. The method of claim 2 wherein the checksum includes a URL
associated with the image, and further comprising retrieving a reference image from the Web site according to the URL.
associated with the image, and further comprising retrieving a reference image from the Web site according to the URL.
6. The method of claim 2 wherein the checksum includes header information associated with the image, and further comprising retrieving a reference image from the Web site based upon the header information.
7. The method of claim 5 further comprising retrieving the image from the content recipient if the image cannot be retrieved from the Web site.
8. A method performed at a content recipient comprising:
receiving an image from a Web site;
computing a checksum for the image at the content recipient;
transmitting the checksum from the content recipient to a data collection site; and transmitting the image from the content recipient to the data collection site in response to a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the image.
receiving an image from a Web site;
computing a checksum for the image at the content recipient;
transmitting the checksum from the content recipient to a data collection site; and transmitting the image from the content recipient to the data collection site in response to a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the image.
9. The method of claim 8 wherein transmitting the image comprises transmitting to the data collection site non-checksum information related to the image.
10. The method of claim 9 wherein the non-checksum information includes a size of the image.
11. The method of claim 9 wherein the non-checksum information includes a location of the image on a page.
12. The method of claim 11 wherein the non-checksum information includes a URL of a page containing the image.
13. The method of claim 9 wherein the non-checksum information includes a URL of the image.
14. The method of claim 9 wherein the non-checksum information includes a URL of a click-through location.
15. The method of claim 9 wherein the non-checksum information includes an identification tag which identifies the image.
16. The method of claim 9 wherein the non-checksum information includes ALT text relating to the image.
17. The method of claim 9 wherein the non-checksum information includes duration of image exposure.
18. The method of claim 8 further comprising-detecting the image in information downloaded from the Web site based upon size.
19. The method of claim 8 further comprising-detecting the image in information downloaded from the Web site based upon an ID associated with the image.
20. The method of claim 8 further comprising-detecting the image in information downloaded from the Web site based upon a URL associated with the image.
21. The method of claim 8 further comprising-detecting the image in information downloaded from the Web site based upon a click-through URL associated with the image.
22. A method performed at a data collection site, the method comprising:
receiving a checksum from a content recipient, wherein the checksum is related to an image transmitted to the content recipient;
comparing a reference checksum to the received checksum;
if the received and reference checksums do not match, transmitting to the content recipient a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the image; and receiving the image from the content recipient in response to the message.
receiving a checksum from a content recipient, wherein the checksum is related to an image transmitted to the content recipient;
comparing a reference checksum to the received checksum;
if the received and reference checksums do not match, transmitting to the content recipient a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the image; and receiving the image from the content recipient in response to the message.
23. The method of claim 22 wherein receiving the checksum comprises receiving non-checksum information related to the image.
24. The method of claim 23 wherein the non-checksum information includes a size of the image.
25. The method of claim 23 wherein the non-checksum information includes a location of the image on a page.
26. The method of claim 23 wherein the non-checksum information includes a URL of a page containing the image.
27. The method of claim 23 wherein the non-checksum information includes a URL of the image.
28. The method of claim 23 wherein the non-checksum information includes a URL of a click-through location.
29..The method of claim 23 wherein the non-checksum information includes an identification tag which identifies the image.
30. The method of claim 23 wherein the non-checksum information includes ALT text relating to the image.
31. The method of claim 23 wherein the non-checksum information includes duration of image exposure.
32. The method of claim 22 further comprising accessing the image from memory at the data collection site if the received and reference checksums match.
33. The method of claim 32 wherein accessing the image from memory comprises accessing the image from memory based upon the received checksum.
34. The method of claim 22 further comprising:
retrieving a reference image from a Web site to the data collection site; and computing the reference checksum from the reference image.
retrieving a reference image from a Web site to the data collection site; and computing the reference checksum from the reference image.
35. The method of claim 22 further comprising retrieving the reference checksum from memory at the data collection site.
36. The method of claim 35 further comprising retrieving the image from memory if the reference checksum and the received checksum match.
37. A method performed at a data collection site, the method comprising:
receiving a first checksum and a URL from a content recipient, wherein the first checksum and the URL are related to a first image transmitted to the content recipient;
retrieving a second image from a Web site based upon the URL;
computing a second checksum corresponding to the second image;
saving the second image if the first and second checksums match;
if the first and second checksums do not match, transmitting to the content recipient a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the first image; and receiving the first image from the content recipient in response to the message.
receiving a first checksum and a URL from a content recipient, wherein the first checksum and the URL are related to a first image transmitted to the content recipient;
retrieving a second image from a Web site based upon the URL;
computing a second checksum corresponding to the second image;
saving the second image if the first and second checksums match;
if the first and second checksums do not match, transmitting to the content recipient a message from the data collection site requesting the content recipient to transmit the first image; and receiving the first image from the content recipient in response to the message.
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US09/145,090 US6510462B2 (en) | 1998-09-01 | 1998-09-01 | Collection of images in Web use reporting system |
| US09/145,090 | 1998-09-01 |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2272516A1 CA2272516A1 (en) | 2000-03-01 |
| CA2272516C true CA2272516C (en) | 2008-12-30 |
Family
ID=22511566
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA002272516A Expired - Lifetime CA2272516C (en) | 1998-09-01 | 1999-05-19 | Collection of images in web use reporting system |
Country Status (2)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (1) | US6510462B2 (en) |
| CA (1) | CA2272516C (en) |
Families Citing this family (51)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US7607147B1 (en) * | 1996-12-11 | 2009-10-20 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Interactive service device metering systems |
| US6453334B1 (en) | 1997-06-16 | 2002-09-17 | Streamtheory, Inc. | Method and apparatus to allow remotely located computer programs and/or data to be accessed on a local computer in a secure, time-limited manner, with persistent caching |
| US6993495B2 (en) * | 1998-03-02 | 2006-01-31 | Insightexpress, L.L.C. | Dynamically assigning a survey to a respondent |
| US6477504B1 (en) * | 1998-03-02 | 2002-11-05 | Ix, Inc. | Method and apparatus for automating the conduct of surveys over a network system |
| US6058417A (en) * | 1998-10-23 | 2000-05-02 | Ebay Inc. | Information presentation and management in an online trading environment |
| US7007076B1 (en) * | 1998-10-23 | 2006-02-28 | Ebay Inc. | Information presentation and management in an online trading environment |
| US7421723B2 (en) * | 1999-01-07 | 2008-09-02 | Nielsen Media Research, Inc. | Detection of media links in broadcast signals |
| US6954783B1 (en) * | 1999-11-12 | 2005-10-11 | Bmc Software, Inc. | System and method of mediating a web page |
| US6704712B1 (en) * | 2000-04-14 | 2004-03-09 | Shutterfly, Inc. | Remote film scanning and image transfer system, protocol and method |
| US7673229B1 (en) | 2000-06-07 | 2010-03-02 | Ebay Inc. | Apparatus and method for generating sub-codes to a turbo-encoder |
| US7526440B2 (en) | 2000-06-12 | 2009-04-28 | Walker Digital, Llc | Method, computer product, and apparatus for facilitating the provision of opinions to a shopper from a panel of peers |
| JP2002082994A (en) * | 2000-06-28 | 2002-03-22 | Fujitsu Ltd | Internet data base |
| US8831995B2 (en) * | 2000-11-06 | 2014-09-09 | Numecent Holdings, Inc. | Optimized server for streamed applications |
| US20020083183A1 (en) * | 2000-11-06 | 2002-06-27 | Sanjay Pujare | Conventionally coded application conversion system for streamed delivery and execution |
| US6918113B2 (en) * | 2000-11-06 | 2005-07-12 | Endeavors Technology, Inc. | Client installation and execution system for streamed applications |
| US7062567B2 (en) | 2000-11-06 | 2006-06-13 | Endeavors Technology, Inc. | Intelligent network streaming and execution system for conventionally coded applications |
| US6959320B2 (en) * | 2000-11-06 | 2005-10-25 | Endeavors Technology, Inc. | Client-side performance optimization system for streamed applications |
| US7043524B2 (en) * | 2000-11-06 | 2006-05-09 | Omnishift Technologies, Inc. | Network caching system for streamed applications |
| US7451196B1 (en) | 2000-12-15 | 2008-11-11 | Stream Theory, Inc. | Method and system for executing a software application in a virtual environment |
| US8095589B2 (en) | 2002-03-07 | 2012-01-10 | Compete, Inc. | Clickstream analysis methods and systems |
| US10296919B2 (en) | 2002-03-07 | 2019-05-21 | Comscore, Inc. | System and method of a click event data collection platform |
| US7239981B2 (en) * | 2002-07-26 | 2007-07-03 | Arbitron Inc. | Systems and methods for gathering audience measurement data |
| US8055753B2 (en) * | 2003-06-11 | 2011-11-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Peer to peer job monitoring and control in grid computing systems |
| US8103742B1 (en) | 2003-11-24 | 2012-01-24 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Deferred and off-loaded rendering of selected portions of web pages to incorporate late-arriving service data |
| US8452880B2 (en) * | 2003-12-22 | 2013-05-28 | Oracle International Corporation | System and method for verifying intended contents of an electronic message |
| GB2409786B (en) * | 2003-12-29 | 2006-12-13 | Nokia Corp | Content distribution |
| US7302475B2 (en) * | 2004-02-20 | 2007-11-27 | Harris Interactive, Inc. | System and method for measuring reactions to product packaging, advertising, or product features over a computer-based network |
| US20070271145A1 (en) * | 2004-07-20 | 2007-11-22 | Vest Herb D | Consolidated System for Managing Internet Ads |
| US20060048136A1 (en) * | 2004-08-25 | 2006-03-02 | Vries Jeff D | Interception-based resource detection system |
| US7240162B2 (en) | 2004-10-22 | 2007-07-03 | Stream Theory, Inc. | System and method for predictive streaming |
| WO2006055445A2 (en) | 2004-11-13 | 2006-05-26 | Stream Theory, Inc. | Hybrid local/remote streaming |
| US20060218165A1 (en) * | 2005-03-23 | 2006-09-28 | Vries Jeffrey De | Explicit overlay integration rules |
| WO2006102621A2 (en) * | 2005-03-23 | 2006-09-28 | Stream Theory, Inc. | System and method for tracking changes to files in streaming applications |
| US8024523B2 (en) | 2007-11-07 | 2011-09-20 | Endeavors Technologies, Inc. | Opportunistic block transmission with time constraints |
| US7930693B2 (en) * | 2005-04-04 | 2011-04-19 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and system for accessing and launching a java based applet as a locally installed application |
| US7975020B1 (en) * | 2005-07-15 | 2011-07-05 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Dynamic updating of rendered web pages with supplemental content |
| US7975019B1 (en) * | 2005-07-15 | 2011-07-05 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Dynamic supplementation of rendered web pages with content supplied by a separate source |
| US9105028B2 (en) | 2005-08-10 | 2015-08-11 | Compete, Inc. | Monitoring clickstream behavior of viewers of online advertisements and search results |
| US8670319B2 (en) * | 2005-09-19 | 2014-03-11 | Google, Inc. | Traffic prediction for web sites |
| US8271865B1 (en) | 2005-09-19 | 2012-09-18 | Google Inc. | Detection and utilization of document reading speed |
| EP3709539A1 (en) * | 2005-09-26 | 2020-09-16 | Nielsen Media Research, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for metering computer-based media presentation |
| EP2030439B1 (en) | 2006-06-15 | 2018-09-19 | The Nielsen Company (US), LLC | Methods and apparatus to meter content exposure using closed caption information |
| US8261345B2 (en) * | 2006-10-23 | 2012-09-04 | Endeavors Technologies, Inc. | Rule-based application access management |
| AU2015252136B2 (en) * | 2007-10-18 | 2017-03-02 | The Nielsen Company (U.S.), Inc. | Methods and apparatus to create a media measurement reference database from a plurality of distributed source |
| US8892738B2 (en) | 2007-11-07 | 2014-11-18 | Numecent Holdings, Inc. | Deriving component statistics for a stream enabled application |
| US20130151687A1 (en) * | 2008-05-28 | 2013-06-13 | Adobe Systems Incorporated | Systems and Methods for Monitoring Content Consumption |
| US20100121905A1 (en) * | 2008-10-24 | 2010-05-13 | Mcknight Thomas R | Visual Content Detection for Computer-Delivered Advertisement Exposure Measurements |
| US8549357B2 (en) | 2009-12-11 | 2013-10-01 | Aol Inc. | Computer-implemented methods and systems for testing online systems and content |
| WO2013119934A1 (en) * | 2012-02-09 | 2013-08-15 | Aol Inc. | Systems and methods for testing online systems and content |
| US9055021B2 (en) | 2012-11-30 | 2015-06-09 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Methods and apparatus to monitor impressions of social media messages |
| US9832155B2 (en) | 2013-01-31 | 2017-11-28 | The Nielsen Company (Us), Llc | Methods and apparatus to monitor impressions of social media messages |
Family Cites Families (19)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US5388255A (en) * | 1991-12-19 | 1995-02-07 | Wang Laboratories, Inc. | System for updating local views from a global database using time stamps to determine when a change has occurred |
| US5799292A (en) * | 1994-04-29 | 1998-08-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | Adaptive hypermedia presentation method and system |
| US5961582A (en) * | 1994-10-25 | 1999-10-05 | Acorn Technologies, Inc. | Distributed and portable execution environment |
| JPH08249317A (en) * | 1995-03-08 | 1996-09-27 | Toshiba Corp | Document providing method, document providing device, and document requesting device |
| US5675510A (en) | 1995-06-07 | 1997-10-07 | Pc Meter L.P. | Computer use meter and analyzer |
| US5923846A (en) * | 1995-11-06 | 1999-07-13 | Microsoft Corporation | Method of uploading a message containing a file reference to a server and downloading a file from the server using the file reference |
| US5903723A (en) * | 1995-12-21 | 1999-05-11 | Intel Corporation | Method and apparatus for transmitting electronic mail attachments with attachment references |
| US5842216A (en) * | 1996-05-03 | 1998-11-24 | Mitsubishi Electric Information Technology Center America, Inc. | System for sending small positive data notification messages over a network to indicate that a recipient node should obtain a particular version of a particular data item |
| US6018619A (en) * | 1996-05-24 | 2000-01-25 | Microsoft Corporation | Method, system and apparatus for client-side usage tracking of information server systems |
| US5864837A (en) * | 1996-06-12 | 1999-01-26 | Unisys Corporation | Methods and apparatus for efficient caching in a distributed environment |
| US5898836A (en) * | 1997-01-14 | 1999-04-27 | Netmind Services, Inc. | Change-detection tool indicating degree and location of change of internet documents by comparison of cyclic-redundancy-check(CRC) signatures |
| US5978842A (en) * | 1997-01-14 | 1999-11-02 | Netmind Technologies, Inc. | Distributed-client change-detection tool with change-detection augmented by multiple clients |
| US5796952A (en) | 1997-03-21 | 1998-08-18 | Dot Com Development, Inc. | Method and apparatus for tracking client interaction with a network resource and creating client profiles and resource database |
| US5944780A (en) * | 1997-05-05 | 1999-08-31 | At&T Corp | Network with shared caching |
| US6014698A (en) * | 1997-05-19 | 2000-01-11 | Matchlogic, Inc. | System using first banner request that can not be blocked from reaching a server for accurately counting displays of banners on network terminals |
| US6038601A (en) * | 1997-07-21 | 2000-03-14 | Tibco, Inc. | Method and apparatus for storing and delivering documents on the internet |
| US5951642A (en) * | 1997-08-06 | 1999-09-14 | Hypertak, Inc. | System for collecting detailed internet information on the basis of the condition of activities of information viewers viewing information of service providers |
| US6006217A (en) * | 1997-11-07 | 1999-12-21 | International Business Machines Corporation | Technique for providing enhanced relevance information for documents retrieved in a multi database search |
| US6212565B1 (en) * | 1998-08-26 | 2001-04-03 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Apparatus and method for improving performance of proxy server arrays that use persistent connections |
-
1998
- 1998-09-01 US US09/145,090 patent/US6510462B2/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
-
1999
- 1999-05-19 CA CA002272516A patent/CA2272516C/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| US20020002595A1 (en) | 2002-01-03 |
| CA2272516A1 (en) | 2000-03-01 |
| US6510462B2 (en) | 2003-01-21 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CA2272516C (en) | Collection of images in web use reporting system | |
| US6434614B1 (en) | Tracking of internet advertisements using banner tags | |
| TW482961B (en) | Method and apparatus for measuring user access to image data | |
| US7844488B2 (en) | Method of delivery, targeting, and measuring advertising over networks | |
| US8862712B2 (en) | Use of browser history file to determine web site reach | |
| US6418470B2 (en) | Metering of internet content using a control | |
| KR100377515B1 (en) | Method for managing advertisements on Internet and System therefor | |
| CA2396565A1 (en) | System and method for estimating prevalence of digital content on the world-wide-web | |
| US20050021731A1 (en) | Traffic flow analysis method | |
| EP1236145A1 (en) | Method for brokering internet advertisements on the internet and host therefor | |
| US20080300972A1 (en) | System and method for generating user-assisted advertising relevancy scores | |
| US8738447B2 (en) | Banner advertisement transfer server and banner advertisement transfer program | |
| KR20000058428A (en) | Analysis method for network web log and Web advertising method for the same | |
| WO2002086773A1 (en) | Method of tracking user behaviour within a communications network | |
| JP2002133281A (en) | Delivery system for text advertisement | |
| KR20000036686A (en) | Method for advertising ads centerally in web hosting server | |
| KR20000037311A (en) | Real time advertising method on Internet | |
| KR20000058959A (en) | Advertising method of using versatile cursors of window |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| EEER | Examination request | ||
| MKEX | Expiry |
Effective date: 20190521 |