Automatic broker tools and techniques

The invention provides sampling, escrowing, and other tools and techniques for facilitating transactions that involve digital goods. Transactions may be of the goods-for-payment type, or they may be barter transactions that exchange goods for goods. Digital goods may be escrowed with an automatic broker. The broker may also create and distribute samples of the goods, which are created by techniques such as distorting or burdening part or all of a copy of the goods. In some cases the broker may accept and act on approval or disapproval notices from the parties to a transaction, to cancel or complete a transaction. In other cases, the broker's participation is limited to providing and/or authenticating samples.

 

What is claimed and desired to be secured by patent is:

1. A sample of digital content produced by a process for facilitating a transaction involving digital content, the sample provided to a sample-receiving party over a computer network, the process comprising the steps of:

an automatic broker tool receiving a copy of the digital content; and

the automatic broker tool creating the sample from the digital content;

wherein the sample is characterized in that it contains useful information about the digital content without containing a complete and accurate copy of the digital content, thereby preventing an unauthorized use of the digital content by the sample-receiving party.

2. The sample of claim 1, wherein the process that produced the sample comprises the step of distorting a copy of at least a portion of the digital content.

3. The sample of claim 1, wherein the process that produced the sample comprises the step of changing the order of data in a copy of at least a portion of the digital content.

4. The sample of claim 1, wherein the process that produced the sample comprises the step of adding steganographic data to a copy of at least a portion of the digital content.

5. The sample of claim 1, wherein the process that produced the sample comprises the step of adding spurious data to a copy of at least a portion of the digital content.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to the technical goal of providing prospective buyers and sellers of digital content with information and assurances, and relates more particularly to sampling, escrow, and barter tools and techniques for an automated broker to facilitate a market in digital content.

TECHNICAL BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Advances in computer technology have created an enormous body of digital content, namely, content stored as bits in some computer-readable medium. Some categories of digital content have widely used non-digital counterparts. For instance, books are still more widely available in paper form than in digital form. Other categories of digital content exist primarily or solely in response to the widespread use of digital computers; examples include databases and software. Some categories of digital content exist primarily to entertain. Others reflect research, development, or marketing efforts. Regardless of such distinctions, one result of the computer revolution is a growing body of valuable artistic, technical, business, academic, and other content stored in various digital formats.

Another result of the computer revolution is relatively easy communication of digital content. The Internet (including the World Wide Web), email, "instant messaging" services, "chat rooms", news groups, electronic discussion forums and bulletin boards, and other computer-aided avenues of communication are now available in many parts of the world. One might expect these communication tools to support a thriving market in the growing body of digital content. Indeed, much digital content is advertised, purchased, and/or delivered through the Internet and other computer-assisted communication tools.

For example, demonstration versions of computer software can be downloaded by prospective users without any direct human action, once the software owner selects the software version and places a copy of the selected software on a web site, FTP site, or other electronically accessible location. Full-function versions can also be paid for and then obtained through commercial transactions that require little or no direct human action, other than having the seller initially provide a master copy of the software and having each buyer provide payment information such as a credit card number. Shareware software can similarly be downloaded using computer programs as intermediaries, rather than relying on a human sales clerk. In short, online software shops are well-known.

Moreover, transactions involving goods other than software can also be performed using software sales "personnel". Auction sites such as www.ebay.com facilitate transactions involving software and many other types of goods, both digital and non-digital. Reverse auction or "demand collection" sites such as www.priceline.com facilitate transactions involving both goods and services.

These and/or other "e-commerce" sites offer prospective buyers and competing sellers information about goods and services of virtually every type, and many sites also allow one to purchase goods and/or services on-line. To give just a few examples, web sites exist to advertise and/or sell patent rights, games, software, books, mortgage services, oil and gas properties, medical supplies, scientific equipment, factory simulation services, insurance services, computers, management consulting services, investment banking services, and "adult" content and services. Sellers' sites generally provide textual descriptions of the goods and/or services being offered, and many offerings also include images and/or sounds that represent or constitute the offered goods and/or services. The images may be still images, video clips such as those in MPEG or AVI format, or user-navigable images such as those in the IPIX format.

The images sometimes include samples in the form of partial images or thumbnail images. These samples are apparently selected by the seller and/or approved by the seller for posting based on the seller's understanding of the techniques used to create the samples. That is, the seller apparently knows what prospective buyers will see when they view the samples. If the goods are digital images, these samples may be presented with the promise that complete and/or larger images are available to be downloaded in exchange for payment. Similarly, video and/or audio clips showing part of a work may be presented to encourage purchase of a copy of the complete work.

Despite the enormous amount of activity in electronic commerce, problems remain. One factor that makes the market in digital content risky is the ease with which most digital content can be copied. Of course, many efforts have been made to reduce unauthorized use of digital content. For instance, copyright laws, other intellectual property laws, encryption that prevents use of a product without user registration and/or payment, other technical measures, and the basic honesty of many people, can each provide some protection against the theft of digital content.

But a content owner may still be justifiably reluctant to make that content available for inspection by prospective buyers, lest the content be copied and used without paying the owner. On the other hand, buyers may quite reasonably want to inspect the digital content before they pay for it. Unless the buyer and the seller have a working relationship based on successful completion of earlier transactions, or trust each other for some other reason, the lack of trust can prevent successful completion of the transaction even when such completion would benefit both parties.

To help illustrate the issues of trust involved in a transaction between a seller and a buyer, we define some notation. This notation, or similar notation, may have been used previously but the notation itself is not the invention. Rather, the notation is used in this Technical Background to describe prior approaches to marketplaces in digital content, and it is also used in later sections to describe the present invention, just as English (or another language) can be used for both purposes. That is, the fact that the notation is used in discussing both past approaches and the present invention does not mean that the invention described with that notation was previously known.

Naming the initial participants and items involved is straightforward: we use "S" to denote a seller, "B" for a buyer, "G" for the goods or services being sold, and "$" for payment (understanding that other currencies than U.S. dollars may also be used).

If all goes well a seller S transfers goods G to a buyer B and receives payment $ as compensation. But the order of events in the transaction can be very important, so the notation also describes different orders. When S hands B the goods and then receives the payment, in that order, the steps in this transaction may be represented as:

S-G->B; S<-$-B.

Diagrams or other notation could also be used; the notation above has the advantage of not requiring special characters or any drawing (graphics) facility. If the seller first receives payment and only then turns over the goods to B, the transaction may be represented as:

S<-$-B; S-G->B

or as:

S<-$-B

S-G->B

If we do not know or do not care about the order (either act may occur first, or they may partially or completely overlap each other), then the transaction is shown as:

(S-G->B.parallel.S<-$-B)

or, equivalently, as:

(S<-$-B.parallel.S-G->B)

Finally, if the two acts must overlap in time, we write:

(S-G->B && S<-$-B)

or, equivalently:

(S<-$-B && S-G->B).

A single "I" means "or" in the sense of one act or another act or both acts being done. A single "&" means "and" in the sense of both acts being done.

S and B will often negotiate before exchanging goods and payment, with one or more offers, counteroffers, conditions, and/or acceptances before goods and payment are exchanged. Such negotiations are written as:

S<-N->B

The "N'" stands for "negotiation(s)" and the arrow is bidirectional to indicate the back-and-forth nature of most negotiations.

The seller S will often provide (and/or the buyer B will require) a description and/or a sample of the goods. These events can be represented (and annotated with comments) like this:

S-DM->B //description and sample

S-D->B //description only

S-M->B //sample only

The sample M is a conventional sample, that is, it is obtained using tools and techniques which are known in the art and it is provided in the context of conventional commercial transactions. As explained later, the present invention provides novel samples, samples which are obtained by novel tools and/or techniques, and/or samples which are used in the novel context provided by the invention.

If a step is optional, we precede it by "?". For instance, if the seller's provision of a sample can be either present or omitted without substantially altering the trust (or other) issues being discussed, but negotiation is essential, we could write:

(S<-N->B.parallel.?(S-M->B)); (S-G->B.parallel.S<-$-B)

The notation could be made even more complex, borrowing ideas from areas like computer programming, logical calculus, and multiprocessing, but the notation is not the goal. Understanding and improving transactions is the goal. We will use the notation and/or Figures hereafter.

Consider some trust issues, which may depend on the order of events in a transaction. For instance, consider transaction T1, which is illustrated in FIG. 1 and described by the notation as follows:

1. ?(S-D->B) .parallel. ?(S-M->B)

2. S<-$-B

3. S-G->B

If the description and/or sample provided in step (1) are faulty, then the payment in step (2) may be too high. For instance, the quality of the goods may be lower than the sample led the buyer to expect. Even if any description and/or sample provided in step (1) are accurate, seller S may "take the money and run", so the desired step (3) doesn't occur as buyer B expected. Buyer B is forced to trust that descriptions and/or samples provided by seller S accurately represent the goods G, and buyer B is also forced to trust that seller S will not disappear after being paid, leaving buyer B without the goods G for which B paid.

An alternative is transaction T2, which is illustrated in FIG. 2 and described by the notation as follows:

1. ?(S-D->B) .parallel. ?(S-M->B)

2. S-G->B

3. S<-$-B

This approach forces seller S to trust that buyer B will not simply take the goods and fail to make payment in the desired step (3).

Another alternative is transaction T3:

1. ?(S-D->B) .parallel. ?(S-M->B)

2. S-G->B && S<-$-B

That is, the seller and the buyer each hand the other the goods and the payment, respectively, at essentially the same time. This may be good in theory, but it is difficult in practice. Each must trust the other not to outwit or overpower them and then leave with both the goods and the payment, leaving one party empty-handed. To succeed reliably, T3 requires matching levels of trust and power, which are relatively rare when one looks at the wide range of parties that could mutually benefit from completing a transaction with each other.

Each of these transactions can be improved somewhat by having each party learn more about the other through negotiations, using transactional approaches such as those which are illustrated in FIG. 3 and summarized in the following notation:

Transaction TIN:

1. ?(S-D->B) .parallel. ?(S-M->B)

2. S<-N->B

3. S<-$-B

4. S-G->B

Transaction T2N:

1. ?(S-D->B) .parallel. ?(S-M->B)

2. S<-N->B

3. S-G->B

4. S<-$-B

Transaction T3N:

1. ?(S-D->B) .parallel. ?(S-M->B)

2. S<-N->B

3. S-G->B && S<-$-B

But trust issues remain. In T1N, B might not receive accurate samples and descriptions, and B might not receive the goods or services after paying for them. In T2N, S might not receive payment after providing the goods or services. In T3N, each party may be at risk of being outwitted or overpowered by the other.

Another set of alternatives use a conventional agent A such as a broker, attorney, banker, or other "trusted third party" who is trusted by virtue of being neutral, bonded, licensed, and/or regulated, for example. The agent A is a human, or an institution directly operated and controlled by humans. One transaction T4 involving seller S, buyer B, agent A, goods or services G, payment $, and approvals OK is illustrated generally in FIG. 4. Time advances as one moves from the top of the Figure toward the bottom. In the notation we have been using, the transaction T4 goes something like this:

1. ?(S-D->B) .parallel. ?(S-M->B)

2. ?(S<-N->B) // could also precede step (n), or precede and follow, or overlap

3. A<-$-B // agent A receives money from buyer; A "holds" or "escrows" the $

4. S<-OK-A // A confirms to S that A has the payment

5. S-G->B

6. S<-OK-B A<-OK-B // B OK's the goods and OK's payment completion

7. S<-$-A // A releases the funds to S

However, agent A must be trusted by both seller S and buyer B. A must be trusted by B, lest A leaves with the payment after step (3). B must also trust A to perform step (7) when, and only when, approval is given to A by B in step (6). A must be trusted by S, lest A leaves with the payment after step (3), or receives the payment but denies receiving it (no step (4)). There are other ways for the transaction to go wrong if trust is undeserved (such as partial payments or damaged goods or faulty timing), but these suffice for now.

Another transaction T5 involving an agent goes like this:

1. ?(S-D->B) .parallel. ?(S-M->B)

2. ?(S<-N->B) // could also precede (n), or precede and follow, or overlap

3. (A<-$-B .parallel. S-G->A) // agent receives money from buyer and goods from seller

4. (A-OK->B .parallel. S<-OK-A) // agent confirms goods & payment OK and in hand

5. (A-G->B .parallel. S<-$-A) // agent releases goods to buyer & payment to seller Again, agent A must be trustworthy and trusted. Otherwise, for instance, A could improperly retain possession of both the goods and the money after step (3). A could also intentionally misrepresent the amount, quality, or receipt of the goods, and/or the amount, quality, or receipt of the payment in step (4). A could also release an item (goods or payment) to one party but not release the other item in step (5) if A improperly favors one party unbeknownst (at least beforehand) to the other.

In short, conventional approaches to commercial transactions pose significant risks to buyers and sellers. These risks are increased by the ease with which digital goods can be copied once they are made available for inspection. The need for trust is also increased by the fact that the Internet and other communications media make it more likely than ever that a prospective buyer and prospective seller do not have a history of successfully concluded transactions (at least not with each other), and that they may well be separated by long geographic distances, by different natural languages, by different national laws, and/or by cultural differences.

Accordingly, it would be an advance to provide tools and techniques which make it easier for prospective buyers to inspect digital goods without thereby creating a significant risk that those goods will be copied, and hence stolen, by someone who is merely posing as a buyer.

More generally, it would also be an advance to improve the market for digital content by providing tools and techniques which reduce and/or meet the need for the parties in a transaction to trust each other.

Such tools and techniques are disclosed and claimed herein.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to methods, articles, signals, and systems for facilitating electronic commerce in digital goods. Examples of digital goods include musical works, visual works, and other artistic works in digital form; patent applications, engineering documents, CAD files, and other technical information in digital form;

software; mailing lists, customer databases, and other marketing information in digital form; intellectual property rights in patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and/or technical or marketing know-how; and other information in digital form that does or may possess commercial value. The invention facilitates commerce in such goods by reducing or eliminating barriers by providing an improved basis for the parties to expect successfull completion of the desired transaction.

In a transaction according to one embodiment of the invention, each of the two or more parties to a transaction provides an inventive automatic broker with (a) the ability to deliver some item of value to one or more of the other parties, such as goods or payment, and (b) conditional authorization to deliver that item. Each party then reviews information from the other party or parties (often sent by way of the broker) and approves or cancels completion of the transaction. If the parties approve completion, then the broker effects the transfers. Otherwise, the broker returns the digital items of value, releases its hold on them, and/or deletes them, such that the broker no longer has the ability to deliver the items.

Unlike some conventional approaches to transactions, all brokering functions can be provided automatically. This reduces cost, increases transaction throughput, and reduces the opportunity for transactions to fail due to mistakes or bad acts by a broker.

In particular, digital goods can be escrowed with an automatic broker by providing the broker with a copy to be stored on a medium accessible only to the broker (or at least not reasonably accessible to the party that provided the goods to be escrowed). Goods could also be escrowed on a medium that is accessible to the party that provided the goods, by encrypting them and/or digitally signing them so any changes made after they are provided to the broker can be prevented or can at least be detected by the broker and/or the buyer. However, placing copies at a location not known to the seller and/or not accessible to the seller is preferred, since preventing the seller from retrieving all copies of the escrowed goods will significantly reduce the risk that the seller will prevent a buyer from receiving the goods after paying (or bartering) for them.

Payments, such as credit card holds, bank transfers, digital cash, and the like, can also be escrowed by the broker. In transactions that exchange goods for goods (i.e., barter transactions) rather than exchanging goods for payment, all of the digital goods can be held in escrow by the broker pending authorization from the parties to complete the transaction, after which the goods are released by providing copies to the parties, as previously specified by the parties. Note that "payment" is used herein to mean cash, currency, or similar liquid payment, as opposed to goods or services.

The automatic broker can generate samples of digital goods, to be provided by the broker to a prospective buyer. Samples can also be provided to the seller, but this is not always necessary or appropriate. In some embodiments, the seller does not know what technique will be used to generate the sample, so the seller is discouraged from providing goods that will pass inspection only if a particular sampling technique is used. The sampling techniques preferably permit the buyer to inspect the goods without thereby making the goods available for use by the buyer without purchase. Samples can also be provided in a catalog, to be browsed by specified or unspecified parties. For instance, a catalog might be open to general access within a company, or open to the public at large. Other aspects and advantages of the present invention will become more fully apparent through the following description.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

To illustrate the manner in which the advantages and features of the invention are obtained, a more particular description of the invention will be given with reference to the attached drawings. These drawings only illustrate selected aspects of the invention and thus do not limit the invention's scope. In the drawings:

FIG. 1 is a flowchart illustrating a prior art approach to transactions involving digital and/or non-digital goods, in which the buyer provides payment and the seller then provides the goods in response.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart illustrating a prior art approach to transactions involving digital and/or non-digital goods, in which the seller provides the goods and the buyer then provides the payment in response.

FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating prior art approaches to transactions involving digital and/or non-digital goods, including negotiations between seller and buyer, and showing alternatives in which the seller provides the goods and the buyer provides the payment in various orders.

FIG. 4 is a data flow diagram illustrating a prior art approach to transactions involving digital and/or non-digital goods, in which a conventional agent acts as an intermediary between the seller and the buyer.

FIG. 5 is a data flow diagram illustrating embodiments of the present invention with transactions involving at least some digital content, in which a novel automatic broker acts as an intermediary between the seller and the buyer, the broker receives the digital content from the seller, the broker provides samples based on that digital content to the buyer, and the broker completes the transaction by releasing payment to the seller and releasing the digital content to the buyer.

FIG. 6 is a data flow diagram illustrating embodiments of the present invention with transactions similar to those illustrated in FIG. 5, in which the novel broker also provides the seller with at least one sample which is being provided to the buyer to permit evaluation of the seller's digital content.

FIG. 7 is a data flow diagram illustrating embodiments of the present invention with transactions similar to those illustrated in FIG. 5, in which the novel broker completes the transaction by releasing payment to the seller and releasing the digital content to the buyer at different times, despite the risk that the later release will be prevented after the first release is underway or completed.

FIG. 8 is a data flow diagram illustrating embodiments of the present invention with transactions in which the seller and the buyer each provide digital content to be released to the other after their approval is given to the novel broker.

FIG. 9 is a data flow diagram illustrating embodiments of the present invention with transactions in which the novel broker is used primarily or solely to provide samples of digital content, and hence does not necessarily participate in the transaction by releasing payment or by releasing goods.

FIG. 10 is a flowchart further illustrating techniques which may be used in the novel broker, separately or in combination, to provide buyers and/or sellers with samples of digital content.

FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating a configuration of computers and networks suitable for use according to the present invention.

FIG. 12 is a diagram illustrating an architecture for an automatic broker according to the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

In describing methods, devices, signals, programs, products, and systems according to the invention, the meaning of several important terms is clarified, so the claims must be read with careful attention to these clarifications. Specific examples are given to illustrate aspects of the invention, but those of skill in the relevant art(s) will understand that other examples may also fall within the meaning of the terms used, and hence within the scope of one or more claims. Important terms may be defined, either explicitly or implicitly, here in the Detailed Description and/or elsewhere in the application file.

In particular, an "embodiment" of the invention may be a system, an article of manufacture, a method, the product of a process, and/or a signal which configures a computer random access memory, disk, CD, DVD, or other computer-readable media 1110. In jurisdictions which permit it, such as some European jurisdictions, an embodiment may also be a computer program, provided it meets the novelty, inventiveness/nonobviousness, and other legal requirements of the jurisdiction.

For convenience, reference is also made to sellers and buyers as "human parties" or "humans" to distinguish them from the automatic broker of the invention. But a buyer and/or seller may be any legal person, such as an individual, corporation, limited liability company, foundation, partnership, French "S. A.", German "GmbH", etc. Also, the broker is presumably programmed, built, or otherwise created and/or maintained by people according to teachings herein. Operation of the broker may be overseen by human administrators and driven by data and/or commands from human users. The broker may also be property of an individual, corporation, or other legal person.

Networks, Computers, Software, Infrastructure

Suitable networks for configuration and/or use as described here include one or more local area networks, wide area networks, metropolitan area networks, and/or "Internet" or IP networks such as the World Wide Web, a private Internet, a secure Internet, a value-added network, a virtual private network, an extranet, an intranet, or even standalone machines which communicate with other machines by physical transport of media (a so-called "sneakernet"). In particular, a suitable network may be formed from parts or entireties of two or more other networks, including networks using disparate hardware and network communication technologies.

One suitable network includes a server and several clients; other suitable networks may contain other combinations of servers, clients, and/or peer-to-peer nodes, and a given computer may function both as a client and as a server. Each network includes at least two computers such as the server and/or clients. A computer may be a workstation, laptop computer, disconnectable mobile computer, server, mainframe, cluster, so-called "network computer" or "thin client", personal digital assistant or other hand-held computing device, "smart" consumer electronics device or appliance, or a combination thereof

Each computer includes at least a processor and a memory; computers may also include various input devices and/or output devices. The processor may include a general purpose device such as a 80.times.86, Pentium (mark of Intel), 680.times.0, or other "off-the-shelf" microprocessor. The processor may include a special purpose processing device such as an ASIC, PAL, PLA, PLD, Field Programmable Gate Array, or other customized or programmable device. The memory may include static RAM, dynamic RAM, flash memory, ROM, CD-ROM, disk, tape, magnetic, optical, or other computer storage medium. The input device(s) may include a keyboard, mouse, touch screen, light pen, tablet, microphone, sensor, or other hardware with accompanying firmware and/or software. The output device(s) may include a monitor or other display, printer, speech or text synthesizer, switch, signal line, or other hardware with accompanying firmware and/or software.

The network may include communications or networking software such as the software available from Novell, Microsoft, Artisoft, and other vendors, and may operate using TCP/IP, SPX, IPX, and other protocols over twisted pair, coaxial, or optical fiber cables, telephone lines, satellites, microwave relays, modulated AC power lines, physical media transfer, and/or other data transmission "wires" known to those of skill in the art. The network may encompass smaller networks and/or be connectable to other networks through a gateway or similar mechanism.

At least one of the computers is capable of using a floppy drive, tape drive, optical drive, magneto-optical drive, or other means to read a storage medium. A suitable storage medium includes a magnetic, optical, or other computer-readable storage device having a specific physical configuration. Suitable storage devices include floppy disks, hard disks, tape, CD-ROMs, DVDs, PROMs, random access memory, flash memory, and other computer system storage devices. The physical configuration represents data and instructions which cause the computer system to operate in a specific and predefined manner as described herein. Thus, the medium 1110 tangibly embodies a program, functions, and/or instructions that are executable by computer(s) 1100, 1102, and/or 1104 to provide samples, escrow goods for bartering or for cash purchases, complete transactions, and/or otherwise help facilitate transactions in digital and/or other goods or services substantially as described herein. Likewise, the "wires" and other data carriers and hard drives and memory may embody signals for facilitating transactions in digital and/or other goods or services substantially as described herein.

Suitable software to assist in implementing the invention is readily provided by those of skill in the pertinent art(s) using the teachings presented here and programming languages and tools such as Java, Pascal, C++, C, database languages, APIs, SDKs, assembly, firmware, microcode, and/or other languages and tools. Suitable signal formats may be embodied in analog or digital form, with or without error detection and/or correction bits, packet headers, network addresses in a specific format, and/or other supporting data readily provided by those of skill in the pertinent art(s).

Much of the infrastructure that can be used according to the present invention is already available, such as: general purpose computers; computer programming tools and techniques; computer networks and networking technologies; digital storage media; authentication, access control, and other security tools and techniques provided by public keys, encryption, firewalls, and/or other means; bank transfers, credit card processing, digital money, and other tools and techniques for making payments. Such existing technologies are not claimed by themselves. However, the present invention uses existing infrastructure in new ways and adds incremental improvements to that infrastructure.

Overview

The inventive approach shown in FIG. 5 does bear some resemblance to the conventional approach shown in FIG. 4. As in FIG. 4, the transaction is between at least one seller 500 and at least one buyer 502, and if all goes well then the seller receives payment and the buyer receives goods.

However, in any given embodiment of the invention, there are one or more significant differences between the invention, on the one hand, and conventional tools or techniques on the other hand. These differences may include the parties participating, the goods involved, the samples involved, the path taken by the goods, the path taken by the payment, and the type and level of trust required. Although they are related and may be combined in inventive embodiments, we consider each of these in turn below.

For clarity of illustration, negotiations between parties are not shown in FIG. 5 or subsequent Figures, but it should be understood that such negotiations may occur at zero or more points during a given transaction according to the present invention. Also, transactions according to the invention may involve more than one buyer and/or more than one seller; for clarity of illustration, only a single seller 500 and a single buyer 502 are shown in the Figures.

Parties

One difference between the conventional approach illustrated in FIG. 4 and the inventive approach shown in FIG. 5 is the presence of an automatic broker 504. The automatic broker 504 is identified in the priority application Ser. No. 60/134,383 as "Q", and is identified herein as "Q", "the broker", "broker 504", "automatic broker", etc. In some embodiments, the automatic broker 504 supplements or replaces the conventional agent A discussed in the Technical Background section above by escrowing goods, completing transactions, and so on. As indicated in FIG. 4, conventional agent A is an attorney, escrow firm, or other person or institution known before the present invention. In other embodiments, the broker 504 is used by an agent A or another transaction party to generate samples.

The automatic broker Q may be implemented as an automatic impartial broker in computer hardware and/or software according to the invention. For instance, Q may be embodied in novel software running on general-purpose hardware. Q could also involve novel hardware. The invention is not limited to Q but also includes related signals, and methods using Q such as business methods for transacting digital content sales. Q's impartiality is preferably reasonably protected through encryption, certification, anti-virus protection, and like measures, to prevent intervention by untrustworthy parties. Untrustworthy parties are those who would unfairly take advantage of others' trust in Q. For instance, an untrustworthy party might try to take unfair advantage of others' reliance on the assumption that Q will complete the transaction if and only if the buyer(s) and the seller(s) expressly advise Q of their consent to such completion.

When properly implemented, the automatic broker Q is not subject to temptation. Thus, if the broker Q is programmed by persons having trustworthy intent and adequate technical skills, Q will be impartial in the sense that it may be entrusted with transaction facilitation tasks with fewer trust-related risks than in some conventional approaches.

Goods

In a conventional transaction like that shown in FIG. 4, the goods are not necessarily digital. By contrast, transactions with the automatic broker 504 involve at least some digital goods 506; non-digital goods may or may not also be involved. In some embodiments, the goods 506 are digital in the sense that they include digital content such as bits, files, databases, etc. which are placed in escrow with the broker 504, to be released by the broker 504 as part of transaction completion. In some embodiments, the goods 506 are digital in the sense that their digital content serves as an original (i.e., an initial copy) from which the broker 504 creates samples 508 as discussed herein.

In some transactions, the digital goods 506 are the only goods that are subject to the transaction at hand. In other transactions, rights in non-digital goods may also be transferred, as when a seller provides both a digital technical description of some chemical composition, and physical pieces of that composition for spectrographic or other physical inspection. Of course, other non-digital goods may be treated similarly, as when samples are extracted or test data is provided on alloys, minerals, agricultural products, and so on.

In some transactions, the digital goods 506 represent or replicate non-digital goods. For instance, the digital goods could include seismic records indicating the nature and extent of petrochemical deposits; satellite images; or instrument readings or traces, including, for instance, output from medical imaging devices such as CAT or NoM scans, from chemical analysis tools such as gas spectrometers, from physics instruments such as electron microscopes, or from other instruments whose data can be checked by the buyer for internal consistency and whose data provide the buyer with pertinent information about the physical goods.

Samples

Conventional transactions involve no samples at all, or involve samples of conventional types. Conventionally, samples are provided by sellers in the form of physical pieces of the goods, as when part of a fluid good is siphoned off to be tested, or when one free pen or other specimen of a mass produced item is provided to encourage purchase of additional copies. Conventional samples of software are often provided in the form of "demo" software which runs but has only a subset of the functions of the regular product and/or has a built-in limit on the duration of use and/or the total number of uses. Although catalog descriptions and images are not the same as samples of the described and depicted items, conventional catalog entries are used to convey product information and encourage purchase, which are also common goals when providing demo versions, specimens, or other conventional samples.

By contrast, samples 508 are provided by the broker 504. Unlike transactions in which the seller provides the sample directly to the buyer or provides the agent A with the sample to be given to buyers, in some embodiments of the invention the seller 500 does not directly generate the sample 508. Instead, the automatic broker 504 generates the sample. Indeed, in some transactions, the seller 500 never receives a copy of the sample 508 from the broker 504.

In addition, embodiments of the invention permit samples 508 to be more than "siphoned off" specimens. Content for a sample 508 may be extracted from the content of the goods 506, but the extraction can be performed in various ways, and it may depend on the type of digital good 506 involved. Content for a sample 508 may also be obtained by other techniques, such as by distorting or enhancing the content of the goods 506.

Path of the Goods and the Payment

In some conventional transactions, like those illustrated in FIG. 4, goods are shipped directly from the seller to the buyer. This may be done in transactions according to the present invention. However, digital goods 506 can also be escrowed with the automatic broker 504, to be released automatically to the buyer 502 after payment is made.

Likewise, in conventional transactions payment may be sent directly from the buyer to the seller. This may also be done in transactions according to the present invention. However, a digital payment 510 can also be escrowed with the automatic broker 504, to be released automatically to the seller 500 after the goods 506 are provided.

In particular, FIG. 5 illustrates an embodiment of the invention in which neither the goods nor the payment are provided directly by one of the human parties to the other. Instead, the goods 506 and the payment 510 are each escrowed with the automatic broker 504. Only after it receives both the goods 506 and the payment 510 does the broker 504 release them to the other party (by sending 512 the payment to the seller 500 and sending 514 a copy of the digital goods 506 to the buyer 502). This approach requires the seller 500 and the buyer 502 to each trust the automatic broker 504, rather than asking them to trust each other. For instance, the seller 500 need not worry that the buyer 502 will receive a useable copy of the goods 506 without the seller 500 being paid, and the buyer 502 need not worry that the seller 500 will receive payment without the buyer 502 receiving a useable copy of the goods 506.

Trust Issues

As noted, some embodiments of the invention shift the trust required from trust in the other party to trust in the automatic broker. This may facilitate transactions that would otherwise not occur. When properly implemented and administered, the automatic broker is preferably an impartial entity. That is, the broker's behavior does not unfairly favor any human party over any other human party in the transaction.

Moreover, people may perceive the automatic broker as more trustworthy than human agents, because machines are usually not subject to human emotions such as greed, fear, or hatred that sometimes skew transactions between people. This does not mean a severely mechanistic interface, such as a sequence of forms, would necessarily be best. People sometimes reveal confidences or otherwise place trust in programs that mimic people, such as the ELIZA program, so a natural language interface could also be used in embodiments of the automatic broker.

A legally binding confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement is used in some embodiments of the invention, to assure sellers that the buyer will not disclose confidential sample contents, for instance. Unlike conventional transactions, however, the invention provides a way for prospective buyers to inspect digital goods without necessarily obtaining a complete and useable copy of those goods.

Instead, the samples 508 permit sellers to provide buyers with enough information to permit inspections of quality and/or extent without forcing sellers to rely solely on legal means (e.g. contract or copyright law) or business ethics to prevent buyers from unauthorized use of easily reproduced digital goods. This encourages sellers to make goods available for inspection, which facilitates transactions. Some embodiments of the invention also remove the selection of samples 508 from the control of the seller. This encourages buyers to rely on the samples as accurate guides to the content of the digital goods 506, which also facilitates transactions. In short, the invention reduces or eliminates questions of trust which inhibit transactions in digital content.

FIG. 5 is not comprehensive. To further illustrate the invention, we now consider some additional examples, using both the notation introduced earlier and additional Figures. The Figures and the notational examples do not necessarily correspond precisely with each other as representations of the invention. That is, the Figures illustrate inventive embodiments or aspects thereof which are not called out expressly in the notation examples, and vice versa. Also, some embodiments of the present invention mix elements which are set forth in the Figures with elements set forth in the notational examples.

Additional Goods-for-Payment Transactions

FIG. 6 illustrates an embodiment similar to that shown in FIG. 5, with the addition of a step transmitting the samples 508 to the seller. That is, in this embodiment the seller 500 receives a copy of the samples that are created by the broker 504 and then provided by the broker 504 to the buyer 502 for inspection.

By contrast, the seller in FIG. 5 only obtains a copy of the samples 508 if the buyer sends it one. The seller does not provide the samples to the broker 504 for forwarding (the broker creates the samples), and the broker 504 does not provide the seller with a copy of the samples the broker creates.

In conventional approaches, a seller of digital goods has the opportunity to inspect a copy of the samples that the buyer receives, either because the seller creates the samples itself or because the seller knows in advance what techniques will be used to create the samples. For instance, a seller of images may itself conventionally create thumbnail samples, or the seller may conventionally use software tools which will create thumbnail samples on the seller's behalf using techniques whose details are not necessarily understood by the seller but whose results are readily predicted by the seller.

In the embodiment shown in FIG. 6, by contrast, the broker 504 creates the samples 508 using techniques whose results are not necessarily known ahead of time to the seller 500. Because the seller 500 cannot easily predict what algorithms will be used to create the samples from the goods 506 provided to the broker 504 by the seller, the invention can make it difficult or impossible for the seller to trick the broker into sending the buyer 502 samples that are not accurate guides to the nature and extent of the digital goods.

The samples 508 may be provided to the seller for one or more purposes. For instance, the techniques used to create the samples may be challenged by the seller, in which case the buyer and seller may agree that the broker should produce a second (or third, fourth, etc.) sample using a different technique. Note that the broker 504 preferably uses a subsequent sampling technique which produces a subsequent sample that cannot be combined with the previous sample(s) to obtain a complete and useable copy of the goods. Sampling should allow inspection without permitting full use of the goods.

FIG. 7 illustrates embodiments in which the automatic broker 504 releases 514 the goods at a substantially different time than it releases 512 the payment. In FIG. 7, the goods 506 are released before the payment 510, but other embodiments similarly release the payment 510 before releasing the goods 506. Either approach creates a risk that the broker 504 will be unable to complete the transaction. For instance, the broker 504 or the network might be attacked after the payment 510 has been transmitted but before the goods 506 are transmitted. Nonetheless, releasing the payment 510 and the goods 506 at different times may be desired for convenience, by mutual agreement of the parties, to take advantage of network bandwidth (goods will generally be larger than payments, in terms of bandwidth required for transmission), and/or for other reasons.

Barter Transactions

FIG. 8 illustrates barter embodiments in which the buyer and seller each provide the other with digital goods, as opposed to situations in which the seller provides digital goods and the buyer provides digital cash or similar liquid payment. The seller places 800 its digital goods in escrow with the broker 504, which obtains samples thereof and then sends 802 the samples to the buyer. Likewise, the buyer places 804 its digital goods in escrow with the broker 504, which obtains samples that it sends 806 to the seller. At this point, the broker 504 has the digital content that was submitted by each party 500, 502, and each party 500, 502 has samples of the other's digital content. The samples were preferably produced by techniques not chosen by the parties, but selected instead by the broker 504, so that each party can rely on the samples as representative of the goods being proposed by the other party for the exchange.

If each party 500, 502 is satisfied with the other's goods, as represented by the sample it received from the broker 504, then each party gives its approval to the broker 504. The broker 504 then completes the transaction by releasing 812, 814 each party's goods to the other party.

If either party is unsatisfied with the samples or wishes to cancel the deal for some other reason, it can withhold its approval, and the transaction will time out without being completed. Alternately, a party can expressly cancel the transaction. In either case, the broker deletes the escrowed goods. The broker 504 may also overwrite the hard disk, RAM, and/or other memory that held the parties' digital content, using an electronic "shredding" algorithm such as that employed by various known products for military and other security purposes.

Barter transactions are also illustrated in the following method for facilitating barter transactions involving digital content, the digital content provided by at least two parties, the method comprising the steps of:

receiving from a first party a copy of first digital content and escrowing that first digital content;

receiving from a second party a copy of second digital content and escrowing that second digital content;

determining an approval exists to release the first digital content to the second party;

determining an approval exists to release the second digital content to the first party;

releasing the first digital content to the second party; and

releasing the second digital content to the first party.

In some embodiments, at least one of the determining steps comprises receiving an approval from the party that provided the digital content being approved for release. In others, lack of disapproval is taken as approval, so at least one of the determining steps comprises timing out after no cancellation is received from the party that provided the digital content being approved for release.

In some embodiments the method further comprises the steps of creating a sample of digital content, and sending the sample to at least one of the parties prior to at least one of the determining steps. If the digital content includes an image, for instance, then the step of creating a sample could create a thumbnail of the image. Thus, the exchange may be based on an inspection by one or more parties of samples taken from the goods proposed by other parties for exchange.

More generally, in these and other transactions according to the invention each party provides the other with components in the form of liquid payment, digital goods, non-digital goods, and/or legally binding promises, in varying mixtures, including mixtures that omit one or more such components. To give just two of the many possible examples, rather than exchanging payment for goods, the parties could exchange goods for goods (per FIG. 8), or they could exchange payment for a time-limited option on the goods. That is, a "sale" of digital goods includes a lease, or an exchange for other goods or services, or legal promises, or liquid payment. This makes the terms "buyer" and "seller" broader than would otherwise be the case, since a "buyer" may receive payment and a "seller" may receive goods, but the terms are convenient so we use them nonetheless. Also, barter transactions may provide payment as well as goods, and payment transactions may provide goods as well as payment.

Samples vs. Transactions

FIG. 9 illustrates embodiments of the invention which facilitate transactions but do not necessarily include any particular transaction completion. In these situations the seller 500 does not necessarily know the identity of the prospective buyer 502. Indeed, in some