The DVR That Watches You Back: Verizon Applies For 'Ambient Action' Detecting Device Patent
from the comes-with-pair-of-glue-on-googly-eyes-to-make-product-seem-fun-and-less-creepy dept
Here's another patent application to keep an eye on, following on the heels of Microsoft's patent app for a TV that counts noses in order to charge each viewer for content, potentially turning your living room into something akin to a porn store viewing booth or bus stop TV -- "please insert $2 to continue viewing." Verizon's patent application also involves a device eyeballing your living room, this time in an effort to target advertising.Verizon's living room intruder is a DVR that observes "ambient action," identifies it and scans its ad database for an appropriate ad to serve up during the next commercial break. This sounds about as creepy as an ad exec watching you through your open living room drapes in order to decide which flyers to shove in your mailbox. Rest assured, Verizon's use of the phrase "ambient action" is designed for maximum innocuousness. It's not until you get to the list of possible "ambient actions" that the creep factor really kicks in.
[0016] To illustrate, an exemplary ambient action may include the user eating, exercising, laughing, reading, sleeping, talking, singing, humming, cleaning, playing a musical instrument, performing any other suitable action, and/or engaging in any other physical activity during the presentation of the media content. In certain examples, the ambient action may include an interaction by the user with another user (e.g., another user physically located in the same room as the user). To illustrate, the ambient action may include the user talking to, cuddling with, fighting with, wrestling with, playing a game with, competing with, and/or otherwise interacting with the other user. In further examples, the ambient action may include the user interacting with a separate media content access device (e.g., a media content access device separate from the media content access device presenting the media content). For example, the ambient action may include the user interacting with a mobile device (e.g., a mobile phone device, a tablet computer, a laptop computer, etc.) during the presentation of a media content program by a set-top box (“STB”) device.It looks as though Verizon has carefully avoided naming any other ambient actions that viewers may not want to have "watched back," like "having sex with," "fighting with," "yelling at," "masturbating to," "Farmvilleing at" or "blogging about." All joking aside, it's a bit disconcerting that Verizon's main concern isn't the potential privacy violations, but rather that its customers just aren't watching TV hard enough.
[T]raditional targeted advertising systems and methods fail to account for one or more ambient actions of a user while the user is experiencing media content using a media content access device. For example, if a user is watching a television program, a traditional targeted advertising system fails to account for what the user is doing (e.g., eating, interacting with another user, sleeping, etc.) while the user is watching the television program. This limits the effectiveness, personalization, and/or adaptability of the targeted advertising.I suppose that, in this era of "second screens" and "promiscuous 'cuddling' teens," it's tough to get the sort of "captive audience" that advertisers (and the companies that sold customers to them) used to take for granted. The bold, new paradigm is the "observed audience," an innocuous phrasing in itself. The "tracked audience." The "surveilled audience." These terms are a little more accurate, especially considering how much information Verizon covers under the pillow-soft, marketing-friendly, customer-disarming term "ambient."
[0019] Detection facility 104 may be additionally or alternatively configured to analyze data received by way of a detection device in order to obtain information associated with a user, an ambient action of the user, a user's surroundings, and/or any other information obtainable by way of the data. For example, detection facility 104 may analyze the received data utilizing one or more motion capture technologies, motion analysis technologies, gesture recognition technologies, facial recognition technologies, voice recognition technologies, acoustic source localization technologies, and/or any other suitable technologies to detect one or more actions (e.g., movements, motions, gestures, mannerisms, etc.) of the user, a location of the user, a proximity of the user to another user, one or more physical attributes (e.g., size, build, skin color, hair length, facial features, and/or any other suitable physical attributes) of the user, one or more voice attributes (e.g., tone, pitch, inflection, language, accent, amplification, and/or any other suitable voice attributes) associated with the user's voice, one or more physical surroundings of the user (e.g., one or more physical objects proximate to and/or held by the user), and/or any other suitable information associated with the user.There's also wording in the application regarding recognizing the tune a viewer is humming and reacting accordingly (presumably by contacting the nearest PRO and reporting an unlicensed public performance). It also leaves the option open for detecting other animate and inanimate objects, including pets and branded products. And, like Microsoft's application, Verizon's suggests the system will be able to distinguish between adults and children and activate parental controls.
This being Verizon, the advertising watch-and-push isn't limited to the all-seeing DVR. The user's phone or tablet will most likely be receiving additional advertising or content based on what "ambient actions" are detected. I can only imagine the delighted thrill of customers watching their DVR shove ads onto their phones simply because they weren't paying enough attention to the ad on the TV screen.
Once again, this is nothing more than a patent application, which doesn't necessarily mean this product will ever make it to market, USPTO 'OK' or not. But it does give you some idea of Verizon's theories on where targeted advertising is headed.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: advertising, dvr, patents, surveillance
Companies: verizon
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The lens looks like a glowing red eye.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The lens looks like a glowing red eye.
Hal: I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Which customers would want this?
With this, the buyer would be giving Verizon (or other, as someone else will make such a device in such a way that it does not violate this patent) that will literally spy on you 24/7/365. Who would want that? Putting a piece of tape over the camera lens (remember that fix for the flashing VCR clock that was never right?) would only be a partial fix as there appears to be a microphone listening as well. Who wants to be spied upon?
Another thought. Put one of these devices in a state such as Massachusetts where any recording needs to be notified to all parties. Would Verizon be liable for illegal wiretap?
I see what value Verizon would find in such a product. What is the benefit to the end user?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Which customers would want this?
What is the benefit of letting Google read your email? Lots of people do that and never think twice about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Which customers would want this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Which customers would want this?
An email service that has no monetary cost to the end user, is highly reliable, and has effectively unlimited storage.
If Verizon wants to offer a no cost equivalent to cable TV, included DVR with effectively unlimited storage, access to library with nearly all video content I could ever want, then I would seriously consider their offer even if it included a box that spied on me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Which customers would want this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Which customers would want this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Which customers would want this?
Next the US Gov will tell these Corps that they have to build a backdoor in their Software because of blah blah blah terrorism and save the children.
Then the Device will not only phone home to the Corp but it will also be abused by the Gov.
And the Tech Geeks who sold out to come up with the system will feel bad but they will take home their fat paychecks and buy some new Computer Hardware for their cool Linux Server.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The uncanny valley of advertising
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
First to File?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: First to File?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: First to File?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i see a scandal in the wings
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Worried about "targeted advertising"? What about Google?
Verizon like all corporations is allowed to exist only so long as please the public; we can demand they offer products without any tracking at all, let alone these new levels, or we toss all the corporate officers into jail and liquidate the assets to finance our indig-nation. (Pun, get it?) Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's legal. We must move to explicit and informed opt-IN as the default EVERYWHERE, not let gov't and corporations continue to deploy machines against us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worried about "targeted advertising"? What about Google?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Worried about "targeted advertising"? What about Google?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Worried about "targeted advertising"? What about Google?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worried about "targeted advertising"? What about Google?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Worried about "targeted advertising"? What about Google?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Worried about "targeted advertising"? What about Google?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But... think about the children!
Haven't they?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anyone else notice that Verizon is selling home security cameras, with recording and playback over FIOS from their cloud?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rejected?
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9234476/Verizon_patent_application_for_TV_snooping_t ech_rejected?taxonomyId=84
If it has been rejected, let's hope it remains that way. The Microsoft equivalent should be rejected also.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rejected?
Yes, a non-final rejection was issued on November 15th, but that's kinda meaningless. If you look at nearly every patent these days, they seem to go through a few rounds of both "non-final" and "final" rejections -- but there IS NO SUCH THING as a TRUE final rejection at the USPTO. You can simply continue to adjust the applications with no limit on times you can resubmit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Rejected?
And people wonder why there's a backlog.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I could not be trusted with a DVR with such capabilities in the first place. I cannot help myself when it comes to tinkering with every electronic device I own. "Both hardware and software."
If something went into play it's sad that the people like me would not have to deal with these problems as there is always a way around them. I'm not the only person that deserves the respect to not be fucked with by a company. Every single person on this planet deserves the same. However the way shit is going it seems the people less adapted to technology will pay for it in the future.
If it does happen you can be sure plenty of people like me will always be fighting for a way around it legally or illegally. I have zero respect for laws that allow anything that interferes with our rights that we're born with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I know I sure as hell wouldn't let one of these devices into my home. When do you suppose all these different company executives will come to the realization that THEY are the reason why piracy is so appealing to so many people?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They won't. These people are Extroverts: they would never consider that they might be the problem, only that anyone & everyone else could be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You may be making a joke, I can't tell, but that isn't what extravert means.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sleeping?
Wait, sleeping? What ads do they think I should be watching when I'm asleep? Are they going for subliminal advertising or just jacking up the volume to make me wake up?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sleeping?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sleeping?
Yeah, it was my first thought, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sleeping?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They're gonna need that one if I'm in a room with their technology in use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To put it bluntly, I HATE A COMMERCIAL with a passion.
You always hear that ads make things cheaper. Exactly when was the last time your bill went down because the company was getting money from the commercials?
A hole in the head would be of more use than this spy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Would the police want live feeds from the rooms of "suspects" everywhere?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
2. Cameras and microphones added to TVs to improve targetted advertising.
3. In the face of death, TV industries lobby the government into making television a manditory, taxpayer-funded "free" utility.
4. Several decades later, the NSA finally notices that there are now microphones and cameras operating 24/7 in everyone's house at the beck and call of companies in bed with the government.
5. Nineteen Eighty-Four
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
- Decency nuts groups would lobby for every state to have it force Verizon to install facial recognition software that can gauge age based on facial features and make it liable if inappropriate content is shown to them.
- Copytards would lobby congress to force verizon to save logs of whom watched what so they can use those things in court to prosecute "pirates".
eLoL (evil Laughing out Loud)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Like I said, just put a piece of adhesive tape over the camera to put it out of commission, so they cannot see how many of you are there.
And as for the Microphone, just open open your TV or DVR, find the wires going to the mic and snip them, putting the mic out of commission.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
- If the recognition software doesn't see anything it doesn't turn on.
- If you put a photo with people in there, the software could be programmed to search for movement.
- If you feed video stream the software could be programmed to search for repetition patterns.
- Cutting the mic can be dealt with requiring the mic to announce itself to the equipment if it is not there the TV doesn't turn on.
This simple steps would disable 99% of the population from tampering with that box unless it had and addon.
But I wonder why buy an expensive TV with internet, picture in picture and other stuff that can all be added to a cheap-o screen with a simple Raspberry Pi running XMBC or something like it? You could even print a case that attached itself to the TV and would be hidden from view, plus using a Raspberry Pi you can buy addons like cameras and mics to plug it in that you know will all be "clean".
I just saw a 35" LED backlight for $300 bucks, plus the Raspberry PI would cost less than $400 to have the equivalent of a $1000 dollar equipment with reduced risks of wiretapping.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some hacker somewhere will eventually figure out a way around that. Someone could easily make money off of circunventing that. Someone could set up a TV shop in Mexico that offers that kind of service, and there is not much the TV makers could do about it.
Someone who knew what they are doing could hack the software.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Personally I don't need cable that bad, but maybe some do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1984 in 2013
Absent an absolutely AMAZING marketing campaign, this appears to be the best reason for cord cutting.
The obvious downside to this is EVERY intelligence agency on the planet salivating at the chance to manipulate state laws to gain access. For the children, to stop terrorism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 1984 in 2013
Decency nuts could go crazy and force Verizon to replicate the feed or have a filter installed so that every time a "known" indecent video appears it snaps a photo of whom it is sitting there if the software recognizes minors in the room, or copyright holders wanting to know how much to charge wants a head count of their shows, which they then would complain that they can't trust Verizon to do the right thing and will ask for a copy of the raw feed so they can "analyze it" to make sure they are not being cheated.
Panic people would ask for it to have recognition capabilities to find missing people and criminals sitting in front of a TV with the support from law enforcement.
Heck that thing is scary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anyone who willfully installs this technology in their homes, quite frankly, deserves it. The fact that someome would be willing to pay a corporation to monitor them 24/7 so that they can profile them and their family, then sell that info to interested parties, is the height if stupidity. Ditto for so-called home *security* cameras. A camera is powerless -- it will not stop a criminal. It will only allow for unseen eyes to watch you in your home. With or without cameras, the police will arrive after the crime has already been committed. Sceurity is just an illusion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ignore the utility for a sec...
This reads more like an idea that enumerates a lot of other ideas on how the prime idea may be accomplished.
In my mind this is incredibly far from a concrete invention, and is an attempt to patent an idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ignore the utility for a sec...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ADS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let MS and Verizon sue each other out of existence...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can imagine there would be a recognition program specially designed for use at Hooters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only thing missing is that they eye ball at us, while a television is running and we're in a bathroom, taking a bath or just doing business on our royal throne... For a free ecchi scene in their eyes AND charge us...
Next IDIOTIC idea please? for the LULZ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's Not Being Said...
Me: ...and if they are watching and recording it, could they release the video, "Jill Rides Bobby Hard"?
My friend: "I don't mind the sharing, but if somebody is gonna make money then my vagina deserves to be paid."
Me: I nominate you for the best actress in the adult film awards! You moan like a champion!
My friend: "So you heard me last night?"
Me: Everyone in my neighborhood said they saw it on their Verizon. I guess you missed it since you and the hubby were obviously busy! LOL
...but seriously, could something like this eventually come down the pike? If they record what you doing what's to stop them from going a step further and releasing video. It sounds absurd now but where are the boundaries?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lock it in the basement
However, it seems like you could just put the thing in an enclosure in the basement and use an IR replicator to control the device. Cameras and mics on the DVR could enjoy the furnace and sump pump in the basement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lock it in the basement
Capital idea!
It certainly has the potential of giving an entirely new meaning to the term "media room".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The DVR that watches you back.
Verizon's technology can be applied to any Set Top Box, it does not have to be a DVR. If you think you can place tape over the camera lens to block their snooping, all they have to do is make the camera the remote control receiver.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The DVR that watches you back.
Then put frosted glass in front of it to distort the image. The IR signal will still get through but the image to the camera will be one big blur.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The DVR that watches you back.
Glass blocks infrared signals, you would need an RF remote.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
boy, I'm glad...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
At last! Racist ads
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seriously though people need to be more security aware. Put a sticker over the camera on your laptop. If you have a TV with a camera cover the camera except for when you want to use it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Camera on the DVR?
Does the patent app indicate whether or not they'll start serving up blip-verts?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't think that word means what you think it means. Not if you think it has anything to do with this story, anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]