USOO7680889B2
`
`(12) United States Patent
`Blumenau et al.
`
`(10) Patent No.:
`(45) Date of Patent:
`
`US 7,680,889 B2
`Mar. 16, 2010
`
`(54)
`
`(75)
`
`(73)
`
`(*)
`
`(21)
`(22)
`(65)
`
`(63)
`
`(51)
`
`(52)
`(58)
`
`(56)
`
`USE OF BROWSER HISTORY FILE TO
`DETERMINE WEBSITE REACH
`
`Inventors: Trevor I. Blumenau, San Francisco, CA
`(US); David H. Harkness, Wilton, CT
`(US); Manish Bhatia, Cranbury, NJ
`(US)
`Assignee: Nielsen Media Research, Inc., New
`York, NY (US)
`Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this
`patent is extended or adjusted under 35
`U.S.C. 154(b) by 491 days.
`Appl. No.: 11/094,061
`
`Notice:
`
`Filed:
`
`Mar. 30, 2005
`
`Prior Publication Data
`US 2005/0216581 A1
`Sep. 29, 2005
`
`Related U.S. Application Data
`Continuation of application No. 09/103,026, filed on
`Jun. 23, 1998, now abandoned.
`
`Int. C.
`(2006.01)
`G6F 5/6
`(2006.01)
`G06F 5/73
`U.S. Cl. ........................ 709/206: 709/219; 709/223
`Field of Classification Search ................. 709/223,
`709/224, 219, 206
`See application file for complete search history.
`References Cited
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`3,540,003 A 11, 1970 Murph
`3.818.458 A
`6, 1974 T y
`3,906,450 A
`9/1975 Prado, Jr.
`3,906,454 A
`9, 1975 Martin
`T955,010 I4
`2/1977 Ragonese et al.
`4,168,396 A
`9, 1979 Best
`4,230,990 A 10/1980 Lert, Jr. et al.
`
`4,232, 193 A 11/1980 Gerard
`4,306.289 A 12/1981 Lumley
`4,319,079 A
`3, 1982 Best
`4,361,832 A 11/1982 Cole
`4,367,525 A
`1/1983 Brown et al.
`4,558,413 A 12/1985 Schmidt et al.
`
`(Continued)
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`EP
`
`O 703 683
`
`3, 1989
`
`(Continued)
`OTHER PUBLICATIONS
`
`Hirsch, Frederick J., “Building a Graphical Web History Using Tcl/
`Tk.” Jul. 1997, Usenix, pp. 1-3.*
`(Continued)
`Primary Examiner Paul H Kang
`(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm Hanley,
`Zimmerman, LLC
`
`Flight &
`
`(57)
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`In a method of metering Web usage, a collection program is
`downloaded from a server to a metered computer in response
`to a message transmitted from the metered computer to the
`server, and the collection program is executed on the metered
`computer in order to collect Web usage history information
`stored in a history file by a browser running on the metered
`computer. The collected Web site usage history information is
`transmitted by the metered computer to the server. The Web
`site usage history information is stored in the server along
`with Web site usage history information from other metered
`computers.
`
`14 Claims, 5 Drawing Sheets
`
`"Y------
`12- COMPUTER \ --"
`° N browser \
`it.
`
`|COMPUTERY
`
`-10
`
`- -
`-
`"- - -
`N coPUTER
`22- BROWSER
`- - - - - -
`
`BROWSER 2
`l
`
`WEB-18
`
`18-WE
`"\------
`2N computer
`
`SITE
`14
`firi,
`BROWSER : a
`
`22
`
`BRyjSER |
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`
`
`"------
`
`CoMPUTER
`| BROWSER
`
`Twitter-Google Exhibit 1030
`
`

`

`US 7,680.889 B2
`Page 2
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`A
`5, 1986 Atalla
`4,588,991
`A
`5, 1986 Eilert et al.
`4,590,550
`A
`6/1986 Lofberg
`4.595,950
`A
`1 1/1986 Naftzger et al.
`4,621,325
`A
`4, 1987 Hellman
`4,658,093
`A
`6/1987 Alsberg
`4,672.572
`A
`8, 1987 Barnsdale, Jr. et al.
`4,685,056
`A
`9, 1987 Wiedemer
`4,696,034
`10, 1987 White
`4,703,324
`A
`12/1987 Hashimoto
`4,712,097
`A
`1/1988 Feigenbaum et al.
`4,718,005
`A
`A
`1, 1988 Kovalcin
`4,720,782
`A
`3, 1988 Scullion et al.
`4,734,865
`A
`4, 1988 William
`4,740,890
`5, 1988 Taaffe
`4,747,139
`A
`A
`6, 1988 Hackett et al.
`4,754,262
`A
`7, 1988 Allen et al.
`4,757,533
`A
`12/1988 Dunham et al.
`4,791,565
`A
`4, 1989 Levin et al.
`4,821, 178
`4, 1989 Agrawal et al.
`4,825,354
`A
`A
`5, 1989 Shear
`4,827,508
`9/1989 Karp
`4,866,769
`A
`4/1990 Quade et al.
`4.914,689
`A
`A
`5, 1990 Pickell
`4,926, 162
`7, 1990 Gastouniotis et al.
`4,940,976
`A
`9, 1990 Smith
`4.956,769 A
`4,970,644 A 11/1990 Berneking et al.
`4,977,594. A 12/1990 Shear
`5,023,907 A
`6, 1991 Johnson et al.
`5,032.979 A
`7, 1991 Hecht et al.
`5,086,386 A
`2f1992 Islam
`5,113,518 A
`5/1992 Durst, Jr. et al.
`5, 182,770 A
`1/1993 Medveczky et al.
`5,204.897 A
`4, 1993 Wyman
`5,214,780 A
`5/1993 Ingoglia et al.
`5,233,642 A
`8, 1993 Renton
`5,283,734 A
`2f1994 Von Kohorn
`1
`is A
`E. St.
`5,355.484 A 10, 1994 Elect a.
`5,374.951 A 12, 1994 Welsh
`5,377.269 A 12/1994 Heptig et al.
`5.388,211 A
`2f1995 Hornbuckle
`5.406,369 A
`4/1995 Baran
`5,410,598 A
`4, 1995 Shear
`5.440,738 A
`8, 1995 Bowman et al.
`5.444,642 A
`8/1995 Montgomery et al.
`5,450,134 A
`9/1995 Legate
`5483,658 A
`1/1996 Grube et al.
`5,497.479 A
`3, 1996 Hornbuckle
`5.499,340 A
`3, 1996 Barritz
`5,584,050 A 12/1996 Lyons
`5,594,934 A
`1/1997 Lu et al.
`5,675,510 A 10/1997 Coffey et al.
`5,732,218 A
`3, 1998 Bland et al.
`5,796,952 A
`8, 1998 Davis et al.
`5,892,917 A
`4/1999 Myerson
`5,918,014 A
`6, 1999 Robinson .................... TO9,219
`6,006,332 A 12/1999 Rabine et al.
`6,012,093 A
`1/2000 Madalozzo, Jr. et al.
`6,018,344 A
`1/2000 Harada et al.
`6,018,619 A
`1/2000 Allard et al.
`6,230,204 B1
`5/2001 Fleming, III
`6,338,066 B1
`1/2002 Martin et al.
`
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`EP
`EP
`GB
`JP
`
`O 325 219
`O 744 695
`2 176 639
`5-324352
`
`7, 1989
`11, 1996
`12, 1986
`12/2003
`
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`
`WO96, 17467
`WO96,28904
`WO 96.32815
`WO 96.OO950
`WO96,37983
`WO 9641495
`WO 97.26729
`WO98,26529
`WO98,26571
`WO 98,31155
`
`6, 1996
`9, 1996
`10, 1996
`11, 1996
`11, 1996
`12/1996
`7/1997
`6, 1998
`6, 1998
`7, 1998
`
`OTHER PUBLICATIONS
`Hirsch et al., “Creating Custom Graphical Web Views Based on User
`Browsing History.” 1997. The Open Group Research Institute.*
`Helinski P: “Automating Web-Site Maintenance Part 2 Perl-based
`tools to manage your Web site'. Web techniques, vol. 1, No. 9, Dec.
`1996, pp. (75-78).
`International Search Report for patent application serial No. PCT/
`US97/21643 dated Mar. 16, 1998.
`Software Inventorying Technology, “Tally Systems Patents Software
`Inventorying Technology”. Jul. 1, 1996, 5 pages.
`Lafferty, M.. “Taking the PC out of the Data Comm Pool; New
`Techniques Bring Mass Market and Net Together on TV. CED:
`Communications Engineering & Design, vol. 22. No. 9.
`XP-002079179: pp. 34-38 (Aug. 1996).
`“Internet Access Without a PC.” WorldGate Communications (Press
`Release Apr. 29, 1996) (3 pages).
`“Lan times 1995 Index: Application Administration & Manage
`ment.” LAN Times (1995) (5 pages).
`R. Lisle, “The Management Features in Software-metering toold can
`save you a bundle.” LAN Times, Jul. 3, 1995 (3 pages).
`T. Johnson, “Research in the Future:The Role and Measurement of
`the Internet.” ARF 6oth Anniversary Annual Conference and
`Research Expo, Mar. 11, 12, and 13, 1996 (4 pages).
`“The Top Five Advertising Agencies Now Subscribe to PC-Meter
`Web Measurement Service” at http:www.npd.com:80/pcmpr10.htm
`on Jul. 1, 1996 (2 pages).
`“D
`hics.” at http:
`emographics.” at http://www.w3.org/pub/www/Demographics on
`October 4, 1996 (3 pages).
`D. Hoffman et al., “How big is the Internet.” Aug. 18, 1994 (2 pages).
`M. Brownstein, "Streamlined and Ready for Action.” pp. 81.83-86,
`88,90,95-96, Nelgiude 1996.
`B. Harvey, “Interactive Standards,” pp. 1-6, Vo XIV. Issue 12, The
`Marketing Pulse, Aug. 31, 1994.
`Chiat/Day. The New Video Highway: What will we need to know?
`How will we measure it?, pp. 1-12, Advertising Research Founda
`tion, Jun. 29, 1994.
`M. Green et al., “The Evolution of Research Problems on the Infor
`mation Superhighway,” JMCT Media Researc. Jun. 1994, 7 pages.
`Release Notes for the NeTraMetas Found on the Worldwide web on
`Jul. 1, 1996, 2 pages.
`Infoseek InternetSearch Results When Searching for npdP on Jul. 1,
`1996, 2 pages.
`Print of page from The Worldwide Web, http://www.npd.com/
`pcmdef.htm on July 1, 1996, 1 page.
`Print of page from The Worldwide Web, http://www.npd.com:80/
`pcmeter.htm on July 1, 1996, 1 page.
`Print of page from The Worldwide Web, http://www.npd.com:80/
`pcmpr.htm on July 1, 1996, 1 page.
`E. English, “The Meter is Running.” Lan Times, Mar. 27, 1995, 2
`pageS.
`Marketing News, Jun. 3, 1996, Section: 1996 Business Report on the
`Marketing Research Industry, 36 pages.
`C. Graziano, "Cash, Check or Charge?". LAN times, Apr. 24, 1995,
`1 page.
`“Latest NPD Survery Finds World Wide Web Access From Homes
`Grew Fourfold in Second Half of 1995.” from http://www.npd.
`com:80/meterpr4.htm on July 1, 1996, 1 page.
`“First Demographis Data on HomeWorldWideWeb UseNow Avail
`able from the NPD Group.” from http://www.npd/com:80/meterpré.
`htm on July 1, 1996, 1 page.
`
`

`

`US 7,680.889 B2
`Page 3
`
`“America Online is Leading Destination of Web Surfers in First-ever
`PC-Meter Sweeps Citing Top 25 Web Sites.” from http://www.npd.
`com:80/meterpris.htm on Jul. 1, 1996, 3 pages.
`NPD’s PC Meter Service to Provide More Accurate Measure of
`World Wide Web Traffic,” from http://www.npd.com:80/meter
`pr.htm on Jul. 1, 1996, 1 page.
`“PC-Meter Now in 1,000 Households Nationwide” from http://www.
`npd.com:80/meterpr2.htm on July 1, 1996, 1 page.
`“PC-Meter Predicts Happy Hollidays for Computer Manufacturers
`and Retailers.” http://www.npd.com:80/meterpr3.htm on July 1,
`1996, 1 page.
`
`Electronic News, vol. 42, No. 2110, Apr. 1, 1996, 4 pages.
`Interactive Marketing News, Jul. 5, 1996, 2 pages.
`Minority Markets Alert, vol. 8, No. 2 ISSN: 1041-7524, Feb. 1, 1996,
`1 page.
`Advertising age, Special Report, May 20, 1996, 1 page.
`Charlottesville Business Journal, vol. 7, No. 2, Thursday, Feb. 1.
`1996, 6 pages.
`Submitted herewith is a copy of an Office Action received in the
`corresponding Canadian application No. 2.247.706, dated Aug. 1,
`2006, 4 pages.
`* cited by examiner
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Mar. 16, 2010
`
`Sheet 1 of 5
`
`US 7,680,889 B2
`
`"A
`
`22
`
`IN COMPUTER
`Y BROWSER
`"Y------
`IN COMPUTER
`
`12
`
`10
`
`/
`
`WEB
`SITE
`
`18
`
`14
`-/-
`| | COMPUTER Y
`browser?
`BROWSER Y
`
`12
`
`22
`
`N BROWSER
`
`
`
`14 N
`12
`N COMPUTER
`
`22
`
`Y BROWSER
`
`SITE
`
`18
`
`WEB
`SITE
`
`2O
`
`ISP
`
`FIG. 1
`
`CENTRAL
`FACILITY
`
`COMPUTER
`
`BROWSER
`
`22
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Mar. 16, 2010
`
`Sheet 2 of 5
`
`US 7,680,889 B2
`
`30-N
`
`
`
`RECEIVE WEB
`MESSAGE2
`
`PERFORM
`OTHER
`PROCESSING
`
`Panelist?
`
`SEND APPLICATION
`
`2
`TRY AGAINT
`
`RECEIVE
`HISTORY
`
`FIG. 2
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Mar. 16, 2010
`
`Sheet 3 of 5
`
`US 7,680,889 B2
`
`\------
`52-
`N COMPUTER
`
`66
`
`N BROWSER
`
`54
`N- - - - - -
`52
`IN COMPUTER
`
`66
`
`N BROWSER
`
`50
`
`M
`
`WEB / 58
`SITE
`
`54
`-4- 52
`| | COMPUTER Y
`BROWSER Y
`
`browser
`
`
`
`58
`
`WEB
`SITE
`
`N
`
`Y COMPUTER
`
`66
`
`Y BROWSER
`
`SITE
`
`58
`
`WEB
`SITE
`
`60
`
`ISP
`
`FIG. 3
`
`CENTRAL
`FACILITY
`
`52
`
`COMPUTER
`
`BROWSER
`
`66
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Mar. 16, 2010
`
`Sheet 4 of 5
`
`US 7,680,889 B2
`
`66-y
`
`
`
`TIME TO SEND?
`
`NEW ENTRY?
`
`PACKAGE DATA WITH
`CENTRAL FACILITY
`ADDRESS
`
`FIG. 4
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Mar. 16, 2010
`
`Sheet 5 of 5
`
`US 7,680,889 B2
`
`504
`
`506
`
`508
`
`510
`
`512
`
`514
`
`516
`
`START
`
`Receiving a user input
`including a reference to a
`Web Site
`
`Accessing the Web Site
`
`Maintaining a browser
`history file stored on a
`first computer
`
`Receiving a message at
`the first computer
`instructing the first
`Computer to send the
`message to a second
`Computer
`
`Sending a message form
`the first computer to the
`second Computer after
`the browser history is
`populated with
`information
`
`Receiving an application
`at the first computer from
`the second computer in
`response to the message
`
`Executing the application
`at the first computer
`
`Storing the reference to
`the WebSite in a third
`Computer
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`END
`FIG. 5
`
`

`

`1.
`USE OF BROWSER HISTORY FILE TO
`DETERMINE WEBSITE REACH
`
`2
`The present invention overcomes one or more of the above
`noted problems.
`
`US 7,680,889 B2
`
`RELATED APPLICATIONS
`
`SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
`
`This is a Continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/103,
`026 filed Jun. 23, 1998 now abandoned, the entire content of
`which is hereby incorporated by reference.
`
`TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION
`
`10
`
`The present invention relates to an arrangement whereby
`Web site reach is determined from the history files of brows
`CS.
`
`15
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`
`30
`
`35
`
`45
`
`The Internet has proven to be an efficient and popular
`mechanism for the dissemination of information from content
`providers to content recipients. Content providers in many
`cases are organizations, such as businesses, governmental
`agencies, educational institutions, and the like, who operate
`Web sites in order to provide information that can be down
`loaded by content recipients. The content recipients are often
`25
`consumers who use computers typically located in their
`dwellings to access the content provided by content provid
`ers. However, content recipients may also be other busi
`nesses, governmental agencies, educational institutions, and
`the like. In many cases, a content provider is also a content
`recipient.
`The operators of Web sites, as well as those who create and
`place content (such as advertisements) for Web sites, have an
`interest in measuring the reach of content. Reach is typically
`determined by the number of unique visitors who visit a Web
`site. Web site operators, and those who create and place
`content, may then draw market relevant conclusions from the
`reach of their content.
`Several arrangements have been proposed in order to mea
`sure reach. For example, it is known for a Web site to itself
`40
`measure reach by determining the number of unique visitors
`who visit a Web site. However, such a measurement is local
`ized in that it provides little information about the reach of
`content offered by other Web sites, such as competitive Web
`sites. Also, this measurement provides no information about
`the demographic information about the reach.
`Accordingly, it has been proposed to install software
`meters on the computers of statistically selected panelists so
`that reach, and other information related to content, 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
`messages in order to detect communications of interest.
`When the software meters detect communications of interest,
`the Software meters log the titles of the corresponding win
`dows which are displayed to a computer user. However, log
`ging titles of windows containing Internet content is not par
`ticularly useful because such titles can be very generic. For
`example, one such title which is popular with many content
`providers is simply “Home Page.” This title provides little
`indication of the information Supplied to the content recipi
`ent.
`Moreover, tagging of Internet content has been broadly
`Suggested. However, the context in which tagging has been
`Suggested requires widespread industry cooperation, and it is
`unlikely that Such widespread industry cooperation is attain
`able.
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`In accordance with one aspect of the present invention, a
`method of metering Web site reach through execution of
`program code running on at least one computer comprises the
`following steps: a) accessing Web site access history infor
`mation; and b) copying the Web site access history informa
`tion.
`In accordance with another aspect of the present invention,
`a method of metering Web site reach through execution of
`program code running on at least one of first and second
`computers comprises the following steps: a) accessing Web
`site access history information stored in a history file stored
`on the first computer; and b) communicating the Web site
`access history information to the second computer.
`In accordance with yet another aspect of the present inven
`tion, a method of metering Web usage comprises the follow
`ing steps: a) downloading a collection program from a server
`to a metered computer in response to a message transmitted
`from the metered computer to the server; and b) executing the
`collection program on the metered computer in order to col
`lect Web usage history information stored in a history file by
`a browser running on the metered computer.
`
`BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
`
`These and other features and advantages of the present
`invention will become more apparent from a detailed consid
`eration of the invention when taken in conjunction with the
`drawings in which:
`FIG. 1 illustrates a metering system according to the
`present invention in which browser histories are reported to a
`central facility from a plurality of computers located at cor
`responding statistically selected sites:
`FIG. 2 illustrates an exemplary embodiment of a software
`routine which may be executed by the central facility in order
`to obtain the browser histories from the computers of FIG. 1;
`FIG.3 illustrates an alternative metering system according
`to the present invention in which a plurality of meters resident
`on computers at corresponding statistically selected sites
`report browser histories to a central facility; and,
`FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary embodiment of a software
`routine which may be used for the meters of FIG. 3.
`FIG. 5 illustrates an example flowchart of an example
`method for metering a web site.
`
`DETAILED DESCRIPTION
`
`A metering system 10 is shown in FIG. 1 as an exemplary
`application of the present invention. The metering system 10
`includes a plurality of computers 12 each of which is located
`at a corresponding panelist location 14. The computers 12
`may be referred to herein as metered computers. The panelist
`locations 14 are statistically selected, such as by a central
`facility 16, in order to participate in a Web site reach survey.
`For example, personnel at the central facility 16 or elsewhere
`may implement random digit dialing in order to find the users
`of the computers 12 for participation in the Web site reach
`Survey.
`The purpose of the Web site reach survey is to determine
`the reach of one or more Web sites 18 to the users of the
`computers 12. The Web site reach survey may provide such
`
`

`

`15
`
`3
`information as the number of users reached by the Web sites
`18, the demographics of the users reached by the Web sites 18,
`and the like.
`As shown in FIG.1, one or more of the Web sites 18 may be
`reached through an Internet Service Provider 20. The users of
`the computers 12 reach the Web sites 18 through browsers 22
`operating on the computers 12. The computers 12, the central
`facility 16, the Web sites 18, and the Internet Service Provider
`20 are interconnected by a network 24 which, for example,
`may be a public telephone system, an internal network, or the
`like.
`Many browsers, such as the Netscape Navigator(R) browser
`and the Internet Explorer browser, store the URLs and other
`information of the Web pages which are accessed by surfers
`whenever the surfers go to Web pages, either by clicking on
`hyper-links or by typing in URLs directly. The Netscape
`Navigator(R) browser stores the URLs in a flat database history
`file, while the Internet Explorer browser stores the URLs and
`other information in a directory as a structured historical
`hierarchy according to date and week of access. Surfers use
`the data stored in these histories to allow them to return to
`pages which they recently visited.
`Therefore, in order to conduct the Web site reach survey,
`the users of the computers 12, who have been statistically
`selected as discussed above and who have agreed to partici
`pate in the Survey, are directed to a Web page residing on a
`server of the central facility 16. The Web page at the central
`facility 16 contains a history file retrieval program which the
`server at the central facility 16 downloads to the computers 12
`of those users who have accessed that Web page. The history
`file retrieval program retrieves the information stored by the
`browsers 22 in the history files and causes this information to
`be uploaded to the server of the central facility 16. It should be
`noted that the server of the central facility 16 preferably stores
`multiple history file retrieval programs, one for each of the
`different types of browsers of the panelists participating in the
`Web site reach survey. Thus, once the server at the central
`facility 16 has identified the type of browser a panelist access
`ing its Web page is using, it may download the correct history
`file retrieval program.
`Abrowser does not necessarily retain the information in its
`history file indefinitely. For example, some browsers allow
`the user to set the length of time that history file information
`is retained. Such browsers may also time stamp each entry in
`the history file with the time of the last visit. Accordingly, if a
`user returns to a page that the user has seen before, the time
`stamp is overwritten with the latest time, such that entries in
`the history file are not duplicated on repeat visits.
`Other browsers store the history information with time
`stamps in directories according to the week in which the Web
`pages are visited. These browsers may also permit the user to
`set the number of days that the historical information is
`retained. Thus, for example, if the user sets the number of
`retention days to twenty, these browsers will maintain three
`directories, one for two weeks ago, one for one week ago, and
`one for the current week. Therefore, if a user is running such
`a browser on a Wednesday, there will be subdirectories for
`Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday under the Current Week
`directory in the history file. With this approach, many entries
`may be duplicated when the same page is visited more than
`once. For example, a page may appear in each weekday
`Subdirectory and in each prior week directory depending on
`the users use of the browser. However, as duplicate entries in
`the current week directory age (e.g., from Sunday to Mon
`day), many of the entries are deleted or merged into one entry
`65
`for the week. Duplicate entries across week boundaries are
`not merged.
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`US 7,680,889 B2
`
`5
`
`10
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`4
`Even though the information in these history files in not
`retained indefinitely, this information is still useful to indicate
`the number and demographics of people who reach the Web
`sites 18. Also, the information acquired by the server of the
`central facility 16 can be improved by the frequency with
`which the information is uploaded to the server of the central
`facility 16.
`Accordingly, the server at the central facility 16 may
`execute a software routine 30 shown in FIG. 2 whenever a
`user accesses its home page. The user may access this home
`page on the user's own initiative, or the software routine 30
`may prompt the user to initiate access by sending a message,
`Such as an e-mail, to the user requesting the user to access this
`home page. However access is initiated, the server at the
`central facility 16 waits for a Web message at a block 32.
`When the server at the central facility 16 receives a Web
`message at the block 32, the server at the central facility 16
`determines at a block 34 whether the user sending the current
`Web message is a panelist who has been selected for partici
`pation in the Web site reach survey. For example, the server at
`the central facility 16 may refer to a list of panelists who have
`agreed to participate in the Web site reach survey. If the user
`is not a panelist (e.g., the user is not on the list), the server at
`the central facility 16 at a block 36 hands off the received
`message to other software for appropriate processing. (Alter
`natively, program flow may simply return to the block 32 to
`await the next message.)
`However, if the user is a panelist, an application is sentata
`block 38 to the user's computer 12. This application may be
`a Java applet, JavaScript, or an ActiveX control. The user's
`permission is required to access information on the hard disk
`of the user's computer. In Java and JavaScript, permission is
`obtained in the form of a signed application (as opposed to an
`unprivileged application that runs in a sand-box environ
`ment). An ActiveX application requires the user's authoriza
`tion even if the application does not need to access the hard
`disk of the user's computer. The latest versions of many
`browsers allow a programmer to automate the download and
`Subsequent execution of a signed application on a single Web
`page. All the panelist may be required to do is to go to the
`specified Web page and click the “Okay” or similar icon or
`button in response to a security override request.
`The application downloaded to the panelists computer is
`arranged to access the history file stored by the computers
`browser, to insert the appropriate information stored in the
`history file into a message, and to communicate the message
`to the server at the central facility 16. For example, the appli
`cation may be arranged to open a regular socket back to the
`server, or the application may be arranged to post the infor
`mation back to the server through an HTTP daemon, or the
`application may be arranged to simply e-mail the information
`back to the server. Alternatively, the application may be
`arranged to access the history file, to store appropriate infor
`mation from the history file in a log, and to later communicate
`the logged information to the server at the central facility 16.
`The server at the central facility 16 determines at a block 40
`whether the central facility 16 has received information in
`response to the application downloaded at the block 38. If the
`server of the central facility 16 has not received the informa
`tion, the server determines at a block 42 whether it should
`again send the application down to the user's computer. If the
`application can be resent, the processing at the blocks 38 and
`40 is repeated. In this manner, a predetermined number of
`attempts may be made to retrieve history data from each
`panelist. If the application should not be resent, program flow
`returns to the block 32 to await another message.
`
`

`

`5
`If the server at the central facility 16 has received the
`history information as determined at the block 40, the server
`at a block 44 Suitably processes the history information and
`then logs the history information in a database along with
`history information received from other panelists. The history
`information can be assembled into reports as directed by the
`customers of the central facility 16.
`In processing the history information, the server at the
`central facility 16 preferably arranges the history information
`from different browsers into a common format. For example,
`because some browsers may contain duplicate data and some
`may not, it may be preferable to eliminate duplicate data. It
`should be noted that some or all of the processing required to
`transform the data to a common format may be effected on the
`panelists computer.
`Also, the data from all weeks and days should be merged
`and any entry that is a duplicate may be discarded in favor of
`the most recent entry. The parameter that controls the length
`of time that the history information is maintained is an inte
`gral part of the history information and should preferably be
`maintained in the server database so that reach data is given
`the propertimeline. For example, data from a browser with an
`expiration time often days cannot be used to measure reach
`over a period extending to before that interval.
`A metering system 50 shown in FIG.3 represents an alter
`native embodiment of the present invention. The metering
`system 50 includes a plurality of computers 52 each of which
`is located at a corresponding panelist location 54. The com
`puters 52 may be referred to herein as metered computers.
`30
`The panelist locations 54 are statistically selected to partici
`pate in a Web site reach survey. As before, the purpose of the
`Web site reach survey is to determine the reach of one or more
`Web sites 58 to the users of the computers 52. As shown in
`FIG.3, one or more of the Web sites 58 are reached through an
`Internet Service Provider 60. The users of the computers 52
`reach the Web sites 58 through browsers (not shown) operat
`ing on the computers 52. The computers 52, the central facil
`ity 56, the Web sites 58, and the Internet Service Provider 60
`are interconnected by a network 64 which, for example, may
`40
`be a public telephone system, an internal network, or the like.
`In the metering system 50, a software meter 66 acquires the
`history information which is accumulated by the browsers
`running on corresponding ones of the computers 52. The
`software meter 66, as shown in FIG. 4, determines when a
`corresponding browser makes an entry into a history file at a
`block 70. When the Software meter 66 determines that the
`browser is making an entry into the history file, the entry at a
`block 72 is intercepted, is copied to a separate log file, and is
`then passed to the history file. In parallel, the software meter
`66 determines at a block 74 whether it is time to transmit the
`contents of the log file to the central facility 56. If it is time to
`transmit the contents of the log file to the central facility 56,
`the log file is tested at a block 76 to determine whether it has
`accumulated any history information since the time for the
`last transmission to the central facility 56. If history informa
`tion has been accumulated in the log file since this time, the
`software meter 66 packages the history information with the
`address of the central facility 56 in a message at a block 78 and
`transmits the message at a block 80. After a new entry in the
`history file is logged at the block 72, or if it is not time to
`transmit the contents of the log file as determined at the block
`74, or if the log file contains no data since the time for the last
`transmission to the central facility 56 as determined at a block
`76, or after the contents of the log file are transmitted to the
`central facility 56 at the block 80, program flow then returns
`to the blocks 70 and 74.
`
`50
`
`45
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`US 7,680,889 B2
`
`10
`
`15
`
`25
`
`35
`
`6
`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, the
`software routine 30 is arranged as described above to deter
`mine at the block 34 whether a user accessing the central
`facility is a panelist. Instead, the software routine 30 may be
`associated with a dedicated survey Web page that can be
`accessed only by a panelist. If so, the block 34 may be unnec
`essary, but may be provided as a filter to filter out non
`panelists who accidentally access this dedicated Web page.
`Also, the software meter 66 is arranged to intercept infor
`mation being Stored in a history file by a corresponding
`browser. However, the software meter 66 may instead be
`arranged to access information from this history file on a
`periodic basis, such as once a day, once a week, or the like.
`Moreover, the software meter 66 is described above as
`being resident on a corresponding computer 52. Instead, the
`functions performed by the software meter 66 may be per
`formed by a hardware and/or software unit connected to the
`corresponding computer 52.
`Furthermore, the software meter 66 as described above
`transmits accumulated logged history information. Instead,
`the software meter 66 may be arranged to transmit the history
`information as soon as it is detected at the block 70. That is,
`the software meter 66 copies the history information for
`immediate transmission to the central facility or other desti
`nation. Alternatively, the history information may be simply
`copied to a disk for posting back to the central facility or other
`destination.
`Additionally, the computers 12 and 52 may be provided
`with mechanisms to determine the identities of their users and
`to transmit such identities to the central facilities 16 and 56.
`For example, the computers 12 and 52 may implement face
`recognition or other recognition techniques in order to iden
`tify the users, or the computers 12 and 52 may require the
`users to identify themselves. These identifications, together
`with demographic data about the panelists stored at the com
`puters 12 and 52 or at the central facilities 16 and 56, provide
`information which is useful in generating reports for the
`customers of the central facilities 16 and 56.
`FIG. 5 illustrates an example flowchart of an example
`method for metering a web site. According to the example
`method, a user input including a reference to a Web site is
`received at a first computer (block 502). In response, the first
`computer accesses the website (block 504). The method fur
`ther comprises, maintaining a browser history stored on the
`first computer (block 506). The browser