Apparatus, method and system for comparative collaborative creative works evaluation

US 8,170,904 B1
Filed: 08/01/2003
Issued: 05/01/2012
Est. Priority Date: 08/02/2002
Status: Active Grant

First Claim

Patent Images

1. A creative work evaluating processor-implemented method, comprising:

providing, via a processor, an offer to compete in a creative works competition by a first user, wherein the offer to compete includes parameters that specify a second user as a potential competitor, a permitted type of creative work to be evaluated in the competition, a permitted length of the creative works to be evaluated in the competition, a submission deadline for competitors to submit creative works, and voting parameters;

obtaining, via the processor, an acceptance to the offer to compete from the second user;

receiving, via the processor, a creative work from the first user and the second user after determining;

(a) that the creative works from the first user and the second user match the permitted type of creative work specified by the first user in the offer to compete, (b) that the creative works from the first user and the second user do not exceed the permitted length specified by the first user in the offer to compete, and (c) that the creative works from the first user and the second user were submitted before the submission deadline specified by the first user in the offer to compete;

providing, via the processor, the creative works from the first user and the second user to an audience;

obtaining, via the processor, votes from members of the audience experiencing the creative works of the first user and the second user;

totaling, via the processor and in response to the voting parameters specified by the first user in the offer to compete being satisfied, votes for each creative work;

determining, based on the totaled votes for each creative work, a winner of the creative works competition between the first user and the second user;

updating a rating for the first user and the second user based on the following formula;

R_n=R_o+K(W−

(1/(1+10^D/S))), wherein;

R_nrepresents the updated rating;

R_orepresents a rating for the user before the creative works competition;

K represents a predetermined weighting factor that rewards more rating points to users with lower R_ovalues;

W represents the outcome of the creative works competition and rewards more rating points to a user for a win than for a tie, and more points for a tie than a loss;

D represents the absolute difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and

S represents a predetermined value that weights the difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and

ranking the first user and the second user along with a plurality of other users according to the updated ratings.

View all claims

0 Assignments

Timeline View

Assignment View

0 Petitions

Accused Products

Abstract

An apparatus, method, and system for a comparative, collaborative, creative works evaluator (3CWE). One of the benefits of 3CWE is that it provides a mechanism to rate and subsequently rank creative works and their authors. The benefits of ranking creative works and their authors are many, one of which is to provide audiences with guidance as to the quality and/or popularity of a given author or work. As such, the system provides and may act as a more accurate promotional vehicle in identifying and uncovering talent. This 3CWE system allows individuals without the standard resources to be recognized by an internationally-targeted market. By evaluating creative artists and works by interested participants, the artists and works'"'"' exposure is expanded. In one, non-limiting example, present, inventive aspect of the disclosure provides a system that pits creative works, and as a consequence, their authors, against one another for evaluation by an audience.

Citations

209 Claims

1. A creative work evaluating processor-implemented method, comprising:
- providing, via a processor, an offer to compete in a creative works competition by a first user, wherein the offer to compete includes parameters that specify a second user as a potential competitor, a permitted type of creative work to be evaluated in the competition, a permitted length of the creative works to be evaluated in the competition, a submission deadline for competitors to submit creative works, and voting parameters;
  
  obtaining, via the processor, an acceptance to the offer to compete from the second user;
  
  receiving, via the processor, a creative work from the first user and the second user after determining;
  
  (a) that the creative works from the first user and the second user match the permitted type of creative work specified by the first user in the offer to compete, (b) that the creative works from the first user and the second user do not exceed the permitted length specified by the first user in the offer to compete, and (c) that the creative works from the first user and the second user were submitted before the submission deadline specified by the first user in the offer to compete;
  
  providing, via the processor, the creative works from the first user and the second user to an audience;
  
  obtaining, via the processor, votes from members of the audience experiencing the creative works of the first user and the second user;
  
  totaling, via the processor and in response to the voting parameters specified by the first user in the offer to compete being satisfied, votes for each creative work;
  
  determining, based on the totaled votes for each creative work, a winner of the creative works competition between the first user and the second user;
  
  updating a rating for the first user and the second user based on the following formula;
  
  R_n=R_o+K(W−
  
  (1/(1+10^D/S))), wherein;
  
  R_nrepresents the updated rating;
  
  R_orepresents a rating for the user before the creative works competition;
  
  K represents a predetermined weighting factor that rewards more rating points to users with lower R_ovalues;
  
  W represents the outcome of the creative works competition and rewards more rating points to a user for a win than for a tie, and more points for a tie than a loss;
  
  D represents the absolute difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and
  
  S represents a predetermined value that weights the difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and
  
  ranking the first user and the second user along with a plurality of other users according to the updated ratings.
- View Dependent Claims (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55)
- - 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the creative works competition is a tournament.
  - 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising, generating an offer to compete, prior to providing the offer to compete.
  - 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the offer to compete is over creative works.
  - 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the offer to compete is upon request of an offering competitor.
  - 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising, selecting potential competitors for the offer to compete, prior to providing the offer to compete.
  - 7. The method of claim 6, wherein selection for the offer to compete is limited by qualification.
  - 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the qualifications are for potential competitors.
  - 9. The method of claim 7, wherein the qualifications are for creative works.
  - 10. The method of claim 7, wherein qualification is based on hand-selection.
  - 11. The method of claim 10, wherein hand-selection is made by an audience.
  - 12. The method of claim 10, wherein hand-selection is made by a division.
  - 13. The method of claim 7, wherein qualification is random.
  - 14. The method of claim 7, wherein qualifications are based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 15. The method of claim 14, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 16. The method of claim 15, wherein membership in a division is based on geography.
  - 17. The method of claim 15, wherein membership in a division is based on ranking.
  - 18. The method of claim 14, wherein criteria includes a ranking.
  - 19. The method of claim 14, wherein criteria includes demographics.
  - 20. The method of claim 6, wherein selected competitors are paired at random.
  - 21. The method of claim 6, wherein selected competitors are paired in a round-robin manner.
  - 22. The method of claim 6, wherein selected competitors are paired through hand-selection.
  - 23. The method of claim 6, wherein selected competitors are paired through the issuance of an offer to compete and the acceptance of the offer to compete.
  - 24. The method of claim 22, wherein hand-selection is made by an audience.
  - 25. The method of claim 1, wherein the offer to compete is provided to a plurality of potential competitors.
  - 26. The method of claim 1, wherein the acceptance of the offer to compete is configured as a request to issue an offer to compete.
  - 27. The method of claim 1, wherein the first user and the second user may not view one another'"'"'s creative works until the creative works are ready for providing to the audience.
  - 28. The method of claim 1, wherein the first user and the second user have a limited time in which to provide creative works.
  - 29. The method of claim 1, wherein the first user and the second user may employ feedback from audience members to update their creative work.
  - 30. The method of claim 1, wherein the first user and the second user are paired at random.
  - 31. The method of claim 1, wherein the first user and the second user are paired in a round-robin manner.
  - 32. The method of claim 1, wherein the first user and the second user are paired through hand-selection.
  - 33. The method of claim 1, wherein the first user and the second user are paired through the issuance of an offer to compete and the acceptance of the offer to compete.
  - 34. The method of claim 1, wherein audience members are limited by qualifications.
  - 35. The method of claim 34, wherein qualification is based on hand-selection.
  - 36. The method of claim 35, wherein hand-selection is made by a division.
  - 37. The method of claim 34, wherein qualification is random.
  - 38. The method of claim 34, wherein qualifications are based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 39. The method of claim 38, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 40. The method of claim 39, wherein membership in a division is based on geography.
  - 41. The method of claim 39, wherein membership in a division is based on ranking.
  - 42. The method of claim 38, wherein criteria includes a ranking.
  - 43. The method of claim 38, wherein criteria includes demographics.
  - 44. The method of claim 1, wherein the audience provides feedback to the first user and the second user.
  - 45. The method of claim 1, wherein the winner is provided to the audience.
  - 46. The method of claim 1, wherein rankings are adjusted for creative works.
  - 47. The method of claim 1, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on current rankings of the creative works.
  - 48. The method of claim 1, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on the format of the creative works.
  - 49. The method of claim 1, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 50. The method of claim 49, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 51. The method of claim 49, wherein the criteria includes demographics.
  - 52. The method of claim 1, wherein the voting parameters include a parameter to set a condition that the audience can vote for a first user specified number of days.
  - 53. The method of claim 1, wherein the voting parameters include a parameter to set a condition that the audience can vote until a first user specified number of votes is reached.
  - 54. The method of claim 1, wherein the audience includes any public persons.
  - 55. The method of claim 1, wherein the audience includes a panel of judges.

56. A creative work evaluating processor-implemented system, comprising:
- means to provide an offer to compete in a creative works competition by a first user, wherein the offer to compete includes parameters that specify a second user as a potential competitor, a permitted type of creative work to be evaluated in the competition, a permitted length of the creative works to be evaluated in the competition, a submission deadline for competitors to submit creative works, and voting parameters;
  
  means to obtain an acceptance to the offer to compete from the second user;
  
  means to receive a creative work from the first user and the second user after determining;
  
  (a) that the creative works from the first user and the second user match the permitted type of creative work specified by the first user in the offer to compete, (b) that the creative works from the first user and the second user do not exceed the permitted length specified by the first user in the offer to compete, and (c) that the creative works from the first user and the second user were submitted before the submission deadline specified by the first user in the offer to compete;
  
  means to provide the creative works from the first user and the second user to an audience;
  
  means to obtain votes from members of the audience experiencing the creative works of the first user and the second user;
  
  means to total, via a processor and in response to the voting parameters specified by the first user in the offer to compete being satisfied, votes for each creative work;
  
  means to determine, based on the totaled votes for each creative work, a winner of the creative works competition between the first user and the second user;
  
  means to update a rating for the first user and the second user based on the following formula;
  
  R_n=R_o+K(W−
  
  (1/(1+10^D/S))), wherein;
  
  R_nrepresents the updated rating;
  
  R_orepresents a rating for the user before the creative works competition;
  
  K represents a predetermined weighting factor that rewards more rating points to users with lower R_ovalues;
  
  W represents the outcome of the creative works competition and rewards more rating points to a user for a win than for a tie, and more points for a tie than a loss;
  
  D represents the absolute difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and
  
  S represents a predetermined value that weights the difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and
  
  means to rank the first user and the second user along with a plurality of other users according to the updated ratings.
- View Dependent Claims (57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107)
- - 57. The system of claim 56, wherein the creative works competition is a tournament.
  - 58. The system of claim 56, further comprising, means to generate an offer to compete, prior to providing the offer to compete.
  - 59. The system of claim 56, wherein the offer to compete is over creative works.
  - 60. The system of claim 56, wherein the offer to compete is upon request of an offering competitor.
  - 61. The system of claim 56, further comprising, means to select potential competitors for the offers to compete, prior to providing the offer to compete.
  - 62. The system of claim 61, wherein selection for the offer to compete is limited by qualification.
  - 63. The system of claim 62, wherein the qualifications are for potential competitors.
  - 64. The system of claim 62, wherein the qualifications are for creative works.
  - 65. The system of claim 62, wherein qualification is based on hand-selection.
  - 66. The system of claim 65, wherein hand-selection is made by an audience.
  - 67. The system of claim 62, wherein hand-selection is made by a division.
  - 68. The system of claim 62, wherein qualification is random.
  - 69. The system of claim 62, wherein qualifications are based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 70. The system of claim 69, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 71. The system of claim 70, wherein membership in a division is based on geography.
  - 72. The system of claim 70, wherein membership in a division is based on ranking.
  - 73. The system of claim 69, wherein criteria includes a ranking.
  - 74. The system of claim 69, wherein criteria includes demographics.
  - 75. The system of claim 61, wherein selected competitors are paired at random.
  - 76. The system of claim 61, wherein selected competitors are paired in a round-robin manner.
  - 77. The system of claim 61, wherein selected competitors are paired through hand-selection.
  - 78. The system of claim 61, wherein selected competitors are paired through the issuance of an offer to compete and the acceptance of the offer to compete.
  - 79. The system of claim 77, wherein hand-selection is made by an audience.
  - 80. The system of claim 56, wherein the offer to compete is provided to a plurality of potential competitors.
  - 81. The system of claim 56, wherein the acceptance of the offer to compete is configured as a request to issue an offer to compete.
  - 82. The system of claim 56, wherein the first user and the second user may not view one another'"'"'s creative works until the creative works are ready for providing to the audience.
  - 83. The system of claim 56, wherein the first user and the second user have a limited time in which to provide creative works.
  - 84. The system of claim 56, wherein the first user and the second user may employ feedback from audience members to update their creative work.
  - 85. The system of claim 56, wherein the first user and the second user may employ feedback from audience members to update their creative work.
  - 86. The system of claim 56, wherein the first user and the second user are paired at random.
  - 87. The system of claim 56, wherein the first user and the second user are paired in a round-robin manner.
  - 88. The system of claim 56, wherein the first user and the second user are paired through hand-selection.
  - 89. The system of claim 56, wherein the first user and the second user are paired through the issuance of an offer to compete and the acceptance of the offer to compete.
  - 90. The system of claim 56, wherein audience members are limited by qualifications.
  - 91. The system of claim 90, wherein qualification is based on hand-selection.
  - 92. The system of claim 91, wherein hand-selection is made by a division.
  - 93. The system of claim 90, wherein qualification is random.
  - 94. The system of claim 90, wherein qualifications are based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 95. The system of claim 94, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 96. The system of claim 95, wherein membership in a division is based on geography.
  - 97. The system of claim 95, wherein membership in a division is based on ranking.
  - 98. The system of claim 94, wherein criteria includes a ranking.
  - 99. The system of claim 94, wherein criteria includes demographics.
  - 100. The system of claim 56, wherein the audience provides feedback to the first user and the second user.
  - 101. The system of claim 56, wherein the winner is provided to the audience.
  - 102. The system of claim 56, wherein rankings are adjusted for creative works.
  - 103. The system of claim 56, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on current rankings of the creative works.
  - 104. The system of claim 56, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on the format of the creative works.
  - 105. The system of claim 56, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 106. The system of claim 105, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 107. The system of claim 105, wherein the criteria includes demographics.

108. A non-transitory computer-readable medium readable by a processor to evaluate a creative work, comprising:
- instructions stored in the processor readable medium, wherein the instructions are issuable by the processor to;
  
  provide an offer to compete in a creative works competition by a first user, wherein the offer to compete includes parameters that specify a second user as a potential competitor, a permitted type of creative work to be evaluated in the competition, a permitted length of the creative works to be evaluated in the competition, a submission deadline for competitors to submit creative works, and voting parameters;
  
  obtain an acceptance to the offer to compete from the second user;
  
  receive a creative work from the first user and the second user after determining;
  
  (a) that the creative works from the first user and the second user match the permitted type of creative work specified by the first user in the offer to compete, (b) that the creative works from the first user and the second user do not exceed the permitted length specified by the first user in the offer to compete, and (c) that the creative works from the first user and the second user were submitted before the submission deadline specified by the first user in the offer to compete;
  
  provide the creative works from the first user and the second user to an audience;
  
  obtain votes from members of the audience experiencing the creative works of the first user and the second user;
  
  total, in response to the voting parameters specified by the first user in the offer to compete being satisfied, votes for each creative work;
  
  determine, based on the totaled votes for each creative work, a winner of the creative works competition between the first user and the second user;
  
  update a rating for the first user and the second user based on the following formula;
  
  R_n=R_o+K(W−
  
  (1/(1+10^D/S))), wherein;
  
  R_nrepresents the updated rating;
  
  R_orepresents a rating for the user before the creative works competition;
  
  K represents a predetermined weighting factor that rewards more rating points to users with lower R_ovalues;
  
  W represents the outcome of the creative works competition and rewards more rating points to a user for a win than for a tie, and more points for a tie than a loss;
  
  D represents the absolute difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and
  
  S represents a predetermined value that weights the difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and
  
  rank the first user and the second user along with a plurality of other users according to the updated ratings.
- View Dependent Claims (109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158)
- - 109. The medium of claim 108, wherein the creative works competition is a tournament.
  - 110. The medium of claim 108, further comprising, generate an offer to compete, prior to providing the offer to compete.
  - 111. The medium of claim 108, wherein the offer to compete is over creative works.
  - 112. The medium of claim 108, wherein the offer to compete is upon request of an offering competitor.
  - 113. The medium of claim 108, further comprising,select potential competitors for the offer to compete, prior to providing the offer to compete.
  - 114. The medium of claim 113, wherein selection for the offer to compete is limited by qualification.
  - 115. The medium of claim 114, wherein the qualifications are for potential competitors.
  - 116. The medium of claim 114, wherein the qualifications are for creative works.
  - 117. The medium of claim 114, wherein qualification is based on hand-selection.
  - 118. The medium of claim 117, wherein hand-selection is made by an audience.
  - 119. The medium of claim 117, wherein hand-selection is made by a division.
  - 120. The medium of claim 114, wherein qualification is random.
  - 121. The medium of claim 114, wherein qualifications are based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 122. The medium of claim 121, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 123. The medium of claim 122, wherein membership in a division is based on geography.
  - 124. The medium of claim 122, wherein membership in a division is based on ranking.
  - 125. The medium of claim 121, wherein criteria includes a ranking.
  - 126. The medium of claim 121, wherein criteria includes demographics.
  - 127. The medium of claim 113, wherein selected competitors are paired at random.
  - 128. The medium of claim 113, wherein selected competitors are paired in a round-robin manner.
  - 129. The medium of claim 113, wherein selected competitors are paired through hand-selection.
  - 130. The medium of claim 113, wherein selected competitors are paired through the issuance of an offer to compete and the acceptance of the offer to compete.
  - 131. The medium of claim 129, wherein hand-selection is made by an audience.
  - 132. The medium of claim 108, wherein the offer to compete is provided to a plurality of potential competitors.
  - 133. The medium of claim 108, wherein the acceptance of the offer to compete is configured as a request to issue an offer to compete.
  - 134. The medium of claim 108, wherein the first user and the second user may not view one another'"'"'s creative works until the creative works are ready for providing to the audience.
  - 135. The medium of claim 108, wherein the first user and the second user have a limited time in which to provide creative works.
  - 136. The medium of claim 108, wherein the first user and the second user may employ feedback from audience members to update their creative work.
  - 137. The medium of claim 108, wherein the first user and the second user are paired at random.
  - 138. The medium of claim 108, wherein the first user and the second user are paired in a round-robin manner.
  - 139. The medium of claim 108, wherein the first user and the second user are paired through hand-selection.
  - 140. The medium of claim 108, wherein the first user and the second user are paired through the issuance of an offer to compete and the acceptance of the offer to compete.
  - 141. The medium of claim 108, wherein audience members are limited by qualifications.
  - 142. The medium of claim 141, wherein qualification is based on hand-selection.
  - 143. The medium of claim 142, wherein hand-selection is made by a division.
  - 144. The medium of claim 141, wherein qualification is random.
  - 145. The medium of claim 141, wherein qualifications are based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 146. The medium of claim 145, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 147. The medium of claim 146, wherein membership in a division is based on geography.
  - 148. The medium of claim 146, wherein membership in a division is based on ranking.
  - 149. The medium of claim 145, wherein criteria includes a ranking.
  - 150. The medium of claim 145, wherein criteria includes demographics.
  - 151. The medium of claim 108, wherein the audience provides feedback to the first user and the second user.
  - 152. The medium of claim 108, wherein the winner is provided to the audience.
  - 153. The medium of claim 108, wherein rankings are adjusted for creative works.
  - 154. The medium of claim 108, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on current rankings of the creative works.
  - 155. The medium of claim 108, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on the format of the creative works.
  - 156. The medium of claim 108, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 157. The medium of claim 156, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 158. The medium of claim 156, wherein the criteria includes demographics.

159. An apparatus to evaluate a creative work, comprising:
- a memory, the memory for storing instructions;
  
  a processor that may issue a plurality of processing instructions stored in the memory, wherein the processor issues instructions to;
  
  provide an offer to compete in a creative works competition by a first user, wherein the offer to compete includes parameters that specify a second user as a potential competitor, a permitted type of creative work to be evaluated in the competition, a permitted length of the creative works to be evaluated in the competition, a submission deadline for competitors to submit creative works, and voting parameters;
  
  obtain an acceptance to the offer to compete from the second user;
  
  receive a creative work from the first user and the second user after determining;
  
  (a) that the creative works from the first user and the second user match the permitted type of creative work specified by the first user in the offer to compete, (b) that the creative works from the first user and the second user do not exceed the permitted length specified by the first user in the offer to compete, and (c) that the creative works from the first user and the second user were submitted before the submission deadline specified by the first user in the offer to compete;
  
  provide the creative works from the first user and the second user to an audience;
  
  obtain votes from members of the audience experiencing the creative works of the first user and the second user;
  
  total, in response to the voting parameters specified by the first user in the offer to compete being satisfied, votes for each creative work;
  
  determine, based on the totaled votes for each creative work, a winner of the creative works competition between the first user and the second user;
  
  update a rating for the first user and the second user based on the following formula;
  
  R_n=R_o+K(W−
  
  (1/(1+10^D/S))), wherein;
  
  R_nrepresents the updated rating;
  
  R_orepresents a rating for the user before the creative works competition;
  
  K represents a predetermined weighting factor that rewards more rating points to users with lower R_ovalues;
  
  W represents the outcome of the creative works competition and rewards more rating points to a user for a win than for a tie, and more points for a tie than a loss;
  
  D represents the absolute difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and
  
  S represents a predetermined value that weights the difference between R_ovalues for the first user and the second user; and
  
  rank the first user and the second user along with a plurality of other users according to the updated ratings.
- View Dependent Claims (160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209)
- - 160. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the creative works competition is a tournament.
  - 161. The apparatus of claim 159, further comprising, generate an offer to compete, prior to providing the offer to compete.
  - 162. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the offer to compete is over creative works.
  - 163. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the offer to compete is upon request of an offering competitor.
  - 164. The apparatus of claim 159, further comprising,select potential competitors for the offer to compete, prior to providing the offer to compete.
  - 165. The apparatus of claim 164, wherein selection for the offer to compete is limited by qualification.
  - 166. The apparatus of claim 165, wherein the qualifications are for potential competitors.
  - 167. The apparatus of claim 165, wherein the qualifications are for creative works.
  - 168. The apparatus of claim 165, wherein qualification is based on hand-selection.
  - 169. The apparatus of claim 168, wherein hand-selection is made by an audience.
  - 170. The apparatus of claim 168, wherein hand-selection is made by a division.
  - 171. The apparatus of claim 165, wherein qualification is random.
  - 172. The apparatus of claim 165, wherein qualifications are based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 173. The apparatus of claim 172, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 174. The apparatus of claim 173, wherein membership in a division is based on geography.
  - 175. The apparatus of claim 173, wherein membership in a division is based on ranking.
  - 176. The apparatus of claim 172, wherein criteria includes a ranking.
  - 177. The apparatus of claim 172, wherein criteria includes demographics.
  - 178. The apparatus of claim 164, wherein selected competitors are paired at random.
  - 179. The apparatus of claim 164, wherein selected competitors are paired in a round-robin manner.
  - 180. The apparatus of claim 164, wherein selected competitors are paired through hand-selection.
  - 181. The apparatus of claim 164, wherein selected competitors are paired through the issuance of an offer to compete and the acceptance of the offer to compete.
  - 182. The apparatus of claim 180, wherein hand-selection is made by an audience.
  - 183. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the offer to compete is provided to a plurality of potential competitors.
  - 184. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the acceptance of the offer to compete is configured as a request to issue an offer to compete.
  - 185. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the first user and the second user may not view one another'"'"'s creative works until the creative works are ready for providing to the audience.
  - 186. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the first user and the second user have a limited time in which to provide creative works.
  - 187. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the first user and the second user may employ feedback from audience members to update their creative work.
  - 188. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the first user and the second user are paired at random.
  - 189. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the first user and the second user are paired in a round-robin manner.
  - 190. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the first user and the second user are paired through hand-selection.
  - 191. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the first user and the second user are paired through the issuance of an offer to compete and the acceptance of the offer to compete.
  - 192. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein audience members are limited by qualifications.
  - 193. The apparatus of claim 192, wherein qualification is based on hand-selection.
  - 194. The apparatus of claim 193, wherein hand-selection is made by a division.
  - 195. The apparatus of claim 192, wherein qualification is random.
  - 196. The apparatus of claim 192, wherein qualifications are based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 197. The apparatus of claim 196, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 198. The apparatus of claim 197, wherein membership in a division is based on geography.
  - 199. The apparatus of claim 197, wherein membership in a division is based on ranking.
  - 200. The apparatus of claim 196, wherein criteria includes a ranking.
  - 201. The apparatus of claim 196, wherein criteria includes demographics.
  - 202. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the audience provides feedback to the first user and the second user.
  - 203. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein the winner is provided to the audience.
  - 204. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein rankings are adjusted for creative works.
  - 205. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on current rankings of the creative works.
  - 206. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on the format of the creative works.
  - 207. The apparatus of claim 159, wherein ranking the first user and the second user is also based on criteria stored in a database.
  - 208. The apparatus of claim 207, wherein the criteria includes membership in a division.
  - 209. The apparatus of claim 207, wherein the criteria includes demographics.

Specification

Resources

Litigation Campaign Assessment

Current Assignee
Andre D.E. Moraes, Sandro De Moraes
Original Assignee
Andre D.E. Moraes, Sandro De Moraes
Inventors
De Moraes, Andre, De Moraes, Sandro
Primary Examiner(s)
KARDOS, NEIL R

Application Number

US10/632,392
Time in Patent Office

3,196 Days
Field of Search

705/12, 705/7.29
US Class Current

705/7.29
CPC Class Codes

G06Q 10/101   Collaborative creation, e.g...

G06Q 30/0201   Market modelling; Market an...

G06Q 30/0282   Rating or review of busines...

Apparatus, method and system for comparative collaborative creative works evaluation

First Claim

0 Assignments

0 Petitions

Accused Products

Abstract

Citations

209 Claims

Specification

Solutions

Use Cases

Quick Links

Apparatus, method and system for comparative collaborative creative works evaluation

First Claim

0 Assignments

Subscription Required

Subscription Required

0 Petitions

Subscription Required

Accused Products

Subscription Required

Abstract

Citations

209 Claims

Specification

Subscription Required

Solutions

Use Cases

Quick Links