IP Library Granted Patent US 12,346,413
Granted Patent B2
US 12,346,413 · App. 17/805,404 · Granted Jul 1, 2025

Streaming fraud detection using blockchain

Inventors: Pouria Assadipour (Burnaby, CA); Evan Martin (Port Moody, CA); Andrew Batey (Vancouver, CA); Morgan Hayduk (Toronto, CA)
G06F21/10G06N20/20H04L9/3218H04L9/50
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,346,413
App. No.
17/805,404
Granted
Jul 1, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Systems and methods for detecting fraudulent streaming activity. Streaming activity is posted to a blockchain by one or more DSPs. Blockchain streaming data is extracted from the blockchain and used as input in a machine learning model. The machine learning model takes the extracted blockchain data, along with additional inputs such as DSP trend pool and social pool inputs, and makes a determination regarding potentially fraudulent streaming activity.

Claims (34)

1. A system for detecting fraudulent streaming activity, the system comprising:

a processor; and

memory, the memory storing instructions to cause a processor to execute a method, the method comprising:

extracting streaming data from a blockchain, the streaming data corresponding to play count activity for streaming media;

transforming the extracted streaming data into a format ingestible by a trained machine learning model;

inputting the transformed streaming data into the machine learning model, wherein the machine learning model comprises a trend pool that allows analysis of streaming patterns across multiple streaming platforms to identify discrepancies between the trends across platforms to suggest streaming fraud; and

determining that a particular stream is potentially fraudulent.

2. The system of claim 1 , wherein the machine learning model takes into account user engagement data including one or more of the following: gyroscope orientation, battery percentage, current city, track label, track distributor, and stream duration.

3. The system of claim 1 , wherein the extracted streaming data comprises hashes instead of raw data for zero knowledge proofs.

4. The system of claim 1 , wherein the machine learning model includes multiple machine learning algorithms for different attributes of streaming media.

5. The system of claim 1 , wherein the extracted streaming data corresponds to other information including one or more of the following: device battery information, operating system, user interaction data.

6. The system of claim 1 , wherein the machine learning model utilizes a social trend pool or a Digital Service Provider (DSP) trend pool as additional input.

7. The system of claim 1 , wherein the method further comprises posting the determination that the particular stream is potentially fraudulent to a data store for direct or indirect access by DSPs.

8. A method for detecting fraudulent streaming activity, the method comprising:

extracting streaming data from a blockchain, the streaming data corresponding to play count activity for streaming media;

transforming the extracted streaming data into a format ingestible by a trained machine learning model;

inputting the transformed streaming data into the machine learning model, wherein the machine learning model comprises a trend pool that allows analysis of streaming patterns across multiple streaming platforms to identify discrepancies between the trends across platforms to suggest streaming fraud; and

determining that a particular stream is potentially fraudulent.

9. The method of claim 8 , wherein the machine learning model takes into account user engagement data including one or more of the following: gyroscope orientation, battery percentage, current city, track label, track distributor, and stream duration.

10. The method of claim 8 , wherein the extracted streaming data comprises hashes instead of raw data for zero knowledge proofs.

11. The method of claim 8 , wherein the machine learning model includes multiple machine learning algorithms for different attributes of streaming media.

12. The method of claim 8 , wherein the extracted streaming data corresponds to other information including one or more of the following: device battery information, operating system, user interaction data.

13. The method of claim 8 , wherein the machine learning model utilizes a social trend pool or a DSP trend pool as additional input.

14. The method of claim 8 , further comprising posting the determination that the particular stream is potentially fraudulent to a data store for direct or indirect access by DSPs.

15. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions to execute a method, the method comprising:

extracting streaming data from a blockchain, the streaming data corresponding to play count activity for streaming media;

transforming the extracted streaming data into a format ingestible by a trained machine learning model;

inputting the transformed streaming data into the machine learning model, wherein the machine learning model comprises a trend pool that allows analysis of streaming patterns across multiple streaming platforms to identify discrepancies between the trends across platforms to suggest streaming fraud; and

determining that a particular stream is potentially fraudulent.

16. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the machine learning model takes into account user engagement data including one or more of the following: gyroscope orientation, battery percentage, current city, track label, track distributor, and stream duration.

17. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the extracted streaming data comprises hashes instead of raw data for zero knowledge proofs.

18. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the machine learning model includes multiple machine learning algorithms for different attributes of streaming media.

19. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the extracted streaming data corresponds to other information including one or more of the following: device battery information, operating system, user interaction data.

20. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the machine learning model utilizes a social trend pool or a DSP trend pool as additional input.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jun 9, 2022
From: ASSADIPOUR, POURIA; HAYDUK, MORGAN; BATEY, ANDREW; MARTIN, EVAN
To: BEATDAPP SOFTWARE INC.
Reel/Frame 060147/0157 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 63196600 · Jun 3, 2021
Related Publication 20220391474A1 · Dec 8, 2022
References Cited (41)
US 10268660B1 · Arazi · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 10382476B1 · Li · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 10459827B1 · Aghdaie · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 10469605B1 · Batey · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 10645180B1 · Batey · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 11074500B2 · Volkova · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 11783221B2 · Trim · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20070179853A1 · Feige · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20140244375A1 · Kim · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20160092999A1 · Kabdebon · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20170221111A1 · Salehi · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180260860A1 · Devanathan · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180270244A1 · Kumar · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180285996A1 · Ma · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180374283A1 · Pickover · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190034986A1 · Robinson · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190122258A1 · Bramberger · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190179861A1 · Goldenstein · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200004882A1 · Kulkarni · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200167631A1 · Rezgui · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200311790A1 · Keren · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200349284A1 · Saket · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200410495A1 · Tadiparti · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200412820A1 · Assadipour · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210042830A1 · Burke · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210049441A1 · Bronstein · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210089579A1 · Shu · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210192651A1 · Groth · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210295436A1 · Langdon, Jr. · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210342704A1 · Pavlov · 2021 [cited by examiner]
CA 3107819A1 · 2021 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2019183191A1 · 2019 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2020040777A1 · 2020 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2020163508A1 · 2020 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2021072403A1 · 2021 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2021262180A1 · 2021 [cited by examiner]
Author Unknown, “Birdnest: Bayesian Inference for Ratings-Fraud Detection” Published: Mar. 7, 2016, arXiv:1511.06030v2 [cs.Al] (Year: 2016). [cited by examiner]
Author: Nour Jnoub and Wolfgang Klas, “Declarative Programming Approach for Fake Review Detection”. Published: 2020, IEEE (Year: 2020). [cited by examiner]
Author: Marco Maratea, Luca Pulina and Francesco Ricca , “Applying Machine Learning Techniques to ASP Solving”, Published: Jan. 2012, Technical Communications of the 28th International Conference on Logic Programming (I… [cited by examiner]
Author: Nidhi A. Patel and Rakesh Patel, “A Survey on Fake Review Detection using Machine Learning Techniques”, Published: 2018, International Conference on Computing Communication and Automation (ICCCA) (Year: 2018). [cited by examiner]
Author: Syed Mohammed Anas and Santoshi Kumari, “Opinion Mining based Fake Product review Monitoring and Removal System”, Published: Jan. 2021, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Inventive Computation … [cited by examiner]