A Novel Video Watermarking Scheme

Based on MPEG-2 for Copyright Protection

Rakesh Ahuja1, S S Bedi2
1
Department of Computer Science & Engineering Department, MIT Moradabad, (UP), India
2 Department of CS & IT, MJP Rohilkhand University, Bareilly (U.P), India

Abstract: An innovative MPEG-2 based robust, invisible and blind watermarking scheme for video is
presented. The proposed algorithm uses all the DC coefficients from all 8 x 8 block of discrete coefficient
transforms matrices generated from each IDR frame in order to embed the binary watermark. The watermark
can only be extracted by using the key, which also enhance the security of watermark itself. Therefore the
extraction will never possible without knowing the actual key. The robustness is evaluated by testing against
image processing attacks and video processing intentional and non-intentional attacks by evaluating two
parameters as Normalized Correlation and Bit error Rate in order to find the degree of similarity and degree of
dissimilarity respectively between the original and extracted watermark. The superiority of the proposed video
watermarking algorithm is that the excellent robustness and good perceptibility achieved without changing the
motion vectors during the DPCM process of MPEG-2 encoding scheme.

Keyword: Discrete cosine transforms, information retrieval, video compression, MPEG-2 Structure.

1. Introduction requirements of imperceptibility, throughput

With the advent of internet technology, it
becomes easier to copy, edit and transfer digital
multimedia data from one system to other. Due
to this easiness another issues arises like
creation of illegal redistribution of visual
multimedia data, piracy and tempering with the
original contents and much more serious effect
is to claim for false ownership and more
challenges is to protect the copyright
information. Encryption is the earlier use
technique to protect the contents. Still, it fails to
protect the digital contents once decrypted.
Another way to protect the multimedia is to
embed the copyright into the host object in a
robust and imperceptible manner. It certainly
feels more comfortable not only to the
multimedia owners for supplying the
copyrighted materials but also for end users for
sharing much of the information. The current
digital video multimedia data is available in
different format and types and therefore
watermarking terminology can also use these
different compression standards like MPEG-2
for embedding purposes. Other way of video
watermarking is to use directly original video
stream as spatial domain or frequency domain.
Hence there are numbers of ways to implement
the video watermarking algorithms but the
common thing for any video watermarking is
that they must meet three basic contradict
and robustness.
This paper is structured into six sections
described as follows. Section 1 described the
brief introduction and section 2 summarised the
background of MPEG-2 video compression
scheme. A brief review of video watermarking
using the MPEG structure elaborated in section
3. Proposed digital video watermark scheme is
explained in section 4. The experimental setup
and their results and analyses are illustrated in
section 5. Section 6 comparing the proposed
method with the existing techniques either
works on the same structure (MPEG) or
different structure like spatial domain and
frequency domain in order to perfectly evaluate
the standing of the anticipated scheme. Section
7 is set for concluding the paper with their
limitations and future works.
2. Background of MPEG-2 Video
Compression Standard
The MPEG-2 coding standard development is
started in 1990. Each video sequence in MPEG
is divided into one or more group of pictures
(GOP). Each group consisting of three types of
pictures named as I frames (Intra coded
pictures), P frames (forward predicted
pictures), and B frames (Bidirectional frames).
Their decoding and encoding order of GOP is
shown in fig 1 and fig 2 respectively.
I1 B2 B3 P4 B5 B6 P7 B8 B9 P10
Fig. 1 Decoding and Display order of GOP
I1 P4 B2 B3 P7 B5 B6 P10 B8 B9
Fig. 2 Encoding and Processing Order of GOP
MPEG structure processed the video frames in
unit of a macro blocks. Each of the macro block
is processed in intra or inter coded mode and the
processing is depend upon that it is associated
with which type of frame (I, P or B). Each macro
block of size 16 x 16 of I frame is divided into
number of blocks and the size of each block is set
to 8 x 8. Each block of video frame is passes
through some key steps necessary to encode the
video data. Since I-frames are the very first
frame in each picture group therefore these I
frames are coded directly i.e. without taking
reference to any other past or future frames.
While encoding I-frames, spatial redundancy can
be reduces and therefore also consider as Intra-
frame coding. Another kind of frame is P frames,
can be predicted from previous I frame or P
frame i.e. they are using the inter-frame coding
technique are use to reduce spatial and temporal
redundancies and provides more compression as
compared to I frames. The result is P frames are
more complex than I-frames and therefore also
having less space for any type of embedding
information. The third category of pictures is B-
pictures, also called bidirectional prediction and it
uses both references, past and future frame may
be I or P frames as a reference to provide highest
degree of compression.
MPEG-2 video data stream is being divided into
3 major parts: Evaluation of DCT coefficients
data stream, finding motion vector and head
information. Watermark information can be
embedded into the first two of them. If the
copyright information as watermark is embedded
into the DCT coefficients during the encoding of
video, it is generally embedded into I-frames
because of having large number of DCT
coefficients available in it as compared to P-
frames and B-frames. Since I frames is the key
frame among all three kinds of frames therefore
special attention must be required to embed the
watermark in this type of frames. Since I- frames
directly affect the quality of P-frame and B-
frame. Degrading the quality of I frames by
inserting other information means lowering down
the value of P-frames and B-frames. Hence the
limitation with this approach is that the quality of
watermarked video may degraded significantly if
special care has not been consider. The proposed
scheme uses this approach to embed the
watermark but carefully designed keeping the
view of quality of watermarked video must not be
degraded sharply. Another method for embedding
the watermark is to finding the motion vector by
considering the P and B frames. Although this
approach claims for high throughput and good
perceptibility, yet the robustness and bit error rate
may not get up to the mark due to P-frame is
having less redundancy. The limitation of this
approach is that the robustness will be
compromised certainly, the essential feature of
any video watermarking. Therefore, the proposed
algorithm implemented the video watermarking
by adopting the first method in order to get all
three features remarkably.
3. Previous Researchers Work
Chiou-Ting Hsu et al. [1] embedded the
watermark into the modified quantized middle
frequency DCT frequency coefficients to survive
the MPEG structure. Since MPEG do the
quantization operation to achieve the higher level
of adaptation. Therefore the limitation of this
approach is that is the modification of DCT
coefficients for inserting the watermark is
depends upon the quantization factor. Larger the
quantization factor providing the larger survival
of watermark against compression ratio otherwise
poor invisibility would be obtained. Bijan G.
Mobasseri [2] embedded the watermark into the
raw video contents by using the spread spectrum
technique. In this approach, they simulated their
experiments that the extraction of watermark can
be extracted from the MPEG decoded bit stream.
It has been clearly indicated the limitation in his
approach that up to what extend the inserting
binary pattern would survives. You-Ru Lin et al.
[3] inserted the watermark image according to the
direction of motion vector by using the block
matching algorithm. Satyen Biswas et al. [4]
described the video watermarking scheme
based on MPEG2 structure. They converted
the gray scale image into multiple bit-plane
images and DCT is applied to all the bit-plane
images. Each partitioned image embedded
into each different scene of the movie. In this
way the watermark is embedded into the
whole video. Robustness is being evaluated by
simulating the various attacks like collusion,
filtering, frame dropping, rotation, and
blurring, scaling and temporal shift. The only
limitation with this approach is that only I
frames are used to embed the watermark but
when security concern in so important, as they
indicated, then all kinds of frames I, P and B
frames could be used for watermarked for the
uncompressed domain, but again the limitation
is that it would be performed at the cost of
higher computational complexity. Lu Jianfeng
et al. [5] described the video watermarking
based on DCT coefficient. They adjusted the
DCT coefficient to embed the watermark and
extracted successfully without the need of
original video or watermark. The limitation
with this approach is that the quality of
watermarked video depends upon the control
parameter. Therefore, the little increasing this
control parameter may drastically affect the
perceptibility of watermarked video. Another
limitation is that the robustness has been
evaluated against only ‘Salt & Pepper’ attack
although numbers of image processing attack
as well as video specific attacks are available
to judge the robustness of the scheme. Ahuja
et al. [6] further extended this work based on
MPEG2 structure tried to cover the above
limitations. They focused on improving the
elapsed time to embed the watermark and
achieved higher robustness against some
common image processing attacks and video
specific attacks. Another way to embed the
watermark bits is to first finding the macro
block of Y or Cr or Cb component of I frame
when P-frame has a motion vector and then
these blocks will be little modified in order to
embed the binary watermark
bits as described by [7]. The purpose of all
above mentioned works is to embed the
copyright information in a robust manner. Yuk
Ying Chung et al. [8] developed the
watermarking scheme for MPEG-2 video
based on quantized DCT coefficient. They
embedded each watermark bits into the LSB of
the DC coefficient in each DCT coefficient
lock of I frames. Daniel Cross et al.[9]
proposed the watermarking method of MPEG
video for evaluation of authentication and
temper detection. Their algorithm is entirely
based on the compressed bit stream in which is
to identifying the watermark carrying VLCs.
These VLCs can be use to embedding the
watermark bits. LSB of each VLC is use to
embed one watermark bits. The common
limitation with these above two approaches is
that the attacker can randomized all the LSB
values in order to completely destroy the
watermark. Dr. Anil kumar Sharma [10] uses
quantization index modulation (QIM)
technique to embed the watermark bits into P
frames and claiming that the thousand of bits
of watermark can be embedded in just one P
frame which certainly improves the capacity of
watermark bits. But the limitation with this
approach is that the data of P-frame is having
less redundancy and therefore PSNR and NC
decreases with increases the probability of
errors. The limitations with all above
approaches are that adopted a very cryptic
method to modify the structure of MPEG for
embedding the watermark bits and due to
which all three essential features cannot
obtained in a optimized way. To overcome the
limitations of all the above methods is that this
paper proposed a novel technique by little
modifying the DC coefficients of DCT blocks
by using the MPEG-2 structure in view of
achieving the higher perceptibility and
robustness, essential features of any video
watermarking.
4. Proposed video watermarking
algorithm
4.1 Generation of Watermark Key
A two dimensional binary image of size K= M
x N bits for bit depth 1 is use as watermark
signal ‘W’ is converted into one dimensional
consisting K bits. Each pixel of the binary
image is needed to be represented by 1 bit.
The size of image ‘K’ is act as a key and it will
be use to extract the watermark image from the
watermarked video.
4.2 Video Preprocessing
If the video is in compressed form, convert
into uncompressed form by separating it into
number of frames. Then the video is divided
into the group of pictures (GOP) consisting I,
P and B frames, where each GOP consisting
10 frames for processing as shown in Fig. 2, a
general regular structure of MPEG 2 but it
doesn’t adamant to follow the same sequence
that the I frame must be followed by a chain of
P-frame and B-frames. Sometimes a P-frame
may have drastically changes from the
previous I or P- frame and therefore it may be
predicated awful and due to which it is better
to encode it as I-frame.
4.3 Watermark Embedding Process
Since I frames are having high density of DCT
blocks as compare to P and B frames therefore
the proposed algorithm uses the I type of
frames to insert the watermark bits by little
modifying the DC value of each DCT blocks
of Y channel of each I frame in view of that
the quality of watermarked video must not be
degraded significantly. The details of
embedding algorithm is defined as follows:
Each I frame is divided into three channels,
For each I frame Coverted To Y ,CB and
CR Channel
one as luminance component ‘Y’ and other
two Chrome channels known as CB and CR
respectively. Choose Y component as it is the
most luminance part and have a rich space for
inserting the watermark. Divide the Y matrix
into the number of equal size ( 8 x 8) of blocks
for applying DCT and then quantization on
each currently selected 8 x 8 block. Pick one
watermark bit and also check the value of DC
component of currently selected DCT for odd
or even. If the picked value of watermark bit is
1 and the DC value is odd then there is no
change of DC value otherwise make it odd for
the currently selected DCT component then it
is considered that selected one watermark bit
of ‘1’ is inserted virtually. On the contrary, if
the current watermark bit is ‘0’ and the DC
value is even than there is no change of DC
value otherwise make it even for the currently
Extract Y component Divided Y into 8 x 8 bits
of Blocks

Apply DCT on each

A size of binary image is S= M x N. Where S= { S(i,j) |
Pick first watermark bit (wj) block
0 ≤ i<M, 0 ≤ j<N, And S(i,j) ∈ {0,1}. Convert the
from the first DCT block.
image into one dimensional array, where W= {
wj}, j=1,2,……S, where S= M x N, and wj = 0 or
1 Pick First DC_value from
the first DCT block

y=XOR (wj, x) x= (DC )Mod 2

If y==0? If wi=0?
Yes Yes Yes Yes

No
No change to DC value of & it is
considered that the selected bit (wi=0 or
1) is inserted into the currently selected
DCT block
No
Change DC value to greatest even
integer lower than the DC value & it
is considered that the selected
watermark bit ‘0’ is inserted into the
currently selected DCT block .
Change DC value to greatest
odd integer lower than the DC
value for the currently selected
DCT block & it is considered that
the selected bit ‘1’ is inserted .

Select next Yes If any more

If any more Yes Select next
watermark bit DCT block
bit exist? DCT Block
(wj) exist?

No No
Select first
Embedding of watermark bits Embedding process
watermark bit (wj) is started from the scratch completed.
Fig. 3: Watermark Embedding System
selected DCT coefficient then it is considered
that the selected one watermark bit ‘0’ is
inserted virtually. Now choose DC value from
the next adjacent DCT block. At the same time
also pick the watermark bit (0/1). Repeat the
same procedure to insert the other watermark
bit. This process is continued to embed the
other watermark bits from all the DCT block
from the currently selected I frame. Move to
another GOP to get another I frame for
repeating the same process for inserting the
rest watermark bits. This process is continued
till all watermark bits have been processed. If
still some DCT blocks are untouched then
watermark bits will be inserted again from the
scratch in order to cover all untouched DCT
block. In this way all DCT blocks from all I
frame has been covered. It can be best
understand by the following example. Suppose
5 watermark bits to be insert are { 0,0, 1,1,1}
and the actual DC values are { 183, 94, 72,
187, 190} then the updated value of DC
components are { 182, 94, 71, 187, 189} in
order to be considered that the watermark bits
have been inserted.
5 Experimental setup And Result
Analysis
Proposed video watermarking algorithm is
simulated under MATLAB tool version
R2009. Experimental results have been
evaluated by considering the standard videos
namely ‘Akiyo.avi’ . The video is static since
a newsreader is having only lips movements
and rest part of the video including
background is immovable throughout the
playing of video. The length of this video
sequence is 300 frames with a frame rate is 25
fps and the size of each video frame is 176 x
144. Another input requirement is to choose
the standard binary watermark. A binary
watermarks ‘logo.tif’ as shown in the Fig. 4a
is chosen to embed the watermark. The size of
this image is 122 x 127 with bit depth 1.
Therefore, here the key ‘K= 15494’ is the size
of the binary image use to extract the
watermark. The extracted watermark is shown
in Fig 4b.
Fig 4a: Original Fig 4b: Extracted
Watermark Watermark
The simulation results have been evaluated for
three major parameters as defined below
5.1 Perceptibility
The perceptibility factor measures the degree
of similarity between the original video with
the watermarked video. It is defined by the
following formula.
NoofFrames
PSNR  1/ NoofFrames 
K 1
PSNR (i)
K
Where PSNRK = 10 log10 255/ MSEK(mean
square error) is the peak signal to noise ration
measures between Kth original video frame and
Kth Watermarked Video frame and MSE it is
defined as mean square error between these
two frames, defined by the following formula
–
N 1 M 1 2
MSEK  1/ MN  (OrigVid (i, j ) K  WtrVid (i, j ) K ) (ii)
i 0 j 0
M x N is the size of each video frame and
OrigVid(i,j) refers to particular pixel value of
ith row and jth column of original video frame
and WtrVid(i,j) refers to particular pixel value
of ith row and jth column of watermarked video
frame. The proposed algorithm calculated the
PSNR between original and watermarked
video with and without attacks as shown in the
Table 1.
5.2 Robustness Evaluation:
The robustness parameters calculate the degree
of resemblance between original and extracted
watermark. It is defined by the normalized
correlation as defined below:
M 1 N 1
 W (i, j )W '(i, j )
i 0 j 0
NC  M 1 N 1
(iii)
 W (i, j )
i 0 j 0
2
where W and W ' are the original and extracted
watermarks of size M x N, respectively.
Robustness is evaluated by applying the
different categories of attacks such as image
processing attack and video specific attacks.
Robustness of the proposed algorithms has
been tested through simulation of the
following attacks:
a) Geometric Attacks- Rotation &
Cropping
b) Noise Attacks: Speckle Noise, Salt &
Pepper Noise & Gaussian Noise
c) Filter Attack: Median Filter & Wiener
Filter Attack
d) Video Manipulation Attacks: Frames
insertion, frame deletion, frames
averaging, frame swapping and frame
replacement.
e) Compression Attack: Cinepak Attack
Although in all the listed attacks, the best
robustness results are obtained against frame
replacement attack, frame deletion attack,
frame swapping, frame averaging attack
because of NC value in all these case is above
90%. These attacks must be checked for
robustness evaluation of any digital video
watermarking scheme. As compare to previous
researchers work, no work have been
demonstrate for frame replacement attack for
robustness evaluation till now & it is as
important as other frame specific attacks. It
may be needed for those situation where the
commercial video clip as advertisement have
to be insert but the entire video length must
not be increased. The proposed algorithm also
tested the robustness against various types of
inserting the noise. The results are good for the
small value of noise addition into the
watermarked video. As far as geometric attack
is concern, two attacks namely ‘rotation
attack’ and ‘crop attack’ are very most
important attacks. Generally, in both the cases,
watermarking extraction algorithms fails to
extract the embedded watermark therefore
simulation must required to verify the
robustness against these attacks. Best results of
extracted watermark in the proposed algorithm
are shown in Table 1, the watermark is
successfully extracted after rotating the entire
video by 0.1°. Simulation results show that the
PSNR is decreasing as increasing the rotation
angle beyond 0.1°. It is concluded that the
small value of rotation is acceptable without
having any rotation detector. Definitely the
rotation detector increases the robustness but
also increases the complexity. Another
category of geometric attack is cropping attack
provides satisfactory results if less than or
equal to 10% of the total frames were cropped.
Another way to judge the robustness is to
calculate the ‘Bit Error Rate (BER’. It reflects
the degree of dissimilarities between the
extracted and original watermark image. In
general it is not known the threshold value for
which the value is acceptable.
M 1 N 1
W (i, j)  W '(i, j)
BER  0 0
*100
MN (iv)
Where W and W ' are the original watermark
and the extracted watermark, respectively. M x
N is the size of watermark image. NC and
BER, both the parameters evaluate the
robustness but former find the similarities
between the original and extracted watermark
and later described the degree of
dissimilarities. The numerical relationship
between these two is that NC is inversely
propotional to BER i.e. higher the NC value
and lower the BER indicates the higher
robustness is obtained for some constant ‘k’.
In a simple way, when NC=1 and BER=0
reflects that there is no viable difference
between the original and the extracted
watermark. The proposed algorithm
calculated the BER between original and
extracted watermark with and without attacks
as shown in the Table 1.
 Table 1: NC, PSNR and BER along with extracted image after applying Attacks on Watermarked Video

No Attack Rotation at 0.1 : 30 frames Crop Speckle Noise at 0.0003 Salt & Pepper Noise at
NC: 0.95343 NC : 0.83419 NC : 0.89403 NC : 0.9404 0.0003:
PSNR: 38.3198 PSNR: 37.6641 PSNR: 34.3369 PSNR: 37.6865 NC : 0.93446
BER: 4.5400 BER: 15.8419 BER: 12.8849 BER:5.7837 PSNR: 38.3036
BER:6.3429

Gaussian Noise Median Filter: Frame Replacement Attack Frame Insertion Attack Frame Deletion Attack
at 0.0003 NC : 0.7354 (12 to 24 Frame Replaced (12 to 24 frame inserted (2 frames Deleted)
NC : 0.8185 PSNR: 37.7444 from ‘cat_video.avi’) : from cat_video.avi) NC : 0.90228
PSNR: 35.4524 BER:28.3974 NC : 0.94187 NC : 0.69888 PSNR: 38.2234
BER:17.2974 PSNR: 38.0504 PSNR: 36.2480 BER: 9.3918
BER:5.6534 BER:29.8682

Frame Swapping Frame Averaging Compression Attack Wiener Filter Attack ( 3x

Attack (4 frames Attack NC : 0.7127 3)
swapped) NC : 0.95343 PSNR: 37.4866 NC : 0.69956
----
NC : 0.94197 PSNR: 38.0026 BER:27.0109 PSNR: 38.4757
PSNR: 38.1402 BER:4.5427 BER: 28.3974
BER: 5.8143

----

6 State of Art Vs Simulation Results
The theme of the proposed technique is that the
robustness results can be compared with the
results of previous research by covering same
and different variety of existing techniques as
frequency domain based approach, DCT based
and motion vector based using MPEG structure
as shown in Table 2. Other consideration is that
- some of the author evaluated the NC or other
calculated the BER for robustness point of view.
In view of this, the proposed method evaluated
both NC and BER so that the simulation results
can be compared with those researchers who
have evaluated either NC or BER as shown in
Table 2. Another important obsession is that no
existing schemes shown results for evaluating
PSNR after various attacks. Since this factor is
directly associated with the quality of
watermarked video and therefore it cannot be
overlooked and it is almost as important as
normalized correlation value. That is why; the
proposed scheme demonstrates PSNR along
with NC and BER before and after various types
of attacks.
Table 2: Comparison of the robustness between the proposed algorithm and other previously suggested algorithms

S.No Attack Type [11] [12] [13] [14] Proposed Scheme

PSNR NC PSNR NC PSNR BER PSNR NC PSNR NC BER

1 Rotation --- 0.60 --- 0.71 --- 49.87 --- 0.9140 38.1441 0.95343 15.8419

2 Cropping --- 0.68 --- 0.73 --- 6.52 --- --- 34.3369 0.89403 12.8849

3 Speckle Noise --- 0.90 0.91 35.04 11.34 --- --- 37.6865 0.9404 5.7837

4 Salt & Pepper --- 0.63 --- --- 34.67 --- --- 0.6684 38.3036 0.93446 6.3429

5 Gaussian Noise --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.6847 35..4524 0.8185 17.2974

6 Median Filter --- 0.54 --- 0.63 35.04 6.54 --- --- 37.7444 0.7354 28.3974

7 Wiener Filter --- --- --- --- 35.04 --- --- --- 38.4757 0.69956 28.3974

8 Frame Replacement --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 38.0504 0.94187 5.634

9 Frame Insertion --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 36.248 0.69888 29.8682

10 Frame Deletion --- 0.90 --- --- --- --- --- 0.8801 38.2234 0.90228 9.3918

11 Frame Swapping --- 0.90 --- --- --- --- --- 0.9011 38.1402 0.94197 5.8143

12 Frame Averaging --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.9030 38.0026 0.95343 4.5427

13 Compression --- --- --- --- --- 28.13 --- --- 37.4866 0.7127 27.0109

According to the experimental results, the
following observation made.
1. It is observed from the above results that the
proposed method shows better results than other
existing schemes for most of the image and video
specific attacks.
2. The quality of watermarked video is compared
with the original video tested through
perceptibility (PSNR) as shown in the Table 1. Its
value lies between 38.0026 (minimum value with
any type of attack applied) and 38.3198
(maximum value without any attack), shows that
perceptibility is degraded to maximum of 1.23%,
which is very nominal. Hence it is concluded that
the proposed algorithm successfully achieved the
perceptibility requirements, most essential feature
of any video watermarking, under any type of
intentional or non-intentional attack.
3. Another observation is that the existing
schemes have shown their results for covering
few attacks. The proposed approach covered
almost all geometric attack, image processing
attacks and video specific attacks. Till now, no
researcher has evaluated the robustness against
frame replacement attack.
4. By analyzing the table, it is concluded that the
robustness results are almost better than previous
work except with [13], the results are tarnished
only for cropping and median filter attack shown
by bold case letter.
5. Security of extraction of watermark is
depending upon the key & the key is ‘size of
watermark’ itself. The watermark can never be
extracted by the attacker until he/she knows the
key.
7 Conclusion
In this paper, DCT based robust and
imperceptible digital video watermarking is
proposed by using the MPEG structure. The
results have been evaluated for covering the three
main issues as robustness, imperceptibility and
payload capacity. Robustness is being
successfully simulated by covering fourteen
intentional and non-intentional attacks as shown
in the table 1 and the beauty of this proposed
algorithm is that the watermark is recovered
successfully without degrading the perceptibility.
The only limitation with this approach is that the
payload capacity is depend upon the number of
DCT coefficients available in the I frames. The
future work can be extended to test the robustness
against applying more attacks like ambiguity
attacks, collusion attacks and joint attacks.
References
[1] Chiou-Ting Hsu; Ja-Ling Wu,, "DCT-based
watermarking for video," Consumer Electronics,
IEEE Transactions on , vol.44, no.1, pp.206,216,
Feb 1998
[2] Mobasseri, B.G., "A spatial digital video
watermark that survives MPEG," in Information
Technology: Coding and Computing, 2000.
Proceedings. International Conference on, vol.,
no., pp.68-73, 2000
[3] You-Ru Lin; Hui-Yu Huang; Wen-Hsing Hsu,
"An embedded watermark technique in video for
copyright protection," in Pattern Recognition,
2006. ICPR 2006. 18th International Conference
on , vol.4, no., pp.795-798, 20-24 Aug. 2006
[4] Satyen Biswas, Sunil R. Das, “An adaptive
compressed MPEG-2 video watermarking
scheme”, IEEE transaction on instrumentation
and measurement”, vol. 54, No.5, pp. 1853- 1861,
Oct 2005.
[5] Lu Jianfeng; Yang Zhenhua; Yang Fan; Li Li,
"A MPEG2 Video Watermarking Algorithm
Based on DCT Domain," Digital Media and
Digital Content Management (DMDCM), 2011
Workshop on , vol., no., pp.194,197, 15-16 May
2011
[6] Rakesh Ahuja, S S bedi, “ Copyright
Protection using Blind Video Watermarking
Algorithm based on MPEG-2 Structure”, Paper in
press in IEEE proceedings, conference held on
15-16 May’2015.
[7] Ueno, Y., "A digital video watermarking
method by associating with the motion
estimation," Signal Processing, 2004. IEEE
Proceedings. ICSP '04. 2004 7th International
Conference on , vol.3, no., pp.2576,2579 vol.3,
31 Aug.-4 Sept. 2004
[8] Yuk Ying Chung, Fan Fei Xu, Faith Choy, “
Development of Digital Video Watermarking for
MPEG-2 Video, Proc of IEEE, 2006, pp. 1-4
[9] Danial Cross, Bijan G. Mobasseri, “
Watermarking for self authentication of
compressed video”, IEEE proceeding,
International Conference on , vol.2, pp.913-916
vol.2, 2002
[10] Dr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Mr. Yunus
Mohammed Pervej, “Simulation and analysis of
digital video watermarking using MPEG-2”
,International Journal on Computer Science and
Engineering,3(7)2700-2706, 2011
[11] Mahesh R. Saghavi, Dr. Mrs Archana M.,
Prof. Dr. Rajeev, Kainjan S. Kotecha, “ A Robust
Scheme for Digital Video Watermarking based
on Scrambling of Watermark,” International
Journal of Computer Applications (0975-8887),
Vol 35- No. 2, Dec 2011
[12] Mirza, H.H.; Thai, H.D.; Nagata, Y.; Nakao,
Zensho, "Digital Video Watermarking Based on
Principal Component Analysis," Innovative
Computing, Information and Control, 2007.
ICICIC '07.IEEE Second International
Conference on , vol., no., pp.290,290, 5-7 Sept.
2007
[13] Yuan-Gen Wang, Zhe Ming Lu, Liang Fan,
Yun Zheng, “Robust dual watermarking
algorithm for AVS video”, ELSEVIER, Signal
processing image communication, vol 24, pp.
333-344, 2009,
[14] Lama Rajab, Tahani Al-Khatib, Ali Al-Haj,
“ Hybrid DWT-SVD Video Watermarking” IEEE
proceedings, international conference on, pp.
588-592 2008