Description
To identify relevant patents, comprehensive searches were conducted across multiple patent databases using a combination of search strings, IPC/CPC classifications, and HEVC–specific keywords.
To determine the essentiality of a patent, each claim is compared to the H.265 standard to identify whether the patented claim’s elements are present in the standard. Essentiality is checked with respect to all versions of HEVC, respectively, as improvements have been gradually implemented to address evolving technological demands in HEVC.
Patented claim is compared to the standard, and if every element of the claim aligns with the H.265 specifications, the patent is considered essential. On the other hand, if any element is not present or there is a contradiction between the claim and the standard (e.g., conflicting requirements or descriptions), the patent is considered non-essential. This manual evaluation process ensures that only patents fully aligned with the H.265 standard’s requirements are classified as essential.
Frequently asked questions
Which Dolby patents does this HEVC analysis include?
The analysis covers 102 active granted patents identified for Dolby that relate to HEVC technology. Each of these patents was evaluated by mapping the elements of its independent claims to the relevant sections of the H.265 standard. That mapping shows where the claimed subject matter aligns with the standard text and where it does not. The patents were found through searches across multiple patent databases using search strings, IPC and CPC classifications, and HEVC specific keywords.
Which HEVC technology areas are covered?
Five technology areas are covered: Block-based coding, Predictive Coding, Transformation and Quantization, Multi-layer, and Filtering. These groupings organise the portfolio so you can see which parts of the H.265 specification a patent reads on. Sorting patents this way makes it easier to compare coverage across areas and to see where a portfolio is concentrated. The report keeps the same structure for every patent, so the mapping for one area can be read alongside the mapping for another.
How is essentiality decided against the H.265 standard?
Each claim is compared with the H.265 standard to see whether the claimed elements appear in the specification. If every element of the claim aligns with H.265, the patent is considered essential. If an element is not present, or the claim contradicts the standard through conflicting requirements or descriptions, the patent is considered non-essential. Essentiality is checked with respect to all versions of HEVC, because improvements were implemented gradually as technical demands changed. The evaluation is manual rather than automated.
Who is this report for?
It is aimed at licensing teams, patent pool administrators, IP counsel and technical managers who need a view of Dolby’s position in HEVC. The claim to standard mapping supports licence negotiation, portfolio benchmarking, freedom to operate review and preparation for pool submissions. Engineers working on video coding also use this kind of mapping to understand which parts of the standard a portfolio touches. The report is available on request through the contact page, and the scope can be adjusted to suit your question.
