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
How many Sun Patent Trust patents are analysed against HEVC?
The analysis covers 82 active granted patents identified for Sun Patent Trust as related to HEVC technology. Each was evaluated by mapping its independent claim elements to the relevant sections of the H.265 standard. The technology areas covered are block based coding, predictive coding, transformation and quantization, multi layer coding, and filtering. Setting the portfolio out this way shows not only how many patents touch HEVC but which parts of the standard they read on, which is the more useful question in a licensing discussion.
What counts as an essential patent in this study?
A patent is considered essential when every element of its claim aligns with the H.265 specifications, meaning the standard cannot be implemented without practising the claim. If any element is missing from the standard, or contradicts it through conflicting requirements or descriptions, the patent is considered non-essential. That test is applied claim by claim rather than to the patent as a whole. Because the reading is manual, differences between claim language and the drafting of the standard can be weighed rather than ignored.
Does the review consider later revisions of the standard?
Essentiality is checked with respect to all versions of HEVC. Improvements were added to the standard over time to meet changing technical demands, so a claim can align with one version and not another. Handling the versions separately keeps that distinction on the record. Readers can then match the findings to the version of H.265 that their own products or their licensees implement, instead of working from a single undated conclusion about the portfolio.
How is the report obtained?
Requests go through the contact page on the website, and the report is supplied in response rather than sold as an instant download. Scope can be adjusted before delivery. That might mean concentrating on one technology area, adding detail on how specific claims were mapped to sections of the standard, or applying the same method to another portfolio in the same field. Questions about the search strategy or the assessment criteria can be raised at the same time.
