Fastest
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/antireflection-and-antiglare-display-films-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Display Optical FilmsAntireflection and Antiglare Display Film Patents: Who Leads and Where the Claim Space Is Still Open
- 81.1% concentration. The top 5 of 100 ranked assignees hold 1,047 of the 1,291 records in scope — a field dominated at the top, not a fragmented one.
- Filing peaked in 2017. Output has since cooled, with 2021's 20 filings falling to 7 by 2024, a -65% move over that span; 2025-2026 figures are still filling in under publication lag.
- Photolithography, not just optics, anchors the field. G03F covers 48.4% of records, ahead of G02B optical elements at 29.7% — resist and pattern-forming chemistry is as central here as coatings.
1,291
Published Records
81%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-65%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (20 records) with 2024 (7) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 1,291 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
Antireflection and antiglare films sit at the intersection of optical coating chemistry and display manufacturing, combining hard-coat hardness, fingerprint resistance and surface haze control with the pattern-forming and resist chemistry that produces the microstructures behind low-reflection surfaces. The 1,291 records in scope span 2015 through the 2026 cut-off and cite both display-specific patents and the underlying photolithography art that makes fine antiglare structures manufacturable.
The dataset draws on published patent families indexed under antireflection film, antiglare film and low-reflection surface language, cross-referenced against haze, sparkle, black-level, hardness, fingerprint and coating-uniformity claim terms. Families, not raw document counts, are the basis for the assignee ranking, which neutralises continuation filings and multi-jurisdiction duplicates.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Antireflection and Antiglare Display Films covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Data
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 1,291-record corpus: the filing trend by year, and the IPC subclasses that describe what is actually being claimed.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings peaked at 32 in 2017 and had fallen to 7 by 2024, a -65% move from 2021's 20. The 2025 and 2026 figures (down to 3) are not a further decline signal — publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent two years are still being backfilled.
IPC subclass composition
G03F (photolithography and photomechanics) leads at 48.4% of the 1,291 records, ahead of G02B optical elements at 29.7% and G02F optical control at 19.5%. B32B layered products (17.0%), H01L semiconductors (14.5%), C08F addition polymers (12.5%), C09D coatings (6.5%) and C07C compounds (5.4%) round out the picture. Because records can carry multiple classes, these shares sum to well over 100% and should be read individually against the full record count, not against each other as a pie.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,291 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Antireflection and Antiglare Display Films covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Antireflection and Antiglare Display Films with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about antireflection and antiglare display films and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
The representative filing and the most-cited prior art
Representative Filing
US20090262431A1 — Antiglare film, antireflection film, polarizing plate and image display device
FUJIFILM CORPORATION
An antiglare film includes a transparent support and an antiglare layer containing a light-transmitting particle and a light-transmitting resin. The particle has a core-shell structure: the shell layer runs 10 to 2,000 nm thick, the core has a refractive index of 1.54 to 1.65, and the shell has a refractive index of 1.46 to 1.53.Filed by Fujifilm Corporation, published 2009-10-22.
Most-cited records in this corpus
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20080187860A1 | Pattern forming method, resist composition for multiple development used in the pattern forming method, devel… | 401 |
| 2 | US20120105400A1 | Camera lens structures and display structures for electronic devices | 304 |
| 3 | US20070146887A1 | Antireflection film, polarizing plate, method for producing them, liquid cryatal display element, liquid crys… | 222 |
| 4 | US20140118826A1 | Displays With Polarizer Layers for Electronic Devices | 210 |
| 5 | US20160070167A1 | Pattern forming method, actinic ray-sensitive or radiation-sensitive resin composition, resist film, manufact… | 202 |
| 6 | US20120106063A1 | Displays with polarizer windows and opaque masking layers for electronic devices | 159 |
| 7 | US6961108B2 | Liquid crystal display viewable under all lighting conditions | 144 |
| 8 | US20120251948A1 | Actinic ray-sensitive or radiation-sensitive resin composition, and actinic ray-sensitive or radiation-sensit… | 142 |
| 9 | US6343865B1 | Non-glare film, polarizing device and display device | 138 |
| 10 | US20090214871A1 | Hard coat film, polarizing plate, and image display | 137 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus over time and structurally favour older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial weight.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Antireflection and Antiglare Display Films covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →Insights
What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three signals from the corpus that matter more for strategy than the raw record count.
Concentration
81.1%
of 1,291 records held by top 5 of 100 ranked assignees
The top of the field is tightly held
With the top 5 of 100 ranked assignees accounting for 81.1% of all 1,291 records, and the top 10 reaching 88.8%, this is not a fragmented technology. A new entrant is filing directly against a small number of very deep portfolios rather than into open space.
Top 10 combined: 1,147 records, 88.8% of scope
Filing momentum
-65%
2021 to 2024 filing change
Output has cooled from its 2017 peak
Filings peaked at 32 in 2017 and dropped from 20 in 2021 to 7 in 2024, a -65% move. That is a real slowdown in the completed-year data, though 2025-2026 numbers will rise as publication catches up with filing.
Peak year: 2017 at 32 filings
Technology mix
48.4%
of records classified under G03F
Pattern-forming chemistry, not just coatings, drives claims
G03F photolithography and photomechanics touches 48.4% of the 1,291 records, more than any optics class. Antireflection and antiglare film development in this corpus is as much about resist and pattern chemistry as about the coating stack itself.
G02B optical elements: 29.7% of records
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to antireflection and antiglare display films, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Antireflection and Antiglare Display Films covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Who's Filing
Assignee landscape and collaboration patterns
The ranking covers 100 assignees by family count; a handful of names account for the large majority of activity, with a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants behind them.
Leader
852
records held by the top-ranked assignee
One filer dominates the ranking
The leading assignee holds 852 of the 1,291 records in scope, dwarfing the fifth-place holder's 36 and tenth-place's 15. This gap is unusually steep even for a concentrated field and suggests one company treats this claim space as core IP rather than a side interest.
Fifth place: 36 records; tenth place: 15
Collaboration
10
co-assignee pairs identified
Co-filing is limited and mostly internal
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the corpus, with the strongest pairings linking named inventors within the same organisation rather than cross-company joint filings. Cross-assignee collaboration is not a meaningful route into this space based on this data.
Strongest pair: 19 shared filings
Momentum
0
latest-year filings for most tracked assignees
Recent-year activity has thinned across the board
Among the tracked assignees, latest-year filing counts sit at zero for most, with the leader down 50% year-on-year to a single filing. This mirrors the completed-year decline visible in the 2021-2024 trend rather than signalling any one company's retreat.
Leader's YoY change: -50%
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Fujifilm Corporation | 1 | -50% |
| Apple Inc. | 0 | — |
| Fujifilm Holdings Corporation | 0 | — |
| Sumitomo Chemical Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Toppan Holdings Inc. | 0 | — |
| LG Chem Ltd. | 0 | — |
| IWATO KAORU | 0 | — |
| Sony Group Corporation | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Antireflection and Antiglare Display Films covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio benchmarking, or scouting for white space.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 852 of 1,291 records, any new filing in core antiglare coating or resist claims should be checked against that portfolio specifically, not just the field average.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTrack the under-claimed branches before they fill in
Sub-areas like fingerprint-resistant chemistry and sparkle-artifact suppression show classification presence without the claim density seen in core coating art, making them worth monitoring for early filings.
Set up white space monitoring in EurekaRe-run the trend once 2025-2026 data settles
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent drop into 2025-2026 is partly an artefact of timing rather than a confirmed slowdown; revisit the completed-year trend in a future cut.
Track filing trends in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Antireflection and Antiglare Display Films covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about this landscape
One assignee holds 852 of the 1,291 records in scope, far ahead of the fifth-ranked holder at 36 and the tenth at 15. The top 5 of the 100 ranked assignees together account for 81.1% of all records, and the top 10 reach 88.8%. This means the field is dominated by a small number of very large portfolios rather than spread evenly across many filers, so any competitive or freedom-to-operate analysis should weight the leader's portfolio heavily.
Filings peaked at 32 in 2017 and declined to 7 by 2024, a -65% drop from 2021's 20 filings — a real slowdown across the completed-year data. However, publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the lower figures shown for 2025 and 2026 (down to 3) reflect incomplete data rather than a confirmed continued decline. The trend should be reassessed once those years finish publishing.
The largest IPC subclass is G03F, photolithography and photomechanics, covering 48.4% of the 1,291 records, which reflects how much of the antiglare surface-structuring work relies on pattern-forming and resist chemistry rather than coating formulation alone. G02B optical elements (29.7%) and G02F optical control (19.5%) follow, with layered products, semiconductors, addition polymers, coatings and carbocyclic compounds also represented. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, these percentages overlap rather than sum to 100%.
Classification data shows presence without deep claim density in areas like fingerprint-resistant surface chemistry, sparkle-artifact suppression structures and coating-uniformity process control — these subclasses appear in the corpus but are not concentrated in the leading assignees' core filings the way hard-coat and resist claims are. That gap suggests room for narrower, more specific claims in those branches rather than head-on competition with the top five holders' core coating and pattern-forming art. Any filing strategy there should still check the specific under-claimed branch against the leader's broader portfolio before assuming it is open.
A single assignee's 852 records against 1,291 total records in scope reflects a long-running, broad filing programme across antiglare coatings, resist chemistry and related display optics rather than a single blockbuster patent family. The gap to the fifth-ranked holder (36) and tenth (15) is unusually steep even for a concentrated technology area. This kind of concentration typically means the leader treats the space as core, long-term IP rather than an opportunistic filing area, which raises the bar for new entrants seeking broad claims in the same territory.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Antireflection and Antiglare Display Films covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Antireflection and Antiglare Display Films in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole antireflection and antiglare display films corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company's registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.