https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/video-coding-standard-tools-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Media Codecs
Video coding standard tools patents: who leads and where filing is headed
  • 41.6% concentration. The five leading assignees combined account for 48,257 of the 116,090 records in scope — a field where a handful of players hold the largest share of claim space.
  • Growth through 2024. Filing rose from 1,798 records in 2021 to 2,226 in 2024, a +24% increase over that three-year span, the most recent period the data can call complete.
  • Sharp recent-year drop-off by leader. The most active assignees each show year-on-year declines of 74-88% in the latest year — a pattern that reflects publication lag rather than an actual pullback in filing.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
116.1K
Published Records
42%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+24%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (1,798 records) with 2024 (2,226) — 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 116,090 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this landscape covers

This dataset covers 116,090 published patent records matching coding-tree-unit, intra-prediction and motion-vector-prediction claims combined with rate-distortion optimization, in-loop filtering, entropy coding, transform-coefficient, quantization-parameter or prediction-mode-signaling terms. The search window runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, so it captures both the settled tool set from earlier codec generations and the newer AI-assisted filter and prediction work now entering examination.

Records are drawn from filings and publications across major offices, with the United States, the European Patent Office and the WIPO PCT route carrying the largest volumes. Because a single filing family can generate several published documents, the family-level assignee ranking below is the fairer read on who actually controls claim space, while the raw record count is what drives the technology-composition and trend charts.

Filing volume and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1QUALCOMM INC16,204
  2. 2HUAWEI TECH CO LTD10,534
  3. 3LG ELECTRONICS INC8,719
  4. 4TENCENT AMERICA LLC7,469
  5. 5BYTEDANCE INC5,331
  6. 6SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD4,710
  7. 7DOUYIN VISION CO LTD3,951
  8. 8GUANGDONG OPPO MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORP LTD3,344
  9. 9SONY GROUP CORP2,865
  10. 10NOKIA TECHNOLOGIES OY2,765
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Video Coding Standard Tools 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

Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology

Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.

10,000 free credits to start
The Numbers

Filing trends and technology composition

Two views of the same 116,090 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.

Filing activity, 2017-2026

Annual filings climbed to a peak of 2,951 in 2020, then continued at a high plateau; the 2021-to-2024 span shows a +24% rise from 1,798 to 2,226 records. Years after 2024 are shown for completeness but understate true activity, since publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.

Filing activity, 2017-202607501,5002,2503,0007262017201820192,9512020202120222023202420251822026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

Where the claims sit

H04N (pictorial communication / video-TV) dominates at 17.0% of all records, an order of magnitude ahead of every other subclass. G06T, H03M, G06K, G06N, H04B, G06F and G06V each sit at 0.4% or below, meaning the vast majority of technical detail is filed as core video-communication art rather than being classified into adjacent computing or AI subclasses — a signal that most drafting still frames these tools as codec claims first.

Where the claims sitH04N · Pictorial communication (video…19,76217.0%G06T · Image data processing & genera…4070.4%H03M · Coding & code conversion2900.2%G06K · Data recognition & presentation1460.1%G06N · Computing based on AI models1360.1%H04B · Transmission (general)1090.1%G06F · Electric digital data processi…1070.1%G06V · Image/video recognition630.1%Other1700.1%

Shares are the percentage of the 116,090 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 Video Coding Standard Tools covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Video Coding Standard Tools with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about video coding standard tools and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key Patents

Representative and most-cited filings

Representative Recent Filing
US20260095600A12026-04-02

Method and electronic device for compressing a video using AI-based in-loop filter

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.

This Samsung filing (US20260095600A1, published 2026-04-02) describes an AI-based in-loop filter (AILF) that extracts features from each frame's channels, selects a pre-processor from a bank of multi-pre-processors based on those features, and encodes the image information accordingly. It sits squarely in the in-loop filtering claim family this dataset tracks, but frames the filter selection as a learned, feature-conditioned step rather than a fixed rule.Abstract trimmed for length; full claims should be reviewed before relying on this summary.

US20260095600A1 — patent drawing 1US20260095600A1 — patent drawing 2
View full record
Most-cited records in this dataset
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US20180098063A1Motion vector prediction for affine motion models in video coding725
2US7003035B2Video coding methods and apparatuses621
3US20180359483A1Motion vector prediction581
4US20050123207A1Video frame or picture encoding and decoding570
5US20170332099A1Merge candidates for motion vector prediction for video coding537
6US20170094313A1Non-separable secondary transform for video coding492
7US20160100189A1Intra bc and inter unification487
8US20090002379A1Video decoding implementations for a graphics processing unit467
9US20170094314A1Non-separable secondary transform for video coding with reorganizing443
10US20140105276A1Picture coding device, picture coding method, picture coding program, picture decoding device, picture decodi…420

Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate references; treat them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not of current technical importance.

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 Video Coding Standard Tools 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
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 →
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 data means for a filing decision

Three patterns worth acting on before drafting or licensing in this space.

Concentration
41.6% of 116,090
held by the top 5

The core codec toolset is claimed by a small group

Five assignees combined hold 48,257 of the 116,090 records in scope. New entrants filing on core motion-vector-prediction or in-loop-filter mechanics are filing into dense, well-defended prior art rather than open ground.

Source: assignee ranking, 100 companies
Trend
+24% (2021-2024)
three-year filing growth

Activity grew through the last complete year

Filings rose from 1,798 in 2021 to 2,226 in 2024. That is genuine growth, not an artefact of publication lag, since 2024 is the most recent year the trend can treat as complete.

Source: annual filing trend
Co-filing
1,733 shared filings
strongest co-assignee pair

Some corporate structures file jointly at scale

The strongest co-assignee pair in this dataset shares 1,733 filings, far ahead of the next pairs at 227 and 119. That kind of joint-filing volume usually reflects a parent-subsidiary drafting arrangement rather than an arm's-length collaboration.

Source: co-assignee pairs, n=10
Classification
17.0% H04N
share of all records

Claims cluster in core video-communication art

H04N alone covers 17.0% of all 116,090 records, while every other subclass sits at 0.4% or below. Drafting that leans on AI-model or image-recognition subclasses (G06N, G06V) is still comparatively rare in this corpus.

Source: IPC subclass composition
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 video coding standard tools, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Video Coding Standard Tools 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
Players

Who is filing, and where momentum sits

The ranked leaders combine large legacy portfolios with newer high-volume filers; recent-year figures should be read alongside the publication-lag caveat above.

Leader
16,204 records
leading assignee

One filer holds a clear lead

The top-ranked assignee's 16,204 records is roughly three times the fifth-place total of 5,331, underlining that scale at the very top is uneven even within the leading group.

Source: assignee ranking
Mid-field
2,765 records
tenth place

The drop-off from fifth to tenth is steep

Tenth place sits at 2,765 records, roughly half of fifth place's 5,331 — the concentration curve is steep even inside the top ten, not just between the top ten and the long tail.

Source: assignee ranking
Momentum
-74% to -88% YoY
latest-year change, leading filers

Latest-year counts look low across the board

Every one of the most active recent filers shows a steep year-on-year decline in the latest year. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, this reads as an artefact of the data cut-off rather than a genuine pullback in R&D activity.

Source: recent-year momentum by assignee
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth a closer look
Branches where filing density is thin relative to the core codec toolset.
AI-conditioned in-loop filter selectionlearned quantization-parameter adaptationcross-component transform coefficient signalingvideo-recognition-linked prediction mode signalingentropy coding for AI-generated residuals
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
ByteDance Inc.44-85%
Douyin Vision Co., Ltd.34-87%
LG Electronics Inc.17-88%
Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd.16-83%
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.13-86%
Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI)11-74%
Beijing Dajia Internet Information Technology Co., Ltd.8-64%
Qualcomm Incorporated5-91%
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Video Coding Standard Tools 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 next

The landscape points to a few concrete next steps depending on what you are trying to decide.

Check freedom-to-operate against the leading five

Given that 41.6% of all records sit with five assignees, any new filing on core motion-vector-prediction or in-loop-filter claims should be checked against their specific claim scope before drafting.

Explore assignee portfolios in Eureka

Scope claims around the under-claimed branches

AI-conditioned filter selection and learned quantization-parameter adaptation show thinner filing density than the core toolset, which is where a first claim has more room to stand on its own.

Run a white-space search in Eureka

Watch the 2025-2026 filings as they mature

Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, the most informative near-term signal will be how many of the thin 2025-2026 records convert to full publications over the next reporting cycle.

Set up monitoring in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Video Coding Standard Tools 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 on video coding standard tools patents

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Video Coding Standard Tools 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 Video Coding Standard Tools in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole video coding standard tools corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.