https://patents.google.com/?assignee=E+Ink+Corp
Certainly a number of drive waveforms and the basic concepts are presented. There are likely implementation subtleties or specific configurations that are not explicitly disclosed.
You can probably figure out a lot about both the implementation, and motivation by digging through the patents.
Additionally, as others have posted, the waveforms vary for different panels, due to manufacturing variation, so reversing a single example won’t tell you much about how to drive a different panel.
This is more or less the type of situation patents were invented for: a simple invention anyone can copy once it's invented, but difficult (I assume) to invent in the first place.
It's why I don't like most software patents, but why I think codecs, especially the modern ones, should be patentable. They're complicated engineering challenges requiring you to make numerous tradeoffs and I feel that just because the result is an algorithm doesn't mean that it shouldn't be patentable.
Other software patents I'm more dubious of, but I feel comfortable saying H.264 should be patentable.