The TLDR is: 1) This article DOES appear to me to discuss technology FULLY applicable to stills as well as motion picture. 2) The point of the technology seems to be achieved, which is HDR images from a single sensor, whereby the highlight exposure will have the same motion blur as the shadow exposure.
From the Canon News explanation of the technical article, that I feel totally misunderstands that article:
You've overlooked Fig 10. While this article is somewhat couched in video-type language (e.g., fps discussion in section 6), nothing I see rules out "1 frame period" as being a single still photo, as well as one frame of a video. And within that Fig 10's "1 frame period," they have not just two exposures, but effectively MANY interleaved exposures. For the very short blue segments, they're accumulating the impacting photons in counter (memory) 1, while in the alternating very long orange segments, they're accumulating the photons in counter 2.
This results in HDR because memory 1 will have about 128x fewer photons than memory 2. This means when memory 2 is full (totally blown out highlight) memory 1 will just be starting to have enough photons counted to get above random statistical variation. (128x is about 2^7 which is 7*6 dB or 7 stops).
More importantly, in normal HDR the fast exposure is taken all at once. Instead, here it is taken in many slices. In section 5 they give a case study of a 1/67.5th second exposure: 14.815ms. They add up photons in the fast accumulator for 23 microseconds, then the slow one for 3.68 milliseconds. Then fast slow fast slow fast slow fast, which finishes the exposure.
The fast exposure, true, hasn't caught the motion EVERYWHERE as the subject slides from (say) left to right, but has caught it 5 different places. As long as those places aren't farther apart than a pixel or whatever the lens resolution is, they'll meld together seamlessly. (And, I imagine the number of slices isn't fixed at 5, but rather the slice frequency is more likely to be fixed. A far longer exposure would simply have far more slices, and therefore still produce a continuously-blurred highlight exposure.)
This spreads the "fast" exposure of 115 microseconds (about 1/8700th) across the same total 14.815ms as the "slow" exposure. That gives the "Short Exp." in figure 12 the same motion blur as the "Long Exp.," unlike the "Short Exp." in figure 11 which was taken all at once and is so short as to freeze motion. Likewise Figure 13 shows that there aren't jerky or double-image effects that would normally occur in HDR; compare these images to those at the beginning of the article.