Adidas files lawsuit against Under Armour for copyright infringement
February 10, 2014 12:27 pm Leave your thoughts
It may be February, but fitness centers and sports apparel companies are still reaping the benefits from millions of people who pledge to live healthier lives. Through the use of calorie-tracking watches, mobile applications and sneakers, these businesses have the potential to experience a strong first quarter. But who owns these patents?
According to a lawsuit that was filed in the U.S. District Court, District of Delaware – Wilmington, these technologies are owned by Adidas. Their report stated that it owns 10 patents on "mobile applications products that track heart rates, calories burned and other information during workouts" and that Under Armour is violating its intellectual property by releasing products with similar capabilities.
Under Armour claims that it rightfully purchased these patents through the acquisition of MapMyFitness, costing the sports apparel company $160 million. However, Adidas is not entirely buying that story because the company told Bloomberg that Under Armour's director of research was a senior engineering manager.
"Accordingly, Under Armour, by and through its director of innovation and research, has direct knowledge of Adidas' patent portfolio," Adidas added.
Because of this "prior knowledge" and possible financial losses for continuing with the release of Under Armour39 goods, Adidas is seeking a jury trial and damages, Reuters reported. It is unclear if Under Armour will file a counter lawsuit or negotiate with Adidas, but the heated dispute will continue.
Whether or not you are an emerging startup looking to sell an innovation or trying to become the next big thing, it is important to have proper legal representation. Although this case involves two parties, there may actually be a third organization involved—were they aware of Adidas's technology as well? Companies that want to have the most protection can benefit from working with an Arizona business attorney.
Categorised in: Intellectual Property Law
This post was written by