Canoo Motors is a leading technology company focused on innovation and creating and monetizing its…
Mad Dogg Athletics institutes patent infringement suit against Peloton Interactive
Mad Dogg Athletics Inc., a U.S based company that markets among others, popular indoor cycling brand Spinning®, has instituted a lawsuit against Peloton Interactive, Inc., a major U.S. based exercise equipment manufacturing company with digital platform for infringing its patents. The suit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas under Case Number 2:20-cv-00382.
According to Mad Dogg Athletics, Peloton’s has infringed two of the below mentioned U.S Patents
- US Patent No 9,694,240: Programmed exercise bicycle with computer aided guidance, and
- US Patent No 10,137,328: Programmed exercise bicycle with computer aided guidance
These patented technologies of Mad Dogg Athletics is being used in Peloton Interactive’s product Peloton Bike+.
Mad Dogg is considered to have revolutionised the indoor cycling category in 2008 with the eSpinner® bike which featured the world’s first touch-screen display designed to bring instructor-led coaching and power training straight to the rider’s home. Mad Dogg is known to have started investing and developing an IP portfolio in 1992 with both design and utility patent filings. In terms of numbers, both Mad Dogg and Peloton Interactive can boast of a solid IP, particularly patent portfolio, however, Mad Dogg holds a first-mover advantage as well as better quality patents, particularly technologies that provide interactive and personalized content for exercisers.
It is interesting to note that just in 2018, Peloton Interactive brought a case against Flywheel, in which Peloton Interactive alleged that Flywheel had copied certain aspects of Peloton’s technology to stream live and on-demand classes, as well as to track riders’ performances. Flywheel in known to have closed its ‘Flywheel-at-Home’ service in March of 2020.
Mad Dogg has sought for a jury trial, an award for damages and other forms of relief.
Author: Arindam Purkayastha, a patent attorney at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorneys. In case of any queries please contact/write back to us at [email protected].