Garmin Countersues Suunto in Escalating Wearables Legal Battle
▼ Summary
– Suunto sued Garmin first in September over five patents, but this received less attention than Strava’s later lawsuit against Garmin.
– Garmin responded with a lengthy counterclaim in December, alleging Suunto infringed on five Garmin patents and criticizing the lawsuit’s basis.
– A key point of contention is that Suunto’s new parent company, Dongguan Liesheng, appears to be driving the lawsuit, not the historically cooperative Suunto engineering teams.
– Garmin’s defense includes technical arguments and claims that some Suunto patents were derived from technology Suunto previously licensed from Garmin.
– The author believes the lawsuit is misguided, as Garmin holds a strong patent portfolio, and predicts Suunto will likely withdraw the case.
The legal landscape for wearable technology companies has intensified, with Garmin filing a substantial countersuit against Suunto, marking a significant escalation in a patent dispute that began quietly last fall. While the fitness app Strava’s lawsuit against Garmin captured widespread attention in October, the initial legal challenge actually came from the Finnish sports watch maker Suunto weeks earlier. This developing conflict reveals deep-seated tensions following Suunto’s acquisition by the Chinese conglomerate Dongguan Liesheng, shifting a long-standing cooperative relationship into a contentious courtroom battle.
Suunto’s original complaint, filed in a Texas district court known for its swift proceedings, leveled five allegations of patent infringement against Garmin. The patents in question cover a range of technologies: golf shot tracking using an accelerometer, determining respiration rate via an optical heart rate sensor, and three separate patents related to antenna design in wrist-worn devices. The filing was notably straightforward, primarily cataloging the numerous Garmin watch models accused of incorporating these features. It stood in stark contrast to the more rhetorical approach seen in other tech lawsuits, presenting a simple request for Garmin to cease infringement and provide financial compensation.
Garmin’s response, delivered just after the holidays, was anything but simple. The company submitted a blistering 218-page document that not only mounted defenses against Suunto’s claims but also launched a counteroffensive. Garmin’s filing accuses Suunto of infringing on five of its own patents, including several related to GPS antenna design, Firstbeat physiological metrics, and, perhaps most notably, a patent for an integrated flashlight feature in smartwatches. The tone of the response is remarkably pointed, with Garmin suggesting Suunto has consistently lagged behind and copied its innovations since falling behind in the marketplace.
A critical theme in Garmin’s counterclaim is the deliberate separation of the Suunto brand from its new corporate parent. The document notes the years of constructive competition and cooperation between the two watchmakers, highlighting how Suunto was a long-time licensee of Garmin’s Firstbeat analytics and ANT+ wireless technology. Garmin contends this cooperative spirit ended when Dongguan Liesheng acquired Suunto, moved production and design to China, and initiated this lawsuit. The countersuit strategically targets not just Suunto products but other devices sold in the U.S. by Dongguan Liesheng, broadening the legal battlefield.
The technical arguments are complex. In defending against the respiration rate patent, Garmin asserts the technology was something Suunto originally licensed from Garmin years ago, questioning the validity of Suunto’s subsequent patent. Regarding the golf shot tracking patent, Garmin argues its devices do not use GPS to trigger shot detection as the patent requires, rendering the allegation moot. The most visually detailed rebuttal concerns antenna design, where Garmin dedicated approximately 25 pages to photographs, diagrams, and X-ray scans alleging Suunto duplicated its proprietary antenna layouts. This section proved effective enough that Suunto subsequently agreed to withdraw its antenna-related infringement claims.
The inclusion of the flashlight patent adds a layer of intrigue to Garmin’s countersuit. The company claims Suunto’s Vertical 2 watch, released years after Garmin’s Fenix 7X, infringes on its patented dual-LED flashlight design. However, the defensibility of this patent is debated, with prior art potentially existing in popular culture, such as the smartwatch worn by Penny in the 1980s cartoon Inspector Gadget, which could challenge the patent’s novelty. Legal experts often view such patents more as strategic deterrents due to the high cost of litigation, rather than ironclad claims likely to withstand scrutiny from a well-funded opponent.
From a product perspective, it is important to distinguish this legal drama from the actual quality of Suunto’s offerings. By most independent accounts, Suunto’s recent watches represent some of the most competitive and feature-rich devices the company has ever produced, particularly regarding value. The legal strategy appears to originate not from Suunto’s engineering teams but from the legal department of its parent company, which may have underestimated the depth of Garmin’s patent portfolio and the historical interplay between the two firms.
This dispute underscores a common reality in the tech industry: many companies hold patents that others could arguably infringe upon, leading to a state of mutually assured destruction that typically discourages litigation. Garmin, which has not initiated a patent lawsuit in over a decade, seems to be responding forcefully to what it perceives as a troubling trend following the Strava case. The outcome will likely hinge on which company has the greater appetite and resources for a prolonged legal fight. Industry observers speculate that Suunto may ultimately seek to settle or withdraw its claims, recognizing the formidable challenge of taking on Garmin’s extensive intellectual property arsenal in a protracted court battle.
(Source: DC RainMaker)
