The two leading sports brands Adidas and Nike have got involved in court trials standing against each other. Adidas filed a complaint against Nike in the court with the allegation that Nike has broken some rules regarding nine of patents relating to smartphone apps and adjustable shoe tech.
Reporting Complaint Against Nike
Speaking about the complaint against Nike, The Verge said, “Adidas is seeking damages from Nike as well as a court order preventing Nike from “directly or indirectly infringing one or more” of the patents involved.””
Reuters reported “The lawsuit filed in East Texas federal court said Nike’s Run Club, Training Club and SNKRS mobile apps and Adapt system for adjusting sneaker fits violate nine Adidas patents for exercise monitoring, an “intelligent footwear” system, and other technology.”
What is Adidas claiming?
Owing to the complaint against Nike, Adidas’s patents include its “intelligent footwear” system and other tech used for the Adidas_1 smart sneaker and sneaker. Adidas claims that they brought “world’s first intelligent running shoe” from 2005 — which featured the “first fully integrated training system combining sensors in shoes and wearable devices” — as well as mobile fitness and sneaker reservation technology.
Nike first revealed the self-lacing Back to the Future Nike Mag sneaker in 2016. 2019 Adapt was rolled out to the wider public. Adidas claims this development is copied from Adidas_1 sneaker, especially the technology helping the shoe to mold according to a wearer’s foot.
In the complaint, adidas claims itself to be the historic “leader in mobile technology, including technology related to mobile fitness and mobile purchases”. Talking about the running apps they launched in 2015 they stated that the Adidas “was the first in the industry to comprehensively bring data analytics to athletes,”
What is Adidas demanding?
For now Adidas is demanding an “unspecified amount of money” as well as an order preventing Nike from infringing upon Adidas’s patents in the future. The undetermined amount should be “sufficient,” according to the documents, but “not less than a reasonable royalty, together with interests and costs.”
