{"id":9607,"date":"2025-10-14T22:09:49","date_gmt":"2025-10-14T22:09:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/?p=9607"},"modified":"2025-10-14T22:09:49","modified_gmt":"2025-10-14T22:09:49","slug":"workout-wars-inside-stravas-patent-infringement-lawsuit-against-garmin","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/blogs\/workout-wars-inside-stravas-patent-infringement-lawsuit-against-garmin\/","title":{"rendered":"Workout Wars: Inside Strava\u2019s Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Garmin"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

6:10 PM, 10\/14\/2025<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Who are Strava and Garmin?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The increasing use of fitness technology reflects a cultural shift towards the prioritization of health and wellbeing. Fitness tech<\/a> is vital for empowering individuals to take control of their health by tracking their fitness activity with various tools, devices, and data monitoring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As seen throughout social media, Strava<\/a> is a leading digital platform for multisport tracking, mostly used for logging running and biking workouts. With about 125 million users worldwide, the smartphone application allows the fitness community to join challenges, set distance goals, record and upload workouts, and interact with friends\u2019 data as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Strava has become a household name in the fitness tech world, but the global fitness industry<\/a> is rapidly expanding due to continuous advancements in wearable tech<\/a> and viral training apps. This means increasing competition in a crowded market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Strava is suing its long-time partner Garmin\u2014another innovator in the digital fitness tech space\u2014in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Garmin is known for its watches<\/a>, combining its roots in GPS technology with advanced smartwatch capabilities. These capabilities include precision tracking, mapping, heart rate monitoring, and user experience customization.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Lawsuit<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this patent infringement lawsuit, Strava is seeking a permanent injunction to stop Garmin from using its segments<\/a> or heatmapping<\/a> features in its products. Garmin\u2019s key products, like its Edge bike computers and Epix watches, are at the forefront of this suit, as these features are prominent within its navigation and tracking abilities. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Looking backward, Strava\u2019s patent for its segments feature was granted in 2015. Strava\u2019s patent for activity heatmaps was granted in 2016, and its patent for popularity-based routing features was granted in 2017. The segments technology is a system that athletes can use to compare their performances on user-created routes. Strava users can create these segments<\/a> to record interesting or challenging parts of their routes for others to try, detailing a start point, an endpoint, and locations in between. Similarly, heatmaps act as a repository<\/a> for routes and trails that other users have used, compiling them into a color-coded visual map that highlights where those popular locations are. This feature helps fitness users to explore new places and find unique ways to reconnect with their favorite activity routes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The claims raise questions about intellectual property, partnership agreements, and which innovations deserve protection and enforcement\u2014especially in an industry that depends on collaboration and overlap.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

When Garmin launched its own \u201cConnect\u201d segments system in 2014, the company signed a Master Cooperative Agreement<\/a> (MCA) with Strava to incorporate its Live Segments into Garmin\u2019s products. Strava claims that Garmin used this limited access to its segment technology to copy and release it as its own, necessitating protection of these patented innovations under U.S. patent law. It seems as though the segments issue is the primary claim, because Garmin introduced heatmaps to its products in 2013\u2014before Strava filed to patent its own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The lawsuit effectively impacts all of Garmin\u2019s fitness and outdoor watches, as well as its cycling computer products. Strava is demanding that Garmin cease selling these products and remove certain features on Garmin Connect<\/a> due to damages in lost revenue, business opportunities, market competition, and breaches of good-faith negotiation. Strava\u2019s chief product officer<\/a> also alleged that Garmin threatened to cut off access to its software interface, which means that Garmin device activity might not be allowed to sync to Strava.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Impact<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Strava and Garmin have been partners for over a decade. During this time, the two companies have worked very closely together, especially as they both share similar company values and goals. With this pending lawsuit, athletes are worried that the user experience of millions who use Strava and Garmin\u2019s fitness technologies will be negatively impacted, including upcoming major running events.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This lawsuit has significant legal implications for the fitness tech industry with the potential to impact other industry leaders as well. The claims raise questions about intellectual property, partnership agreements, and which innovations deserve protection and enforcement\u2014especially in an industry that depends on collaboration and overlap. The outcome of this case could set important precedent for how fitness-feature patents are handled in the future and highlights the importance of drafting clear contractual terms in long-term partnerships. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whether you are a runner, biker, or just someone who likes being active, the Strava and Garmin lawsuit is worth tracking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Disha Adama<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Disha attended the University of Georgia for college and majored in Management Information Systems with an emphasis in Information Security. In law school, Disha is a JOLT staff member, Co-President of the Asian American Law Students Association, and Co-Chair of Outreach and Marketing for the Transactional and Corporate Law Association.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The claims raise questions about intellectual property, partnership agreements, and which innovations deserve protection and enforcement\u2014especially in an industry that depends on collaboration and overlap.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":9608,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[51],"tags":[652,653,654,188,656],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9607"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9607"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9607\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9610,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9607\/revisions\/9610"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9608"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9607"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9607"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9607"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}