PELOTON’S FIRST FLAT TIRE: PATENT

In a steep cycle uphill, Peloton continues to battle numerous patent infringement suits alleging Peloton’s copying of technology for its stationary bikes. Indeed, if Peloton’s nine patents are found to be invalid, then it will lose any monopoly rights it has on the heart of its business: its ‘core’ innovations. In fact, the entirety of Peloton’s patent portfolio is now in peril with 23 applications still pending.

One of its potholes has been its digital leaderboard and real-time performance rankings during its classes, as Flywheel Sports Inc. previously exposed. However, Peloton not only dug itself out of the suit, but Flywheel Sports itself fell into a downward cycle leading to its complete demise shortly after. 

Another ditch for the company has been Echelon Fitness Multimedia and Icon Health & Fitness who allege copying of its feature, and unfair competition and false advertising, respectively. Significantly, Echelon builds upon the prior suit between Peloton and Flywheel Sports while Icon explicitly states “Peloton has invented absolutely nothing.” 

Will Peloton be able to inflate this tire before it falls flat upon these patent suits?

PELOTON’S SECOND FLAT TIRE: COPYRIGHT

The National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) and Peloton finally came to settlement after 14 of the NMPA’s members alleged copyright infringement of over 1,000 musical works. This settlement has allowed recording artists and songwriters to be fairly compensated for their innovative works and creative compositions.

PELOTON AS A NAIL IN MAD DOGG ATHLETICS’ TIRES: TRADEMARK

On the other end of the suit, Peloton attacks Mad Dogg Athletics in a trademark suit alleging the term “SPIN” has now fallen subject to genericide. 

A trademark is “any word, letter, name, numeral, shape, color, sound, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof” that is used by a party to indicate the source of its goods and to identify and distinguish those goods from manufactured or sold by others. 15 USC 1127. However, trademark protection does not extend to generic words or phrases. Indeed, Peloton argues that the term “spin” which Mad Dogg Athletics protects under trademark law has fallen victim to genericide, which would cause Mad Dogg Athletics to abandon all trademark rights to the mark, since it is no longer distinctive. 

In a heightened battle between consumer protection and Mad Dogg Athletics’ interests, the suit will hinge on whether the term “spin” is deemed to be generic or if Mad Dogg Athletics can prove it has secondary meaning, meaning that the consumer associates the term “spin” with Mad Dogg Athletics. 

Looking to free the mark to the public, Peloton argues “SPIN” is generic because consumers have come to use the mark freely for general fitness remarks without reference to Mad Dogg Athletics. It seems Mad Doggs’ only hope is that its 39 registered trademarks and long history of its “SPIN” and “SPINNING” marks have retained as a source-identifier for the company. The suit will ride on consumer surveys, dictionary definitions, and media usage of the term to decide whether “spin” has become a commonplace term used by other fitness studios and the like… which all weigh heavily in favor of Peloton. 

MORE THAN JUST ITS TIRES: CLASS ACTION SUIT AGAINST PELOTON’S TREAD+ TREADMILL

A consumer class action suit against Peloton is in work because of Peloton’s marketing for its Peloton Tread+ products as being appropriate for family use. Specifically, the case presents “violations of applicable consumer protection laws, unfair business practice laws and breaches of warranties in connection with the manufacture, marketing, sale, and failure to honor warranties of PELOTON “Tread+” treadmill.”

Importantly, Peloton Tread+ not only misrepresents these products, but it sports numerous design flaws that make the equipment highly dangerous for children being trapped underneath the machine while the belt is running. These flaws are becoming a heart-breaking reality as the machine has injured several children and pets and has tragically taken a child’s life. 

Consumers are hurrying to press the emergency stop on the Tread+ in hope of locking its brakes for good.  

Peloton’s Patent Lawsuits:

1. Peloton Interactive Inc. v. Flywheel Sports Inc., filed in Marshall, Texas (2018) 
2. Peloton Interactive Inc. v. Echelon Fitness Multimedia LLC, filed in Wilmington, Delaware (2019) 
3. Peloton Interactive Inc. v. Icon Health & Fitness Inc., filed in Wilmington (2020) 
4. Peloton Interactive Inc. v. Echelon Fitness Multimedia LLC, filed in Wilmington (2021)

Photo by Ivan Samkov on Pexels.com