The Business of Fashion
Agenda-setting intelligence, analysis and advice for the global fashion community.
Agenda-setting intelligence, analysis and advice for the global fashion community.
Peloton Interactive Inc. sued Lululemon Athletica Inc. in a preemptive move to protect the workout-bike maker’s new athletic-wear line from a trademark suit by its former co-branding partner.
Lululemon, a Vancouver-based maker of fitness clothing, claimed in a Nov. 11 cease and desist letter that five Peloton products infringe its apparel design patents. Peloton then sued in Manhattan federal court Wednesday — just two days before Black Friday’s start of the holiday shopping season.
New York-based Peloton said it has been selling apparel since 2014, and began its own clothing line in September after an “amicable” termination of its co-branding relationship with Lululemon. In its letter, Lululemon threatened to sue over infringement of its trademarks and trade dress — the distinctive visual appearance of its products — and theft of trade secrets.
“Lululemon’s allegations lack any merit,” Peloton said in the complaint. “Even a quick comparison of the Lululemon patented designs with the allegedly infringing Peloton products reveals numerous clear and obvious differences that allow the products to be easily distinguished.”
ADVERTISEMENT
In a statement Friday, Lululemon spokeswoman Erin Hankinson said the company has “requested that Peloton cease and desist selling a number of styles of apparel which we believe infringe upon Lululemon’s design patents. We will defend our proprietary rights, to protect the integrity of our brand, and to safeguard our intellectual property.”
The Peloton products targeted in the dispute are its Strappy Bra, Cadent Laser Dot Legging, Cadent Laser Dot Bra, High Neck Bra, Cadent Peak Bra and One Lux Tight.
Peloton is hoping to add to its sales for athletic hardware and high-end interactive fitness classes. The company has filed its own patent lawsuits against rivals Echelon and iFit in a bid to limit the ability of rivals to offer fitness classes similar to its own.
The case is: Peloton Interactive Inc. v. Lululemon Athletica Canada Inc., 21-cv-10071, US District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).
By Bob Van Voris
Peloton’s success in fitness has Nike, Lululemon and Adidas lining up to make clothes for its loyal riders. Will those followers be as loyal to the exercise bike maker’s own gear?
Nordstrom, Tod’s and L’Occitane are all pushing for privatisation. Ultimately, their fate will not be determined by whether they are under the scrutiny of public investors.
The company is in talks with potential investors after filing for insolvency in Europe and closing its US stores. Insiders say efforts to restore the brand to its 1980s heyday clashed with its owners’ desire to quickly juice sales in order to attract a buyer.
The humble trainer, once the reserve of football fans, Britpop kids and the odd skateboarder, has become as ubiquitous as battered Converse All Stars in the 00s indie sleaze years.
Manhattanites had little love for the $25 billion megaproject when it opened five years ago (the pandemic lockdowns didn't help, either). But a constantly shifting mix of stores, restaurants and experiences is now drawing large numbers of both locals and tourists.