Here’s What’s Contained in Garmin’s 218-Page Counterclaim Against Suunto.
Before the more high-profile Strava v. Garmin lawsuit made headlines last year, Garmin was the first to be sued by Suunto. In September, Suunto and its parent company, Dongguan Liesheng, quietly filed a five-count lawsuit against Garmin alleging patent infringement. Garmin recently responded with a 218-page counterclaim that reads less like a legal document and more like a cease-and-desist notice.
Why did Suunto sue Garmin?
The five patents cited in Suunto’s original lawsuit covered the following features:
-
Tracking the golf swing using an accelerometer to determine the moment of impact.
-
Respiratory rate is determined using an optical heart rate sensor.
-
Slot antenna design in wearable devices
-
Antenna placement in a wrist device
-
Additional Design Concepts for Wrist Antennas
Three of the five claims concern antennas, one concerns physiological metrics, and one concerns golf swing detection. In the context of patent litigation, Suunto’s initial application was relatively standard in tone; Garmin’s response was not. Suunto and Garmin are not historically enemies. The two companies have coexisted constructively for nearly two decades, with Suunto licensing numerous technologies from Garmin during that time. This is what makes this lawsuit so special.
What’s in Garmin’s 218-page counterclaim?
So, how did Garmin respond to all this? Here’s a notable quote, spotted by DC Rainmaker : “As with everything else, Suunto, as expected, tried to copy Garmin’s GPS technology because it was lagging in the market.” That’s a pretty straightforward statement for an official statement.
In its response, Garmin argues that Suunto products have historically followed Garmin’s technology strategy, particularly with regard to GPS functionality. Garmin has filed five counter-patents of its own, and these applications make clear that the company intends to fight them.
It’s also worth noting that Garmin’s statements acknowledge that the company it’s suing isn’t quite the same Suunto it partnered with for two decades. Garmin seems to understand that it’s fighting Dongguan Liesheng’s lawyers rather than Suunto representatives.
What the Suunto/Garmin lawsuit means for you
Patent disputes between major tech companies are moving slowly. Claimed rights are being narrowed, applications are being added, and many of these disputes are ending in cross-licensing agreements rather than court decisions. For athletes and consumers, nothing changes in the short term regarding their current devices or functions.
But looking at the situation as a whole, this case serves as a useful reminder of how much intellectual property lies hidden beneath modern sports watches. The hardware and software that power these devices is proprietary territory, and when ownership structures shift and relationships deteriorate, this intellectual property becomes leverage. As always, if you have any valuable data stored on your watch or app, be sure to back it up to your personal hard drive.
For a complete technical analysis of the documents presented, a comprehensive overview is Ray Maker’s report on the DC Rainmaker website .