Overview of the case
In a move reported by Android Authority, fitness app Strava has filed a lawsuit against Garmin, one of the largest makers of fitness watches and cycling computers. Strava alleges patent infringement and accuses Garmin of breaching an agreement by building on Strava’s patented features without permission. Central to the dispute are two functions that Strava says Garmin copied—segments and heatmaps. The filing indicates Strava is seeking to block Garmin from selling or offering products that use the claimed technology, including many Garmin devices and the Garmin Connect platform.
What Strava alleges
The complaint centers on two core functionalities that Strava asserts are protected by its patents: segments and heatmaps. Segments let users compare their performance on specific stretches of a course, such as a favorite running loop or a challenging hill. Heatmaps visualize patterns by highlighting routes that attract many users, creating a map of popular training areas. Strava contends that Garmin copied these ideas and incorporated them into its own hardware and software without authorization, breaching an existing agreement between the companies.
Understanding ‘segments’ and ‘heatmaps’
Segments translate a course into meaningful, shareable data points. Athletes can race against their previous times or compare themselves with others on the same stretch. Heatmaps, on the other hand, aggregate user activity to reveal the most popular training routes in a region or city. These features have become common in the fitness ecosystem, but Strava argues that its patented implementations underpin their functionality and user appeal, giving it a competitive edge in the space.
Implications for Garmin and the market
If a court sides with Strava, Garmin could face injunctions that limit the sale of devices and the use of certain software features, potentially forcing changes to Garmin Connect and related products. Beyond the immediate impact on Garmin’s lineup, the case highlights broader questions about licensing, patent noise, and the boundaries of feature ownership in a fast-evolving wearables market. The outcome could influence how other major players approach feature development and cross-licensing in fitness platforms.
What happens next
As with most patent disputes, the process will proceed through formal filings, discovery, and possible motions on preliminary issues. The case may hinge on technical interpretations of the patent claims, the existence and terms of any licenses, and the priority of who first introduced or refined the ideas behind segments and heatmaps. Courts will weigh whether Garmin’s implementations infringe the patents or whether Strava’s protections are broader than what Garmin offered. A decision on injunctive relief, if granted, could dramatically influence product strategy in the near term.
Context and potential user impact
Patents around route analytics and data visualization have long been a battleground in the fitness-tech sector. This dispute underscores the tension between rapid innovation and the legal protections companies seek to secure for their core features. For users, the stakes are mostly about how future updates appear in practice: possible changes to how limits on features are enforced, licensing outcomes, or shifts in how competitive features are rolled out across platforms. Both sides are likely to issue statements as the case unfolds, but the legal process will determine the ultimate balance between Strava’s patented protections and Garmin’s product roadmap.
