Today Zwift and Wahoo have confirmed an amicable settlement in the patent infringement lawsuit brought by Wahoo against Zwift 11 months ago. (The original lawsuit from Wahoo claimed the design of the Zwift Hub infringed on multiple Wahoo-owned patents related to their KICKR trainers. Wahoo further requested an injunction preventing Zwift from selling the Zwift Hub trainer, and that injunction was later denied.)
News of the settlement was first published on BRAIN last week, and I reached out to Zwift and Wahoo for official statements. I haven’t heard back from Wahoo yet, but here’s what Zwift had to say:
Zwift and Wahoo Fitness today confirm the amicable settlement of all pending litigation. The agreement will see both parties embark on a renewed approach to collaboration, with a view to growing the indoor fitness category and delivering continual, ongoing improvements to customers – through increased innovation, ease of use and better value.
Wahoo has granted Zwift a limited license to use its patents. Zwift will continue to sell its Zwift Hub smart trainer in existing ecommerce markets – US, UK and Europe.
In addition to selling Zwift Hub, Zwift will return to selling a selection of Wahoo smart trainers, bikes and accessories on Zwift.com from mid-September. The assorted range will offer customers a simple selection across a range of price points, all sold with one year of Zwift.
Wahoo Fitness will also offer customers the option to bundle one year of Zwift with the purchase of a smart trainer or bike via Wahoofitness.com.
Both parties look forward to sharing further details in the coming months.
Zwift
Of course, this is positive news for indoor cyclists. Wahoo and Zwift are the two biggest names in the indoor cycling industry, and the fewer resources they waste on litigation, the more they can pour into making their products amazing.
It’s worth noting that Zwift’s statement says, “Wahoo has granted Zwift a limited license to use its patents,” meaning the agreement doesn’t give Zwift free rein to sell the Hub or use Wahoo’s patented design in any way they please. The agreement allows Zwift to “continue to sell its Zwift Hub smart trainer in existing ecommerce markets – US, UK and Europe.” Does this mean the Hub isn’t coming to other markets (Canada and Australia, for example) anytime soon? It appears so.
Wahoo also benefits from Zwift returning to selling Wahoo trainers at Zwift.com. Of course, to be competitive with the Hub’s price, Wahoo’s KICKR Core needed a price reduction – and I believe that’s what drove this week’s price drop on Wahoo’s mid-range trainer (see below).
Lastly, Wahoo is adding the ability to bundle a year of Zwift with their trainers when sold via WahooFitness.com. That’s a win for Zwift, and I bet we’ll see more of this bundling in the future – perhaps with a discounted annual rate (12 months of Zwift for price of 10, like Wahoo does with Wahoo X). Perhaps we’ll even finally see an annual plan from Zwift themselves!
Wahoo KICKR Core Price Reduction
In related news, early this week Wahoo reduced the price of their popular KICKR Core smart trainer from $899USD to $599USD – a huge price reduction! While you still need to purchase a cassette ($49.99 from Wahoo), the KICKR Core is probably the most positively-reviewed mid-range direct-drive trainer on the market.
Shop KICKR Core at Wahoo.com >
Your Thoughts
Share below!
I wanted the Zwift hub but soon found they’re not available in Australia, so I went for the JetBlack Volt v2. Isn’t that supposed to be a copy of the Zwift hub? So a copy of a copy?
I think it’s the other way around and the Zwift Hub is effectively a rebranded licensed version of the Jet Black, so you’re basically getting the same item that you wanted with a different outside look
What Andrew said. Except that the two trainers don’t share firmware – Zwift manages the Hub’s firmware, JetBlack manages theirs.
Patent law is a scam on the human race and should be dissolved. Every invention is a tiny incremental improvement on the mass of knowledge from the whole human species entire history. Claiming ownership over that is wrong. Further, parents block future innovation, just like you see here with Wahoo and Zwift.
Clearly the world doesn’t agree with you.
Pretty sure the world’s population most likely.does agree, however the laws in place nationally and internationally are unfortunately highly unlikely to be dissolved, we can only hope they are tempered or slightly relaxed over time
Wow, this took me some time if you both are serious.
just a casus:
you just invested years of time (and money) to thinker something out. And you bring it to market. Offcourse you would like to break even. Or perhaps earn a living?
But tomorrow I will copy your invention, sell my product way cheaper then yours, penetrate the market. And you go bankrupt.
don’t you think that when there is no patent system, everybody will wait on each other, and eventually all improvements come to a halt?
In a socioeconomic system, where a company is concerned to exist, to increase the profit also to pay employees, so secrets must be protected and defended. This is a real shark tank. On the other hand, if we are talking about an ideal image of a future utopian free society, a fantasy world that does not exist as described above, only as a whishfull future. Thoughts can be free? The supernatural and superstition !
It always seems that people who don’t have any intellectual property of their own and lack the ability to create it for themselves are the ones who wish for a world in which they should just be allowed to steal it from others.
No patents + no trademarks = No innovation
Even with the above protections it’s an endless fight against infringement.
Our lawyers eat well.
Is the handshake a file photo, or the actual official settlement handshake ? I feel we should know 🤣
Actual official settlement. I was there!
😁 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Sounds like Wahoo were worried they would lose the case which would effectively put an end to those patents in question internationally so they offered up a settlement that doesn’t really put any new restriction on Zwift’s product sales, plus hands them another avenue of subscription sales, whilst protecting their patents from the risk of being overturned. In the end the whole saga has benefitted the industry since it has forced Wahoo into a significant price cut which will hopefully spread to other brands and product tiers as a new settling point is found for the market. It is a… Read more »
I read it that Wahoo is the winner. Zwift.com will once again sell their trainers and they have also stopped Zwift extending into new markets with their trainer. Wahoo also get some money from Zwift when they do sell trainers as they are licensing their patents.
In this case Zwift was able to resolve the legal jeopardy they placed themselves in without an adverse finding. Money played a part and the willingness of both parties to have some future synergies rather than an ongoing head-on confrontation. It cost them money and possibly they traded some other things e.g. rights or IP or data or other information too. Maybe their recent patent was part of this. And who knows, maybe we will see Wahoo play controllers or similar for $19.99 or $39.99 in all other markets by Christmas. It may have cost them more, or less, than… Read more »
I don’t know that Canada et al’s prospects are that bleak.
From that BRAIN article:
“Wahoo quickly settled with JetBlack, with Jet Black agreeing not to sell its version of the Hub, called the Volt, in the U.S. or Europe. JetBlack continues to sell the Volt in its native Australia.”
That at least leaves open the possibility that Wahoo’s patents were only enforceable in the US and Europe. Right? 🤔
“continue to sell its Zwift Hub smart trainer in existing ecommerce markets – US, UK and Europe.” What continent does Zwift think the UK is in – if not Europe?
You clearly aren’t from the UK… or Europe. 😆
Eric you know I love you like a Zwifty brother, but as a lawyer I object to the following statement: “the fewer resources they waste on litigation”.
Lawyers need to eat too!
But seriously, the denial of an injunction meant that the court found Wahoo’s case weak, so my assessment is that Zwift came out better. And the lawyers were able to feed their families for another month.
zwift does want to expand its own hardware, with the ultimate goal of opening up the market and increasing users. But it seems to be suddenly give up. It looked like zwift was going to take a steady and cautious route, but at the same time it made some very surprising moves: including labeling jetblack’s power trainer, and developing its own game model steering/shortcut hardware.
Do you know if the one year of Zwift only applies to the Wahoo products or if it will also be offered with the Zwift Hub? Wording seems to indicate only the Wahoo range, but wouldn’t that be a bit strange?
It will be offered with Zwift Hub soon.
What do you bet that shutting down RGT was part of this agreement?
https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wahoo-set-to-shut-down-rgt-indoor-cycling-app/