Loyal readers would remember our Alpinestars vs Dainese report we published some time last week. Just to recap, the two Italian riding apparels brands are embroiled in a legal battle of their respective airbag technologies, in which case being the Alpinestars Tech Air and Dainese D-Air Armour.
In light of the battle being reported online by a trusted source, the famed A-star brand has issued an official response to the matter, revealing the true nature of the legal battle in the process as well.
The first thing made clear in Alpinestars’ statement is the fact that the infringement suit it filed for its Tech Air airbag technology patent actual concerns the material of the airbag itself and not the computer algorithm deployment during crash detection as previously reported.
To put it simply, Alpinestars is claiming that Dainese is using a similar physical material for the airbag in the latter’s D-Air suite as the ones used in the former’s rivalling Tech Air system. The consequence of this saw retailers pulling out Tech Air-equipped Alpinestars apparels and products in core markets around Europe such as Germany.
Dainese has not responded to Alpinestars’ allegations, but it is worth noting again that the rivalling devil-horn brand were the most proactive amongst the two at introducing the airbag protection technology into the mass market. In fact, Dainese have even gone to the extent of licensing its D-Air Armor technology to other brands as well.
We’ll have more as soon as the matter evolves over time, to which we expect to last quite some time indeed. In the meantime, you can read the official statement released by Alpinestars below.
Alpinestars Tech-Air Street Airbag system – Statement regarding press coverage of Patent Challenge
With reference to recent articles published about Alpinestars and Dainese being in dispute over airbag technology, Alpinestars is issuing the following statement to clarify the current situation:
Alpinestars has been subjected to an allegation of patent infringement by Dainese on a specific part of its airbag construction used in the Tech-Air Street system.
The Alpinestars’ Tech-Air Street system was launched in November 2014 as the world’s first self-contained street airbag system that independently functions without the need for sensors to be installed on the bike and the subsequent need to link a specific motorcycle to the airbag system used by the rider.
The allegations made by Dainese S.p.A in proceedings launched in Italy against Alpinestars, refer to the assembly of the bag itself, the physical material piece that contains the gas in an inflation and not with any reference to any other parts or Alpinestars’ Tech-Air street system’s use of an algorithm for registering when the airbag deployment should occur.
Dainese instead make claims that the physical construction of the bag in the Tech-Air system infringes upon Dainese’s patents.
In Germany, Dainese did make a direct request to certain retailers, that they cease and desist from offering for sale the Alpinestars Tech-Air Street system, however, no legal action has been taken against Alpinestars and neither has Alpinestars withdrawn any of its products from the German market.
All claims made by Dainese against Alpinestars and/or its retailers are disputed and Alpinestars is taking the appropriate legal measures to ensure that any such unfounded allegations will not prevent distribution and sales of the Tech-Air Street system.
Given Alpinestars’ own research & development has been undertaken through Alpinestars’ in-house Advanced Technology Department since 2001, Alpinestars is contesting the allegations made. The Tech-Air Street system is based on Alpinestars’ technology creation and the physical bag used in the Tech-Air Street system is from known airbag technology, used within the Automotive industry and does not infringe upon third parties’ intellectual property rights.
Alpinestars continues to distribute Tech-Air technology for the benefit of all motorcyclists throughout Europe and the rest of the world and trusts that the allegations made will be proven to have no basis through appropriate legal jurisdiction.