# Velocite vs. Pinarello



## MMsRepBike (Apr 1, 2014)

Who is Velocite? They are the ones about to take Pinarello to court for patent infringement.... if they can afford it.

Why?










This.

This is a "concave down tube" section that they have a patent on. Look similar to newer Pina down tubes? 

Velocite claims that new Pinarello Dogma F10 infringes its patents | Cyclingnews.com



> Dear Pinarello,
> 
> I am personally flattered that you like my concave downtube design so much that you used it not only on the Bolide TT frame, but also on the just released Dogma F10 frame. If we had not patented the concave downtube design I would have personally been very flattered that a noted bicycle brand like yours chose to use our design, thus validating the year of development that I personally put into it. Alas, we actually hold three patents on the concave downtube design. One patent is a design patent in China (ZL2015 2 0139826.6), one is a design patent in Taiwan (D 170607) and then there is the main one, an invention patent valid for 20 years also granted in Taiwan (I562931). Both Taiwan and China are signatories to WIPO, just like Italy.
> 
> ...












Versus:









and









Here's a side by side:












Good luck Velocite, I hope your pockets are deep, that's kind of a stretch.


----------



## GKSki (Nov 12, 2014)

No. I think they nailed it and can expect to be clothed in Louis Vuitton soon.


----------



## MMsRepBike (Apr 1, 2014)

The official response.



> Referring to “Open letter to Cicli Pinarello SpA” published by Mr. Victor Major, CEO of Velocite Tech, on velocite-bikes.com, Cicli Pinarello states the following.
> 
> Cicli Pinarello SpA, as a leading company in the cycling sector, obviously takes Intellectual Property issues with the utmost seriousness, Pinarello itself being a patent holder.
> 
> ...


----------



## GKSki (Nov 12, 2014)

Both parties are correct and both parties are wrong. Should have been completely handled by their attorneys and not in the court of public opinion. Frankly, I see an obvious patent infringement and I cannot associate Velocite's new development with "aero bicycle design". This one will be interesting to watch play out, hopefully inside the legal arena.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

other Industry parties have weighed in on Twitter with their own prior art that Velocite ignored or didn't disclose in filing for their patent- probably why they never dared file their legal complaint and instead are milking this for free media for their small brand. . . .


----------

