Brainguard settles patent suit with Mips-linked helmet maker for $3.2 million

Brainguard Technologies has resolved a patent dispute with Revelyst Sales LLC and Mips in a $3.2 million settlement tied to helmet safety technology. The deal gives the defendants a limited license to Brainguard’s patented system and signals the company will keep enforcing its intellectual property.

Why it matters: - The settlement puts a price on helmet-safety intellectual property tied to reducing rotational-force brain injuries. - Brainguard’s deal may strengthen its position with other helmet makers considering licensed access to similar technology. - Helmet brands, sports safety companies and other manufacturers now have a clearer signal that Brainguard is willing to enforce its patents.

What happened: - Brainguard Technologies settled a patent lawsuit with Mips and Revelyst Sales LLC for $3.2 million. - The dispute centered on helmet technology used in products sold under the Bell and Giro brands. - The lawsuit was filed two years ago in Northern California, case number 8:24-cv-2652-JWH-ADS. - Revelyst sells helmets under the Bell and Giro names, and those helmets incorporated technology licensed from Swedish helmet-safety company Mips.

The details: - Brainguard alleged that the Mips technology used in Revelyst’s helmets infringed Brainguard patents. - As part of the settlement, Mips/Revelyst received a non-exclusive, non-transferrable license to use Brainguard’s patented technology. - Brainguard said its technology protects against injury from direct impacts and rotational forces, which the company describes as a major cause of brain injuries. - Brainguard’s founder Robert Knight said the company will continue to police the marketplace to defend its intellectual property rights. - Brainguard said it is open to other licensing opportunities. - Brainguard provided a contact page for licensing inquiries: Brainguard contact

Between the lines: - The settlement suggests Brainguard is using litigation and licensing together as part of its business strategy. - A non-exclusive license keeps the technology available for other potential licensees, while still generating revenue from this dispute. - The case highlights how helmet-safety features can become a patent battleground as brands compete on protection claims.

What's next: - Brainguard said it will keep monitoring the market for possible infringement. - The company may pursue additional licensing deals with other helmet manufacturers and related safety firms. - The settlement may encourage other companies using rotational-impact helmet systems to review their patent exposure.