Italian Court Orders Giro Distributor to Cease Waterproof Glove Marketing Claims

An Italian court has ordered Giro's European distributor to immediately stop using specific marketing claims about its waterproof cycling gloves, marking a significant victory for a patent holder that says those features can only be achieved through its proprietary technology.

The Court of Venice granted an urgent injunction against Spain-based Adventure Sports Group Europe S.L., Giro's European distributor, and two Italian retailers after a complaint filed by Altexa S.r.l., an Italian company that holds patents on waterproof-breathable technology for outdoor gear.

At the heart of the dispute are marketing claims made about Giro's Proof and Proof 100 gloves, which the company advertised as featuring a waterproof-breathable layer that was both "single-piece" and "heat-bonded." According to Altexa, those specific qualities can only be achieved under the protection of Altexa's Italian and European patents.

Altexa calls its waterproof-breathable technology HDry and markets it to outdoor brands for gloves and other items. The HDry technology is used in gloves by cycling brands including Assos, Ekoï, and Café du Cycliste.

The court's order requires Adventure Sports Group Europe to cease making the contested claims and mandates that the distributor post a summary of the court's order on the brand's Italian homepage, it.giro.com, for two months. The summary is now visible on the site, and the Proof and Proof 100 gloves are no longer offered for sale there.

Giro, owned by outdoor products conglomerate Revelyst, has been marketing the gloves as featuring DDS, or Direct Dry Solution, technology—a trademark of Racer SAS, a French motorcycle accessories brand. The technology competes directly with Altexa's HDry system in the marketplace for waterproof-breathable cycling and outdoor gloves.

The case highlights the increasingly technical nature of intellectual property disputes in the cycling industry, where advances in materials science and manufacturing processes have led to numerous competing claims about waterproofing, breathability, and other performance characteristics.

While Altexa named Revelyst in its initial complaint, a company spokesman said it was unable to serve papers to Revelyst in the U.S. in time for an expedited hearing, so Altexa waived its complaint against the company. The court order therefore applies only to Adventure Sports Group Europe and the two Italian retailers named in the suit: Bi & Bi Di Boscolo Laura and La Bicicletteria di Osti Giovanni.

However, the impact of the ruling appears to be spreading beyond those directly named in the injunction. Other European retailers, including Decathlon, have stopped making the claims on their websites, suggesting that distributors and retailers are proactively adjusting their marketing to avoid potential legal exposure.

The rapid response from retailers reflects the serious consequences that can flow from patent infringement claims in the European Union, where intellectual property protections are rigorously enforced and violations can result in substantial penalties, including damages and legal costs.

For Altexa, the victory represents an important defense of its intellectual property in a competitive market where numerous brands are vying to offer the best waterproof-breathable solutions. The company has invested significant resources in developing and patenting its HDry technology, which it licenses to premium cycling brands seeking to differentiate their products through superior weather protection.

The case also underscores the challenges facing global brands like Giro as they navigate different patent regimes and marketing regulations across international markets. What may be permissible marketing language in one jurisdiction can run afoul of patent protections in another, particularly in the European Union where multiple national patent systems operate alongside the European Patent Convention.

Giro has not publicly commented on the court order or its plans regarding the Proof and Proof 100 gloves in European markets. It remains unclear whether the company will reformulate the gloves using different technology, modify its marketing claims while maintaining the current construction, or challenge the ruling through appeal.

For consumers who purchased the Proof or Proof 100 gloves before the injunction, the court order does not affect the functionality or warranty of their products. The dispute centers solely on the marketing claims used to describe the gloves' construction, not on the performance or quality of the gloves themselves.

The case serves as a reminder to cycling brands and retailers of the importance of conducting thorough patent searches and legal due diligence before making specific technical claims about product features, particularly in competitive product categories where multiple companies are seeking to establish proprietary advantages through patented technologies.

As the cycling industry continues to push the boundaries of materials science and manufacturing innovation, disputes over intellectual property are likely to become more common. The Giro case may set a precedent for how courts approach marketing claims that intersect with patented manufacturing processes, potentially influencing how brands describe their products across the European market.

For now, European consumers shopping for waterproof cycling gloves will find one less option claiming "single-piece" and "heat-bonded" construction on the market—at least under the Giro brand name. Whether Giro will return to the European market with reformulated products or revised marketing remains to be seen.