Gillette Sues Dollar Shave Club for Patent Infringement

Gillette, the razor powerhouse owned by P&G, filed a lawsuit on Thursday against online razor seller Dollar Shave Club.

The suit, filed in federal court in Delaware, says Dollar Shave Club products infringe on a 2004 Gillette patent related to a razor blade with a “chromium-containing overcoat layer.” Gillette wants monetary damages and a court order to stop Dollar Shave Club from selling infringing razors. It’s not clear why the suit does not name Dorco, the South Korean maker of Dollar Shave Club’s razors and an equity stakeholder in the startup. (Update: P&G spokesman Damon Jones said, “[Dollar Shave Club is] actually selling the product and bringing it to market; that’s why they are named in the suit.”)

Jones said the company regularly does “market surveillance” — that is, testing of competitor products — and discovered in its most recent round of testing of Dollar Shave Club blades what it believed to be patent-infringing razors. The testing followed press reports of Dollar Shave Club “investing new money in product development,” Jones said.

A Dollar Shave Club spokeswoman declined to comment on the lawsuit.

Dollar Shave Club has raised nearly $150 million in equity investments and was recently valued by backers at around $600 million. The company launched in 2012 with a hit promotional video starring CEO Michael Dubin, and has used a mix of irreverent online videos, TV commercials and social media campaigns since then to attract a large customer base. Dubin said earlier this year that it had more than two million subscribers who receive razor blade shipments every month or every other month. The CEO also said the company was projecting at least $140 million in 2015 revenue.

Gillette introduced Gillette Shave Club last year and hired celebrities such as Giants quarterback Eli Manning to promote it in June ahead of Father’s Day.

Correction: The story has been updated to clarify that the patent in question is for a razor blade including an overcoat layer, and not for the overcoat layer itself.

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple reasons that we can't rely only on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on.

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. We can’t do that if we have a paywall.

That’s why we also turn to you, our readers, to help us keep Vox free. If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today?

One-Time Monthly Annual

$5/month

$10/month

$25/month

$50/month

Other

$

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via