Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart PLLC
Newsletter – Volume 25, Issue 7
Share on Social
Innovation vs. Imitation: L.A.B. Golf’s Challenge Against Legacy Brands
Over the past few years, L.A.B. Golf has gained significant traction among both professional and recreational golfers. With its signature Lie Angle Balance (L.A.B.) technology, the brand has seen notable success on major tours, including victories by professionals Adam Scott and Lucas Glover. Conventional putters are either face-balanced or include some degree of toe-hang. In contrast, L.A.B. putters are designed with zero-torque balance—once set in motion, the putter naturally stays square to the path, requiring minimal manipulation. Amongst other notable golf professionals using L.A.B. Golf technology are Ricky Fowler, Will Zalatoris, Phil Michelson, and Dustin Johnson.
A popular L.A.B. Golf putter model is the DF3, shown below (as recently used by Ricky Fowler and JJ Spaun).
Similar to other significant club innovations in the past, competitors have taken note of the technology behind L.A.B. Golf’s success—particularly its zero-torque component. Despite the challenges of entering a market dominated by legacy brands, L.A.B. Golf has experienced tremendous success, prompting larger putter companies to watch and wait for an opportunity to capitalize.
L.A.B. Golf aims to protect its innovations, and therefore its market position, owning three patents for its zero-torque design. The company filed its first patent application in April 2013 (US 9,233,280), followed by two additional patents in March 2014 and March 2016 (US 8,932,148 and US 12,011,640). These patents protect the core elements of L.A.B. Golf’s technology and could serve as a legal safeguard against competitors replicating its innovative design.
The question now is whether L.A.B. Golf can withstand the wave of copycat designs.
One of L.A.B. Golf’s biggest competitors, Odyssey, has responded by attempting to enter the zero-torque putter market. Originating from one of the most dominant putter brands among professional golfers, a recent leak revealed an Odyssey model that appears to share many common features with the L.A.B. Golf DF3 putter.
Odyssey is owned by Topgolf Callaway Brands Corp., a billion-dollar golf company that holds a 32% market share of putters used on the world’s five major professional tours combined. Not only is the tour putter market difficult to penetrate, but now the largest supplier of professional putters may be developing its own low-torque design, raising concerns about potential competition and patent infringement.
It remains to be seen whether Odyssey’s low-torque model infringes on L.A.B. Golf’s patents. However, even if L.A.B. Golf successfully prevents Odyssey from manufacturing and selling similar technology, the long-term outlook suggests that low/zero-torque putters will inevitably become widespread. Once L.A.B. Golf’s patents expire in 2033, other brands may introduce their own versions of this groundbreaking technology—just as we are already beginning to see with Odyssey.
L.A.B. Golf has carved out a niche with its zero-torque innovation, but its ability to sustain market leadership will depend on how well it can defend its intellectual property and continue innovating in the face of increasing competition.
Greg is an Associate with Fishman Stewart PLLC. Intellectual property law became Gregory’s focus due to its unique blend of creativity, innovation, and legal intricacies. Protecting the rights of creators, inventors, and businesses allows him to be at the forefront of promoting progress and innovation in various industries.
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
Comerica Park becomes Fifth Third Park in 2027. Here’s how stadium naming rights work as IP licensing and what Fifth Third gains beyond fan approval.
As any trademark lawyer will tell clients considering a rebrand, the adoption of any new trademark involves risk. A search can identify potentially conflicting trademarks that could pose problems for use and/or registration of a new trademark.
Why would the United States grant inventors exclusive rights to their creations while simultaneously seeking to promote competition and innovation? The answer lies in the Patent Act of 1790, which established a framework that still shapes patent law today.
Before a brand makes headlines for the right reasons, it helps to make sure someone else doesn’t already own the name. A recent dispute involving Tesla offers a timely reminder that a great brand name can become an expensive problem.
One second became a surprisingly complicated piece of technology, intellectual property and sports governance in the 2026 collegiate season opening game.
With the end of Hot Dog Season quickly approaching, now is a good time to reflect on the innovative new growth that made this season what it is today.
The Ninth Circuit just reversed course on Jack Daniel's dilution claim against the 'Bad Spaniels' dog toy, vacating the injunction and ruling that parody humor alone doesn't prove reputational harm. Here's what the decision means for brand owners pursuing tarnishment claims.
The trading card industry is booming again - and what makes this moment different is not who holds the cards, literally and figuratively, but how the trading card space is rapidly evolving.
Imagine paying millions of dollars for the naming rights to a stadium—only to have your brand hidden behind a giant white tarp. That’s exactly what happened to Levi Strauss during the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
As we celebrate our nation’s birthday on July 4th, many communities are replacing or supplementing traditional fireworks with drone-based light shows - which prompts the question of intellectual property protection.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
