See they’ve been awarded the U.S. patent for this (here). Lots of players in the market for them to go after for licensing fees! Guessing not applicable in EU though.

How can you patent a cog with x number of teeth?
Yes I read it and know its for a wide range cassette

IANAPATENTL

It’s a patent troll. Any top sprocket could be described as being range -extending. I think their idea is to get some licensing money at a level which is less than the cost of challenging the patent, or to get it bought out.

Indeed and the whole point of any gear system is to extend the range so I dont see how they have patented that concept …its not exactly new is it?

A rear bicycle sprocket for use with a multi-gear rear cassette is provided. The sprocket includes a chain engaging portion and a mounting portion having generally annular shape about a central axis and a plurality of support arms, integrally formed with the chain engaging portion and with the mounting portion. The sprocket further includes a plurality of space maintaining protrusions, each space maintaining protrusion extending axially forwardly from an axially forward surface of a corresponding support arm and integrally formed therewith. A multi-gear rear cassette having a plurality of sprockets coaxially mounted together wherein the plurality of sprockets includes the rear bicycle sprocket mounted axially rearmost and a bicycle including the multi-gear rear cassette are further provided.

I think the bit I put in bold is the key bit.
The lumpy bits that push on the other sprocket to stop it flexing.

I’d suggest that it’s the details of “their” specific solution that they’ve patented, not the general concept.
[edit]As noted by brant above[/edit]

Guessing not applicable in EU though.

No, because the patent system here isn’t quite as stupid. From what I can work out based on other things which have been successfully patented, the US patent office doesn’t tend to bother checking for prior art, preferring to leave it to the courts to argue it out. Which inevitably leads to those with the most money to spend on lawyers being able to successfully defend dodgy patents, but that’s the way they seem to like doing things in the US. I presume OneUp is the biggest player in this particular market…

I presume OneUp is the biggest player in this particular market

I think you’ll find that Shimano, SRAM & Campag might be slightly larger, and have deeper pockets.

EDIT: Brant, yes, you may well be right. Someone will have to design the equivalent of a chainring spider to get around that, or another means of avoiding flex.

aracer: any big sprocket could be described as extending the range, so yes they all do.

Are any of them selling (or likely to sell) extender sprockets?

Often with these things in the states, you might as well patent it before someone else does.

From the Pinkbike article comments:

flag OneUpComponents (19 hours ago)
We’re stoked that Pinkbike cares enough about us to run this article. However, as we expressed to the editor, we don’t feel that it is particularly news worthy. Shimano, SRAM, Race Face, Hope, E-13 and Wolftooth all have patents or patent applications for various designs. Not taking the necessary steps to protect our own ideas puts us in the unfavourable position of having our unique designs duplicated while our much larger competitors block us from their novel concepts.

flag OneUpComponents (16 hours ago)
It seems there may be some misunderstanding about what exactly we have patented here. We have not patented something as generic and ambiguous as a ‘wide range cassette’ or an ‘expander sprocket’. Our patent is for a very specific set of features that OneUp was the first to, invent, market and patent. They are cited in claim 1 of our patent.

I Hope that helps,
Jon @ Oneup

How can you patent a cog with x number of teeth?

coz apparently numbers of teeth is a patentable thing. See SRAM patenting 1.5x double chainsets (pretty ridiculous imo).

any big sprocket could be described as extending the range, so yes they all do.

Not in the way described in the patent. I’ve not read through all of it, nor do I know the tech details of how the bigger fish do things, so mainly assuming that on the basis they wouldn’t be stupid enough to try to patent something which might result in them having to defend it against the big players.

coz apparently numbers of teeth is a patentable thing

In the US. Where patentable doesn’t mean that the patent will stand up if taken to court.

A nice summary of US patent law in one of the comments 🙂

if the wheel was invented today, somebody would at once patent two, three, and four wheeled vehicles. Probably someone who never intends to build any kind of vehicle himself. We would end up with five wheeled bikes and seven wheeled cars, because everybody would just try to find a way not to pay any license fees…

Patent legal-ese -> a plurality of space maintaining protrusions

Brant-ese -> lumpy bits

If only the world could be as simple.