Outdoor apparel giant Patagonia has taken drag performer Pattie Gonia to federal court, arguing that the activist-entertainers bid to trademark a name and logo echoing the companys iconic brand will mislead consumers and inflict lasting damage on the business.
According to The Post Millennial, Patagonias complaint centers on a trademark application filed by Pattie Gonia, the stage persona of Wyn Wiley, which the company says seeks sweeping control over a wide range of commercial and advocacy activities.
The filing states that Wiley applied for a trademark claiming the exclusive right to the brand Pattie Gonia for, among other things, apparel, online marketing services, promoting public awareness of and motivational speaking services in support of environmental sustainability and LGBTQIA2S+ equality, organizing community sporting and cultural events, organizing, arranging, and conducting trail and hiking events, entertainment services in the nature of live musical performances, and music recordings, and argues that these offerings compete directly with the products and advocacy upon which Patagonia built its Patagonia brand for over the last fifty-three years.
Patagonia contends that the drag performers move is not only commercially aggressive but also a reversal of prior assurances made to the company about respecting its intellectual property. The lawsuit alleges that the trademark push appropriates Patagonias brand and identity in a way that has already confused consumers, and will continue to confuse consumers, about Patagonias role in producing or sponsoring Pattie Gonias products, events, and public appearances.
The company emphasizes that both parties publicly claim to champion environmental causes and outdoor inclusion, a shared space that Patagonia says makes brand clarity even more critical.
It notes that the environment and inclusion in the outdoors is central to both the corporation and the drag activist, and asserts that before Pattie Gonias activities and identity transformed into a commercial enterprise, Patagonia repeatedly communicated with Pattie Gonia and understood that the parties had reached agreement about how that advocacy work might continue in a way that would not interfere with Patagonias brand, an understanding the suit says has since been disregarded.
Central to Patagonias argument is a sticker and logo frequently used by Pattie Gonia, in which the drag queens name is substituted for the companys in a design closely mirroring Patagonias famous mountain silhouette. In this version, the sky behind the peaks is replaced with a pride flag, a visual mashup that the company says has already led customers to question whether the entertainer is officially affiliated with or endorsed by Patagonia, as reflected in confused comments on social media.
The company insists it attempted to resolve the matter privately before resorting to litigation, portraying itself as reluctant but ultimately compelled to defend its brand. Patagonia tried to work with Pattie Gonia to avoid this outcome, the lawsuit stated, pointing to a 2022 collaboration between Pattie Gonia and water bottle maker Hydroflask, during which the parties agreed that Wiley must refrain from selling Pattie Gonia-branded products or using fonts or designs that copy, or are substantially similar to, Patagonias logos, an understanding the suit says was later ignored when Pattie Gonia began selling Pattie Gonia-branded merchandise.
Patagonia alleges that by early 2025, after observing products for sale on the entertainers website, it again asked Wiley to halt commercial exploitation of the contested name. The company says it requested that he cease commercial use of the Pattie Gonia name and abide by the 2022 understanding, but that within several months, Pattie Gonias actions confirmed that she did not intend to abide by the understanding the parties reached in February 2022.
The outdoor brand stresses that this is part of a broader effort to protect its trademarks from dilution and politicized misuse across the spectrum. It cites past enforcement actions against knockoffs such as Fratagonia and Petagonia, and underscores in the complaint that Protection of Patagonias brand requires action whether the brand or logo has been misappropriated by supporters of the oil industry, para-military organizations, or supporters of Patagonias own core initiatives.
While the company is not seeking a major payout, it is asking the court to step in decisively to halt what it views as ongoing infringement. While Patagonia seeks only nominal monetary damages, the harm Pattie Gonia has caused and will cause to the PATAGONIA brand is irreparable and cannot be remedied by money damages or other remedies short of an injunction.
Unless Pattie Gonia is restrained by the Court, Pattie Gonia will continue expanding and causing harms, the suit added, underscoring a broader concern shared by many conservatives that activist branding and identity politics are increasingly encroaching on established property rights and the rule of law in the marketplace.
Login