Patagonia Faces Backlash Over Trademark Lawsuit Against Drag Queen Environmentalist
Popular outdoor clothing company Patagonia has been accused of hypocrisy after filing a lawsuit against drag performer and environmental activist Pattie Gonia, claiming her stage name undermines its brand activism. The complaint, lodged in the US District Court for the Central District of California, argues that the drag queen's name competes directly with Patagonia's products and advocacy work.
The Core of the Legal Dispute
Patagonia's legal action responds to an application filed by Wyn Wiley, the real name behind Pattie Gonia, with the US Patent and Trademark Office to secure exclusive rights to the Pattie Gonia brand. The company contends that Wiley's use of the name on clothing and for services like motivational speaking on environmental sustainability and organising hiking events creates consumer confusion. With 1.5 million Instagram followers, Pattie Gonia has gained prominence through posts featuring her in six-inch heels or backpacking 100 miles in drag along the California coast to fundraise for outdoor nonprofits.
In a statement, Patagonia clarified its position: We're not against art, creative expression or commentary about a brand. We want Pattie to have a long and successful career and make progress on issues that matter—but in a way that respects Patagonia's intellectual property and ability to use our brand to sell products and advocate for the environment. The company is seeking a nominal $1 in damages and court orders to prevent Wiley from selling infringing merchandise or obtaining federal trademarks for Pattie Gonia.
Allegations of Hypocrisy and Failed Negotiations
Online critics have lambasted Patagonia, with some labelling the lawsuit as hypocritical. Jonathan Choe, Senior Journalism Fellow at the Discovery Institute, remarked, It is another example of the left eating their own. Even woke Patagonia has limits. The dispute traces back to 2022 when Patagonia first approached Wiley during discussions about a fundraising partnership with Hydroflask and The North Face, a rival brand. According to the lawsuit, Hydroflask expressed concerns that Patagonia might view promotional work under the Pattie Gonia name as likely to confuse consumers.
Patagonia claims it attempted to reach an agreement with Wiley, proposing terms that included:
- Not using the Pattie Gonia name on products in any form
- Avoiding the use or display of Patagonia's logo
- Refraining from employing the same font as Patagonia
Emails cited in the lawsuit show Wiley and his business partner responding they would keep note of it, but not explicitly agreeing. Subsequently, Pattie Gonia registered the domain 'pattiegoniamerch.com' and began selling screen-printed t-shirts and hoodies with Pattie Gonia Hiking Club designs, along with stickers using a similar font and mountain logo. By September 2025, Wiley sought to trademark the brand for clothing and environmental activism, prompting Patagonia's lawyers to re-engage.
Escalating Tensions and Counterarguments
In 2025, Wiley asserted that Patagonia's interpretation of their agreement was incorrect, explaining that Pattie Gonia was inspired by the Patagonia region in South America. He wrote, It's wonderful that both Patagonia the brand and Pattie Gonia the drag queen were inspired by Patagonia's beauty. Wiley also denied selling fan-art items resembling Patagonia's logos and criticised the company for its past involvement with Broken Arrow, a subsidiary that supplied tactical gear to the US military and police, calling it contradictory to environmental goals.
Wiley and his partner stated they have never and will never reference the brand Patagonia's logo or brand and believed there was plenty of room for both entities to coexist. Patagonia's lawyers followed up, requesting a meeting to discuss a neutral relationship, especially given threats to public lands, and offered to address criticisms about discontinued government business. However, Patagonia claims Wiley did not respond and later celebrated one million followers by displaying a Pattie Gonia logo on gloves.
Legal Implications and Brand Protection
Patagonia's legal team argues that the Pattie Gonia trademark, used long after Patagonia's marks became famous, risks diluting the brand's distinctiveness. They cite social media comments where users confused Pattie Gonia with Patagonia, such as one person who wrote, I genuinely thought this was a Patagonia ad. The lawyers emphasise, To maintain our own rights, we must prevent others from copying our brands and logos. If we do not, we risk losing the ability to defend our trademarks entirely. We cannot selectively choose to enforce our rights based on whether we agree with a particular point of view.
This case highlights the tension between corporate intellectual property protection and support for activist causes, raising questions about brand consistency in the face of legal necessities.
