Patagonia seeks $1 in trademark suit against Pattie Gonia
The apparel company says the drag performer’s merchandise risks consumer confusion; Pattie Gonia says the case targets her activism.
By Daniel Okafor · Business Editor
3 min read
Patagonia is suing drag performer and climate activist Pattie Gonia for alleged trademark infringement, seeking $1 while demanding restrictions on merchandise sold under her stage name. The dispute has drawn attention because it pits a sustainability-focused outdoor brand against a queer climate organizer with a large online audience.
Pattie Gonia, whose given name is Wyn Wiley, is based in Bend, Oregon, and is known for environmental videos, drag performances and climate fundraising, according to The Associated Press. She has nearly 3 million followers across TikTok and Instagram, AP reported.
Patagonia filed its federal complaint on Jan. 21, according to court documents cited by AP. Pattie Gonia publicly criticized the lawsuit on May 27, days before Pride Month, saying in a video that the company was trying to erase an activist.
What Patagonia alleges
Patagonia says Pattie Gonia infringed its trademark by selling apparel and other goods using the “Pattie Gonia” name, according to the complaint. The company argues the name could mislead consumers and included screenshots that it says show confusion.
Tim Holbrook, an intellectual property professor at the University of Denver, told AP that a trademark plaintiff does not need to prove actual confusion if it can show consumers are likely to be confused. Carmel Imani, a trademark lawyer who represents creators and small brands, told AP that names as similar as Pattie Gonia and Patagonia can face a difficult path at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
According to the complaint, Patagonia contacted the performer in 2022 after learning of a fundraising collaboration with Hydro Flask. The company said it asked her not to sell products using Patagonia’s logo, font or the Pattie Gonia name, and later followed up by email when she began selling clothing bearing the name.
Pattie Gonia filed a trademark application in September 2025 for “Pattie Gonia,” including for apparel, AP reported. Patagonia sued several months later.
Backlash and legal context
The lawsuit prompted criticism online from supporters who questioned why Patagonia would take legal action against a queer environmental activist, AP reported. Some users posted videos saying they were donating or discarding Patagonia clothing.
Other observers said the public reaction missed key details. Cleo Schroer, a Brooklyn-based researcher on queer politics and culture, told AP she initially thought Patagonia was at fault, then read the complaint and concluded that describing the case as an effort to silence a drag queen felt inaccurate.
Trademark disputes over names that resemble established brands are common, according to lawyers interviewed by AP. The complaint notes that Patagonia has previously challenged names including “Catagonia” and “Fratagonia,” while AP cited past cases involving McDonald’s and “McDental” and Starbucks and “Sambucks.”
Josh Gerben, a trademark attorney, told AP that geographic terms can still be protected as marks, citing examples such as Chevy Tahoe, GMC Denali and Arizona Tea Company. Patagonia is also the name of a region in southern Chile and Argentina, but the apparel company has held a trademark for the brand after building its business around the name, AP reported.
Possible settlement
Both sides have signaled some willingness to resolve the fight, according to AP. Pattie Gonia has said she would withdraw her trademark application if Patagonia drops the lawsuit.
Patagonia said it recognized hurt caused by the case, especially in the LGBTQ+ community, but said it would drop the suit only if Pattie Gonia stopped using its logo, font or her name to sell goods and services, AP reported. Pattie Gonia agreed to stop using the logo and font, but not to give up merchandise reading “Pattie Gonia.”
Corley Kenna, Patagonia’s chief impact and communications officer, told AP the company is “very open” and wants a resolution, while declining to provide details. Gerben told AP the clearest outcome would be a negotiated agreement rather than a court fight.
This story draws on original reporting from Fortune.