Patagonia Sues Drag Performer Patti Gonia Over Trademark Issues

Patagonia, the outdoor gear company, has launched a lawsuit against drag performer and LGBTQ activist Patti Gonia. The company claims that Gonia has been selling items that infringe on its well-known logo.

This upscale brand, favored by both outdoor enthusiasts and business professionals, alleges that Gonia has utilized its trademark in a way that could result in “irreparable” damage.

Patti Gonia, whose real name is Wynn Wiley, previously came to an agreement with Patagonia in 2022 to respect its trademark. However, two years later, she filed for a trademark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, aiming to use the “Patti Gonia” brand across various business initiatives, as detailed in court documents.

The lawsuit, which was filed on a recent Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, mentions that Wiley’s trademark application signifies a shift in her intentions. She plans to explore numerous commercial activities under her brand, including apparel lines, and wishes to market her upcoming performances.

Patagonia has argued that Wiley’s application deviates from the former understanding they had, which allowed for limited use of names in performances.

Emails exchanged between Wiley and Patagonia in 2022 show Wiley explicitly requested that the company avoid using any “logos or similar designs,” especially their distinctive Belwe font.

The brand’s legal team reached out again last February after discovering Wiley had opened an online store selling apparel and stickers branded “Patti Gonia Hiking Club,” along with items featuring her name styled in Patagonia’s font and logo. The complaint indicates dissatisfaction with Wiley’s actions.

Patagonia expressed continued support for Wiley’s endeavors but urged her to stick to the agreements made in 2022. In an email, they stated, “Unfortunately, we are at the mercy of Patagonia regarding the recent product sales, so we ask that you stop selling T-shirts and stickers that closely resemble Patagonia’s logo or branding.”

Patti Gonia and her team responded shortly after, asserting they had never referred to Patagonia’s logo or brand. They suggested there is sufficient space for both brands to coexist. “We trust Patagonia will support us as much as we support our own path,” they stated, which came off somewhat dismissively in the complaint.

About a month later, Patagonia’s legal representatives proposed a meeting to discuss the situation, but Wiley declined and continued to utilize Patagonia’s logo. Consequently, the brand felt that Wiley would disregard their previous agreement.

Ultimately, Patagonia is seeking minimal monetary compensation; however, they emphasize that the ongoing harm to their brand image is significant and cannot simply be addressed with money. Instead, they request an injunction to prevent future issues.

The lawsuit outlines that the “damages” experienced by Patagonia are linked to their loss of control over how their trademarks are utilized and the potential misassociations between Patagonia and Patti Gonia in the public’s eye.