Dewdney William Drew comments in City AM on a trade mark infringement case by outdoor brand Patagonia

In January, outdoor apparel brand Patagonia filed a trade mark infringement case against the drag queen Pattie Gonia for $1 (plus legal fees), alleging the performer violated its trademark by going professionally by the name ‘Pattie Gonia’.

The drag performer and climate activist in question, Wyn Wiley,  responded publicly to the case saying the lawsuit: “cherry-picks a few examples of playful parody and fan art,” also noting drag is “built on parody, puns and jokes.”

The fallout online resulted in the company issuing an update statement last week, stating it “has a responsibility to protect the company that generations of employees have helped build."

“This matter is not about seeking financial gain, nor is it about challenging anyone’s identity or right to advocacy, protest, or creative expression. The last thing we wanted was a legal fight with someone who shares our values, but we must protect our business and employees,” the company added.

Dewdney William Drew, Head of Brand Protection in our Intellectual Property team says:

The marks PATAGONIA and PATTIE GONIA are actually not all that similar.  They are phonetically almost identical but visually less so.  Conceptually speaking, one is a region, the other a name.  Before this lawsuit, and the attendant publicity, how many consumers had actually made the connection?  Could it be that Patagonia have fallen victim to the Streisand Effect, namely that in trying to avoid a connection between their brand and Pattie Gonia, they achieved the opposite and in fact increased public awareness of this connection?  The proceedings also surfaced an agreement or “understanding” from 2022 which, regardless of its legal effect, seems to add substance to the connection between the parties.

His comments feature in City AM:

Trademark disputes of this kind require some finesse. Whatever was going on before the US trade mark application to register PATTIE GONIA was filed seems to have been manageable, so why the lawsuit? Well, the US Patent and Trademark Office examines trade mark applications and will block them if they are considered too similar to an earlier registration.

"Notably, the office action that issued (this February) did not cite PATAGONIA as an earlier trade mark, implicitly expressing the view that PATTIE GONIA is not similar. While Patagonia might have been hoping for the US Patent and Trademark Office to refuse [the Pattie Gonia] application and save them a job, the decision to then sue may be one that they regret.

Read the full article in City AM here.