What You Need to Know About Patagonia’s Lawsuit Against Climate Activist Drag Queen Pattie Gonia

Drag queen and environmental activist Pattie Gonia is asking the outdoor apparel brand Patagonia to drop its trademark infringement lawsuit, calling the suit “a betrayal of the company’s core mission.” 

The brand first filed the trademark lawsuit in January against Wyn Wiley, who performs under the stage name Pattie Gonia. Patagonia is suing for $1, along with legal fees, which the performer says could cost upwards of $1 million dollars. 

On Wednesday May 27, the climate activist, who has over two million online followers across TikTok and Instagram, took to Instagram to call for the company to drop the lawsuit. 

“This is not a brand conflict, this is a corporation trying to erase an activist,” she said. “This is how corporations bully individuals who cannot match their resources. Because this would take away not only my activism and career, but also the livelihoods of the team I employ.”

“This is a betrayal of Patagonia’s core mission. Because if they’re ‘in business to save the home planet’, why are they suing a climate activist?” Pattie Gonia said. “Over the last four months since the lawsuit was filed, I have stayed silent and worked every channel I had to resolve this without going to court. But in the end, I had two choices. The erasure of my name, my advocacy, my community, and everyone I employ. Or fight for myself and fight for us.”

Who is Pattie Gonia?

Pattie Gonia is an American drag queen known for her environmental activism. The persona was created by Wyn Wiley in 2018 and went viral. Since then, Pattie Gonia has created a community focused on defending environmental and LGBTQ+ rights—raising over $3.7 million for environmental and social justice nonprofits. (TIME has recognized Pattie Gonia as one of its 2024 Next Generation Leaders and as one of the most influential creators of 2025.)

Why is Patagonia suing Pattie Gonia?

Last year, Pattie Gonia filed a trademark application for exclusive rights to use her brand to sell merchandise and to promote activism and online marketing. In its complaint, Patagonia said the application “reflects Pattie Gonia’s departure from discrete use of a persona to engage in activism” and instead confirms the activist’s “intent instead to launch a wideranging commercial enterprise under the PATTIE GONIA brand.”

In a May 27 statement posted to its website, Patagonia said that Pattie Gonia violated a previous agreement the two had struck over the use of the name and logo—though Pattie Gonia denies that any such agreement was reached. “There was no agreement,” she said. “In 2022, when I was collaborating with a third party, Patagonia asked me to follow certain terms, and I did. That wasn’t a broad agreement about my future.”

In a January statement, the brand noted that, while it did not want to sue Wiley, it had to enforce its trademark universally in order to protect it from misuse. “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,” the company wrote. “To put a finer point on it, we cannot selectively choose to enforce our rights based on whether we agree with a particular point of view. Inconsistent enforcement might prevent us from stopping entities like the oil and gas lobby, counterfeiters, hate groups, or other bad actors from using the Patagonia name and logo. These are not hypothetical examples; they are real instances of past trademark infringements we successfully stopped only because we have been consistent in defending our rights.”

In a statement to TIME, the brand said that protecting its trademark is critical to defending the environmental activism and product they are known for. 

“Over the past several years, we’ve tried to find a path forward that would allow Pattie Gonia to continue their work while also protecting the Patagonia trademark,” the brand told TIME. “These conversations have included multiple proposals—each intended to support that path—along with ongoing dialogue and genuine efforts to avoid this ending up in court. Unfortunately, we could not reach an agreement.”

Over the weekend, Pattie Gonia released a video offering to drop the trademark if the company drops the lawsuit. The company has since said on Instagram that they can resolve the matter if Pattie Gonia withdraws all trademark applications, stops using the Patagonia logo, and stops selling and promoting apparel and other products as Pattie Gonia.

When asked for comment, Pattie Gonia’s team directed TIME to her press release.

What is one of the main questions to be resolved?

One of the sticking points is the idea around parody and whether marketplace confusion is created.

Pattie Gonia claimed that her merch never fell under the banner of trademark infringement that Patagonia claims in its suit. “I have never used their logo, font or anything from their brand on our merch website,” she said in the Wednesday statement. “Instead, the lawsuit cherry-picks a few examples of playful parody and fan art and tries to spin those into some kind of vast use of their logo. Drag is built on parody, puns and jokes. But I’m willing to never parody their logo ever again, aka never give them free PR ever again.”

It remains to be seen if Patagonia will drop the lawsuit—or if Pattie Gonia’s claims that her merchandise was simply “playful parody” will stand up in court.   

For now, the company seems committed to defending its trademark. “Protecting the Patagonia trademark is part of protecting the ability of this company to continue doing that work in the future,” the company said on Wednesday. “The last thing we wanted was a legal fight with someone who shares our values, but we must protect our business and employees.”