The lawsuit filed by outdoor apparel giant Patagonia against drag performer and environmental activist Pattie Gonia has sparked widespread discussion at the intersection of trademark law, artistic expression, and brand identity. At its core, the dispute centers on whether a performative name that plays on an existing trademark crosses the line from parody and expression into trademark infringement. For performers, creators, and brand owners alike, this case highlights important legal boundaries and sets a meaningful precedent for how trademarks may be enforced against stage names and personas.

Patagonia’s claim focuses on the argument that the name “Pattie Gonia” is confusingly similar to its well-known PATAGONIA trademark, particularly because both parties operate in overlapping spaces related to outdoor culture, environmental activism, and merchandise. Trademark law is designed to prevent consumer confusion as to source, sponsorship, or affiliation. Patagonia has invested decades into building its brand, and under U.S. trademark law, famous marks receive broader protection, even when the alleged infringer is not selling identical goods. The company’s position reflects a growing trend of brand owners aggressively policing their marks to prevent dilution or loss of distinctiveness.

From a legal analysis standpoint, one of the central questions in this case is likelihood of confusion. Courts typically evaluate factors such as similarity of the marks, proximity of the goods or services, evidence of actual confusion, and the intent of the alleged infringer. Performers like Pattie Gonia often argue that their names are expressive, humorous, or parodic, rather than commercial trademarks meant to indicate the source of goods. Parody can be a strong defense in trademark cases, but it is not absolute. If a parody still creates confusion or appears to trade on the goodwill of a famous brand, courts may side with the trademark owner.

Another key issue is trademark dilution, which applies to famous marks like Patagonia. Even without direct consumer confusion, a trademark owner may claim that another party’s use blurs or tarnishes the distinctiveness of its brand. For performers whose names are wordplay on well-known trademarks, dilution claims can be especially dangerous because they require a lower threshold than traditional infringement claims. The Patagonia lawsuit underscores how famous brands can leverage dilution theories to challenge uses that might otherwise be considered artistic or expressive.

The implications of this case extend far beyond Patagonia and Pattie Gonia. Performers, influencers, and creators increasingly adopt names that are clever riffs on established brands to gain instant recognition or cultural relevance. While this can be effective from a marketing standpoint, it also increases legal risk. A name that begins as a joke or statement can quickly become a commercial identifier once merchandise is sold, sponsorships are secured, or ticketed performances are promoted. At that point, trademark law is likely to apply with full force.

This case also raises broader questions about power imbalance. Large corporations have significant resources to enforce their trademarks, while individual performers may lack the means to fight prolonged litigation. Even when a performer believes they have a strong parody or First Amendment defense, the cost of defending a lawsuit can be prohibitive. As a result, trademark enforcement actions can have a chilling effect on creative expression, encouraging artists to self-censor rather than risk legal conflict.

For trademark applicants and performers alike, the Patagonia lawsuit serves as a cautionary tale. Choosing a name that references or plays on an existing trademark requires careful legal analysis, particularly when the brand is famous and operates in a related cultural or commercial space. Early legal advice can help assess risk, explore possible defenses, and, when necessary, adjust branding before it becomes costly to do so.If you are a performer, creator, or business navigating trademark issues, having an attorney who understands both enforcement strategy and expressive defenses is critical. Contact The Plus IP Firm today. Call Mark Terry at 786-443-7720 or email [email protected] to schedule a consultation. The Plus IP Firm helps clients protect their brands while understanding the legal limits of creative naming, ensuring you can build your identity without unnecessary legal exposure.