Marsh Featured on Patagonia/Pattie Gonia Trademark Feud

Patagonia filed suit alleging that Pattie Gonia’s attempt to trademark the drag name and sell merchandise under said name puts them in direct competition with the retail giant. 

“Brands don’t take jokes very well,” Michelle said. “Coca-Cola attempted to stop the Enjoy Cocaine [posters] that were popular in the ’70s. Mattel sued Aqua over the ‘Barbie Girl’ song from the ’90s, and more recently, the Jack Daniel’s versus Bad Spaniels case, which was about a parody over a dog toy, went all the way to the Supreme Court.”

Michelle said that the main issue is that Patagonia believes consumers might confuse Pattie Gonia’s merch with the brand’s gear or see Pattie Gonia’s name on an event and mistake it for a Patagonia endorsement. 

“All trademark law is grounded in consumer confusion,” she said.

The other concern is by not pursuing this suit, Patagonia could be inadvertently opening the door to others seeking to use their name and logo, including by those who may not be ideologically aligned with the company.

“They’re not necessarily wrong,” Michelle said. “Over time, a trademark can lose its power by lacking enforcement, and there are many examples of that — band-aid, trampoline, escalator — these are all words that have become part of the English language, due in part to a company failing to protect its mark in the way that they’re describing.”

However, in the court of public opinion, Patagonia is already on the losing side as Pattie Gonia has rallied her online followers to brigade and boycott the brand.

Michelle said, “What might be happening here is a Barbra Streisand effect, where a brand, in attempting to enforce a technicality about its use, causes more harm. I think there’s a lot more common ground than there is disagreement. It’s just a matter of getting back to the table, getting a good mediator, and finding a resolution.”

Read the full article here.