Patagonia has sued Wyn Wiley, who performs as Pattie Gonia, in federal court in Los Angeles, accusing the environmental activist of trademark infringement and asking for $1 in damages plus legal fees. Wiley responded publicly for the first time on Wednesday, saying the company was trying to erase their name, advocacy and community.
In a video posted to Instagram, Wiley shared a letter sent to Patagonia’s board of directors urging the company to drop the case. They said they had spent four months silent after the lawsuit was filed on 21 January and had worked every channel available to settle the dispute without going to court. “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?” Wiley said.
Patagonia said Wiley filed a trademark application in September to use the brand Pattie Gonia to sell clothing and promote environmental activism, and that the filing would irreparably harm its brand. The company said it had actively engaged with Pattie for several years in an effort to avoid a lawsuit and had tried to find a path forward that would let the performer continue their work while protecting the trademark it has spent 50 years building. Patagonia also said the dispute was not about financial gain or about challenging anyone’s identity or their right to advocacy, protest or creative expression.
Wiley pushed back on that framing, saying their merch had been a playful parody of Patagonia and that they had never used the company’s branding, logo or font. “This is not a brand conflict,” Wiley said. “This is a corporation trying to erase an activist.” They added: “Drag is built on parody, puns and jokes.”
The clash lands as Wiley’s profile has grown rapidly online. They have amassed millions of followers for environmental activism and have raised almost $4 million for non-profits so far. Last year, Wiley said they raised $1 million while hiking 100 miles in full drag from Point Reyes National Seashore to San Francisco, a stunt that helped turn Pattie Gonia into a recognizable name in climate activism and performance. For Patagonia, the fight is about preserving a brand built over the last five decades; for Wiley, it is now a public test of whether a company that markets itself around environmental values can sue one of the movement’s more visible performers and still claim the moral high ground.
The legal case now turns on whether Patagonia can persuade a court that Wiley’s use of Pattie Gonia crosses the line from parody into infringement, or whether the activist’s drag persona is protected expression. Wiley has chosen to make the dispute public, and Patagonia has already said it wishes it did not have to bring the case. That makes the next phase less about private negotiation than about which side can convince the public, and the court, that its version of the brand is the one that matters.
