- in European Union
In the headlines at the moment is the case between Patagonia, the well-known outdoor clothing company, and Pattie Gonia, an American drag queen known for her climate activism. Despite seemingly trying to facilitate co-existence, Patagonia have filed an infringement lawsuit in the US against Pattie Gonia following her filing of a new trade mark application for PATTIE GONIA, covering clothing goods in class 25.
No one should blame Patagonia for seeking to enforce their trade mark rights in a brand which they have carefully built over several decades. Had a third party filed a trade mark application for PATTIE GONIA, it is likely no one would have batted an eyelid at Patagonia's challenge, and Patagonia would likely be successful. However, Pattie Gonia has now established herself as a climate activist and has accused Patagonia of trying to ‘erase’ her through the filing of the lawsuit.
Patagonia have insisted that they have engaged with Pattie Gonia over several years, but they consider the challenge necessary to protect their intellectual property and brand. Pattie Gonia has indicated she considers the dispute is not about branding and is instead about erasing an activist.
The balance between protecting brands and enforcing trade marks versus any associated negative PR can be a really fine line. This might also be a lesson in addressing any potentially infringing or unauthorised use of a trade mark at the outset. We do not know the full details, but perhaps if Patagonia had insisted that Pattie Gonia use a different name right at the point they became aware of her and her activities, it may have avoided the potential PR backlash they are facing now.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]