Drag activist Pattie Gonia says she has agreed to withdraw her trademark application and stop using Patagonia logos – two of the three demands Patagonia issued on June 1, 2026. Her refusal to accept the third, banning apparel sales, means the dispute enters Pride month with no resolution in sight.
The lawsuit between Patagonia and drag queen Pattie Gonia has continued to dominate corners of news coverage and social media this week, with both sides releasing new posts on the matter.
“It’s your move Patagonia,” says drag queen in new statement
On June 1, 2026 Pattie Gonia released a video message on Instagram, using a clip of Patagonia CEO Ryan Gellert at an unknown “industry conference” on May 29, 2026, explaining that Patagonia’s problem with Pattie Gonia arose only after she filed a trademark application for the use of “Pattie Gonia” in apparel and environmental advocacy.
In her response to the clip and Gellert’s soundbite, Pattie Gonia makes an offer saying she is willing to drop her trademark application in exchange for Patagonia dropping the lawsuit. She adds, any other action would demonstrate the issue is not really the trademark – a reference to underlying questions surrounding LGBTQ+ visibility and hostility that many have raised.
Rather than stay quiet or refer back to its original statement, as was Patagonia’s previous response, the California-based outdoor brand this time replied directly.
Patagonia lays out its three demands
On June 1st, 2026, Patagonia released a new statement, this time on its social media platform, in response to the ongoing lawsuit. The choice of platform seems like a deliberate one, reaching the outdoor brand’s 5.4 million followers rather than the probably less well-read PatagoniaWorks.com press page.
Whilst this does address one of the concerns our opinion piece raised about the lawsuit for Patagonia – that the brand has not successfully communicated why it must sue Pattie Gonia – it simultaneously doesn’t. The statement says it will not “argue trademark law on social media.” Once again, not addressing the actual legal grounds why Patagonia must file a claim, which could assuage some criticism. Nor explaining to social media users the examples of appropriation of the Patagonia logo by “bad actors” that the lawsuit would also inhibit.
Patagonia has issued three demands:
● That Pattie Gonia withdraw her trademark applications;
● That Pattie Gonia stops using Patagonia logos;
● That Pattie Gonia stops selling apparel (and other products) as Pattie Gonia.
The post has 55.6 thousand likes – up to 10 times more than the average Patagonia post – and 15.1 thousand comments. Many of these are from Pattie’s supporters calling on Patagonia to drop the suit, however there is now a marked increase in those supporting Patagonia’s right to defend its brand, citing trademark law.
“No deal, Patagonia”
On 2 June, 2026 Pattie Gonia responded to the offer. She stated that she has already agreed to points one and two, but that point three is an attempt to “erase my advocacy” and activism. That agreeing to stop selling and promoting apparel and other products would prevent any partnership with other brands and would cause the collapse of the Pattie Gonia ecosystem of advocacy and community engagement.
She finishes with a resounding, “No deal, Patagonia.”
The statement has again garnered a huge response, with 135 thousand likes in one day. But again, as with the comments on Patagonia’s post, there is now more of a mix between those supporting Pattie Gonia and those saying Patagonia must protect its brand.
Regardless of who is right or wrong, the pursuit of the claim continues to play out with negative optics for Patagonia. The timing is also particularly poor, coming at the start of Pride month, which brands typically use to showcase their gay-friendly credentials.
