Re the Patagonia vs. Pattie Gonia case: the company should sponsor her environmental efforts and part of that is a trademark agreement where each side compromises a little bit; Pattie can keep doing her thing and Patagonia is seen as an ally again.
Advertise here with Carbon Ads
This site is made possible by member support. 💞
Big thanks to Arcustech for hosting the site and offering amazing tech support.
When you buy through links on kottke.org, I may earn an affiliate commission. Thanks for supporting the site!
kottke.org. home of fine hypertext products since 1998.
Beloved by 86.47% of the web.
Comments 4
I do not understand why Pattie agreed to not use her drag name in "any product", vs simply agreeing to not use the logo. That sounds like a bad deal for her, but it seems like that's what the parties mutually agreed.
Getting a lot of pushback on social about Pattie being the one who's mucking up the works here (e.g. see replies on Threads). I'm not really interested in who's "right" here; I just feel (naively perhaps) that fighting about trademarks legally and publicly is not a good look for either party and that there should be a way for everyone to get back on the same "side" again. Americans love their litigation tho.
The problem is the legal framework around trademarks -- Patagonia HAS to defend their marks vigorously or risk weakening/losing them. This is why they sued -- but for $1.
Patagonia's claim that there could be confusion or brand dilution is laughable. "Wait, am I buying a technical backpack from a legacy outdoor brand or a t-shirt from an inclusive drag queen?"
I know the bar is low for such claims, but c'mon, not that freaking low. And anyone so confused is also unlikely to shell out the kind of money Patagonia wants for their (admittedly excellent, yes I own some and rely on it) gear.
Secondly, there's something really weird about an American company screaming "DIBS!" on its name at the top of its litigious lungs, when it chose to name itself after a South American region that - by the diffuse nature of the region - would be unable to similarly protect itself from being used to sell things of no benefit to the region. (See also: Amazon)
Patagonia:
1) Get a freaking sense of humor and honestly think about if you're punching up or down here,
2) Show-not-tell you're not going to add to the misery of already marginalized people during an incredibly difficult time, and
3) Get your army of lawyers to draft up an agreement with Patty Gonia that spells out how you'll keep out of each others' kitchens.
For my part: No more buying of Patagonia gear until/unless they live up to the values of being normal.
Hello! In order to comment or fave, you need to be a current kottke.org member. If you'd like to sign up for a membership to support the site and join the conversation, you can explore your options here.
Existing members can sign in here. If you're a former member, you can renew your membership.
Note: If you are a member and tried to log in, it didn't work, and now you're stuck in a neverending login loop of death, try disabling any ad blockers or extensions. Or try logging out and then back in. Still having trouble? Email me!
In order to comment or fave, you need to be a current kottke.org member. Check out your options for renewal.
If you feel like this comment goes against the grain of the community guidelines or is otherwise inappropriate, please let me know and I will take a look at it.
Hello! In order to leave a comment, you need to be a current kottke.org member. If you'd like to sign up for a membership to support the site and join the conversation, you can explore your options here.
Existing members can sign in here. If you're a former member, you can renew your membership.
Note: If you are a member and tried to log in, it didn't work, and now you're stuck in a neverending login loop of death, try disabling any ad blockers or extensions. Or try logging out and then back in. Still having trouble? Email me!