It seems they're not claiming ownership of the name, merely the use of the name in their specific industry. There's still a conversation to be had about the oddity of using the name of a region the company has no particular ties to, but they don't appear to be claiming ownership.
Right, I tried to communicate that the company is claiming ownership for a specific purpose, which is selling clothes and outdoor gear. Apologies if that did not come across.
However, I’d argue that’s still claiming ownership over a region even if in a specific way. And the moral questions around that are deeply under explored. These conversations I had I think barely scratch the surface.
Up here in Maine, Third Act Maine has been asking another iconic outdoor company, L.L. Bean to stop using Citibank for its credit card services. Citi is one of the dirtiest banks in the world, gleefully financing fossil fuel projects. We have also reminded L.L. Bean that research shows that parking your profits in a Citi account significantly increases your carbon footprint. If the dirtiest banks were a country they would rank as number four in carbon emissions worldwide. LL Bean is not interested, it's all about customer benefits from their Citi card. By contrast, Patagonia offers no credit card and they acknowledge the harm done by banking with Chase, Citi. Wells, and BOA. They park their money with green banks. So, Emily, perhaps your next segment could be about the greenwashing masters at LL. Bean, whose marketing slogan is , "the outside is inside everything we do". NOT!
such good and necessary journalism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you Yessenia!!
I don't see any mention of the specific reason Patagonia sued - apparently, they had no problem with the drag performer Pattie Gonia for several years, until she "filed a trademark application in September to use the brand Pattie Gonia to sell clothing and promote environmental activism" ( https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2026/may/28/patagonia-sues-drag-queen-pattie-gonia-trademark-infringement-ntwnfb ).
It seems they're not claiming ownership of the name, merely the use of the name in their specific industry. There's still a conversation to be had about the oddity of using the name of a region the company has no particular ties to, but they don't appear to be claiming ownership.
Right, I tried to communicate that the company is claiming ownership for a specific purpose, which is selling clothes and outdoor gear. Apologies if that did not come across.
However, I’d argue that’s still claiming ownership over a region even if in a specific way. And the moral questions around that are deeply under explored. These conversations I had I think barely scratch the surface.
Up here in Maine, Third Act Maine has been asking another iconic outdoor company, L.L. Bean to stop using Citibank for its credit card services. Citi is one of the dirtiest banks in the world, gleefully financing fossil fuel projects. We have also reminded L.L. Bean that research shows that parking your profits in a Citi account significantly increases your carbon footprint. If the dirtiest banks were a country they would rank as number four in carbon emissions worldwide. LL Bean is not interested, it's all about customer benefits from their Citi card. By contrast, Patagonia offers no credit card and they acknowledge the harm done by banking with Chase, Citi. Wells, and BOA. They park their money with green banks. So, Emily, perhaps your next segment could be about the greenwashing masters at LL. Bean, whose marketing slogan is , "the outside is inside everything we do". NOT!