A court decision to order one of China’s most famous tea chains to pay Louis Vuitton 10.3 million yuan (£1.1m) in damages has sparked a heated online debate about intellectual property, cultural ownership and the power of global luxury brands.
A court in Suzhou, in the eastern province of Jiangsu, found that Shenzhen-based Molly Tea infringed the French fashion house’s registered trademark by using a logo that copied its four-petal flower motif, one of the most recognizable devices in the LVMH stable. In addition to the damages award, the tea party was ordered to stop using the logo and apologize publicly, according to Chinese media outlet China Daily.
The decision is a reminder that the use of trademarks in China has become more intense in recent years, and that the country’s courts are increasingly willing to find foreign copyright holders, even from famous domestic opponents. For UK companies trading or exporting to China, product protection remains a live commercial issue rather than a legal consideration.
Notably, China Daily reported that Molly Tea and its subsidiaries had applied for multiple trademarks that were rejected by the China National Intellectual Property Administration, the body that oversees registration under the country’s first-mover system. Only the mark containing the Chinese characters for “Molly Tea” has been successfully registered.
Those details are important. China uses a strict pre-filing system, and Louis Vuitton’s floral device has long been on the registry. The UK Intellectual Property Office’s guidance on IP protection in China encourages British businesses to register early and enforce their use, simply because pre-registration is often decisive in Chinese courts. Brands seeking cross-border coverage can also nominate China through the Madrid System for international trademark registration administered by WIPO.
The decision has divided opinion online in China, with a hashtag linked to the case attracting more than 400 million views and tens of thousands of comments.
Many social media users jumped to the tea collection’s defense, saying that Western luxury houses themselves borrowed liberally from Chinese art and artifacts. One Weibo commenter vowed to “drink a cup of Molly Tea every day” in support, adding: “Give me a break. They’re taking advantage of the fact that our ancestors didn’t file ownership papers.”
A user on RedNote, another Chinese forum, made a similar point: “These geometric shapes have been used everywhere in history, not just in China.”
Others supported the court. One Weibo user suggested that Molly Tea’s defenders should “read the law first”, noting that Louis Vuitton had registered the logo and therefore there was no real controversy. One said the French house has the right to protect its intellectual property from imitation in any industry, luxury or otherwise.
For SME owners, the case underscores two strong facts. The first is that registration trumps sentiment: even if they are sensitive to the social situation, the courts decide on the register, not on cultural history. The second is that trademark disputes are very expensive to fight in a weak state, a point made by the strength of entrepreneurs who have faced rows of trademarks in the UK, where defense costs can run into six or seven figures.
For Louis Vuitton’s parent LVMH, the win comes at a critical time in China, where luxury sales remain under constant pressure as Chinese consumers spend at their discretion. A court victory over a popular local tea brand may protect the trademark, but 400 million views suggest the battle for consumer goodwill is another matter entirely.
Molly Tea and Louis Vuitton have been approached for comment.
