Trademark law in China: Why Louis Vuitton won against Molly Tea

Louis Vuitton, owned by the LVMH group, has won a lawsuit against Molly Tea, a Chinese bubble tea chain founded in Shenzhen in 2021.

The dispute concerned Molly Tea's logo, a stylised four-petal flower. The Suzhou Intermediate People's Court in Jiangsu province, China, affirmed that the logo infringed upon seven of Louis Vuitton's registered trademarks that feature the Monogram's floral pattern.

Court ruled on trademark law, a branch of intellectual property

Louis Vuitton holds several registered trademarks in China protecting the various elements of its monogram. These have been registered in the country since 1997.

In 2022, Louis Vuitton extended this protection to class 43, which covers restaurant services. This extension allows Louis Vuitton to also invoke its rights for food and beverage activities.

Since March 2024, Molly Tea had filed several applications to register floral designs with the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA).

These applications were rejected due to their similarity to Louis Vuitton's trademarks. Despite these rejections, Molly Tea continued to use the design on its shops, cups, packaging and derivative products.

Chinese law is based on the first-to-file principle

Unlike some systems where prior use of a trademark can confer rights, the first-to-file principle in China is a simple rule: whoever files first owns the right. This logic prioritises legal certainty and administrative simplicity. It requires companies to adopt a proactive protection strategy.

Although mechanisms exist to combat abuse, the best protection remains early and strategic trademark filing.

Molly Tea ordered to pay 10.3 million yuan to Louis Vuitton

On June 29, 2026, the court ordered Molly Tea to pay a total of 10.3 million yuan. This includes 10 million yuan in damages and 300,000 yuan for the costs Louis Vuitton incurred in defending its rights.

The company was also ordered to stop using the logo and to publish a corrective statement on its communication platforms and social media networks.

Molly Tea has announced its intention to appeal.

LVMH reiterates the importance of protecting its brands

While the court ruled on an intellectual property dispute, the debate quickly shifted to cultural grounds. Some internet users accused Louis Vuitton of appropriating a traditional Chinese motif.

According to several Chinese media outlets, including China Daily and Nanfang Metropolis Daily, the hashtag about the trial surpassed 400 million views on Weibo, China's main microblogging social network.

Many internet users believe the floral pattern is reminiscent of traditional Chinese ornaments, particularly the Baoxiang flower found in Tang dynasty art. Others pointed out that the dispute concerns a registered trademark and not the use of a traditional motif as such.

When asked about the case by Antoine Bege, an analyst at BNP Paribas, during the presentation of LVMH's half-year results, LVMH's chief financial officer Cécile Cabanis responded: “Regarding your question about the lawsuit, I am sure you will agree with me that intellectual property is an absolutely essential asset for us, and we protect our brands with the utmost vigilance.”

“Our houses very regularly handle cases of trademark infringement in many countries, including China, but not exclusively. This case has received significant media coverage. The legal proceedings are still ongoing; therefore, I will not comment further on this matter.”