Molly Tea - A Rare Look At Chinese IP

When it comes to intellectual property (IP), China is clearly one of the world’s big hitters. In this article we discuss the recent Chinese judgment in the case Louis Vuitton Malletier (LV) v. Molly Tea. The issue  was whether the Molly Tea logo infringed Louis Vuitton’s registered trade mark?

*Image credit: Instagram

Louis Vuitton (LV)

LV is well-known for its luxury handbags, leather products, apparel and accessories, and its Monogram Canvas incorporates distinctive floral device trade marks that have been used extensively worldwide.  Through considerable commercial use and investment in branding, certain of these floral device trade marks have become closely associated with Louis Vuitton in the minds of consumers worldwide.

Molly Tea

Molly Tea is a popular Chinese tea and milk tea chain known for its floral-forward, jasmine-infused beverages. Molly tea had adopted a four-petal floral logo which it used in its branding for store signage, packaging, promotional materials, and digital marketing channels.

The dispute

LV sued for trade mark infringement arguing that Molly Tea’s floral device logo was confusingly similar to several of LV’s registered trade marks.

*Image credit

Court ruling

In June 2026, the Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court ruled in favour of LV and awarded a significant damages award in the amount of US$1.5 million in favour of LV. Molly Tea said that it would be appealing the ruling.

We’ll go on to discuss various issues:

Trade mark similarity

The case provides useful guidance on how Chinese courts approach trade mark similarity, consumer perception, and cross-industry brand protection in an increasingly competitive marketplace.

China adopts a first-to-file trade mark system, and applications are generally successfully registered with the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA).

Chinese courts do not examine individual design elements in isolation. Rather, they consider the overall visual impression created by the trade marks.

Under Chinese law certain trade marks are considered to have acquired exceptional commercial reputation through long-term use and extensive public recognition. It appears that such trade marks may well receive broader protection than ordinary marks.  

Under Chinese law, trade mark protection is not a mechanism for claiming ownership of abstract concepts, artistic styles, or cultural motifs; the law instead ‘protects a sign that functions as a commercial identifier’. The court therefore had to decide whether consumers encountering Molly Tea’s logo in the marketplace would perceive an overall commercial impression close enough to LV’s earlier registered marks to give rise to confusion.

Trade mark disputes are seldom resolved by placing two logos side-by-side and identifying differences. Instead, Chinese courts like to assess the ‘overall commercial impression’ created by the competing marks from the perspective of the relevant public.

Backlash

The ruling triggered a backlash in China and gave Molly Tea significant exposure. News of the judgment drew more than 400 million views on Weibo, with the hashtag "Molly Tea lost the lawsuit but won the public's heart" alone attracting over 30 million views. 

Much of the criticism centred on the perceived unfairness of a Western luxury house asserting exclusive rights over a geometric floral motif that many commentators argued echoed traditional Chinese decorative patterns.  This raises questions about how trade marks resembling long-standing cultural motifs are approved and enforced in the first place

*Image credit: Instagram

Some commentators however pushed noting that Molly Tea had itself repeatedly tried and failed to register similar flower trade marks with the China National Intellectual Property Administration before adopting the design anyway, which they argued undermined Molly Tea’s position as a sympathetic test case for cultural-heritage arguments. 

Lessons

The Louis Vuitton v. Molly Tea dispute is a useful illustration of why brand owners should build trade mark protection into their brand development from day one. Thorough clearance searches, legal input at the design stage, and disciplined portfolio planning all help to avoid future conflict, and helps build a robust IP portfolio.  

Businesses operating in China can take away several practical lessons for businesses operating in China. Here are a few:

• Searches: There should be a comprehensive trade mark clearance search before a new brand or logo is adopted.
• Examination: CNIPA raises objections should be treated as early indicators of legal risk.
• Integration: Trade mark considerations need to feed into wider business strategy, particularly before expansion, franchising, or major marketing spend.
• Management: Managing trade mark risk proactively will almost always be less expensive than defending infringement claims, rebranding or suffering reputational risk.

Final words

Trade mark infringement is not turn on reviewing design elements on their own or considering what inspired a trade mark design but on the commercial role a trade mark and the overall impression it leaves on consumers.