Louis Vuitton’s Trademark Dispute with Molly Tea Sparks Debate in China

A recent court ruling in China has favored Louis Vuitton in a trademark case against Molly Tea, igniting a backlash from Chinese netizens. Critics accuse the luxury brand of cultural appropriation, citing trademark law to secure exclusive rights.

Luxury Giant vs. Tea Chain

On June 29, the Intermediate People’s Court in Jiangsu ruled that Molly Tea, a local tea chain, infringed on seven trademarks registered by Louis Vuitton, including its Monogram Canvas featuring stylized flowers. The decision ordered Molly Tea to pay 10 million renminbi (approximately $1.4 million) in damages and 300,000 RMB in legal fees within ten days, as reported by Nanfang Metropolis Daily.

The ruling’s implementation is pending, and Molly Tea’s decision to appeal remains uncertain.

Based in Shenzhen, Molly Tea attracts young consumers by blending traditional Chinese tea flavors with minimalist branding, ideal for social media sharing. The hashtag “LV cannot sue for trademark infringement over its use of Chinese patterns” has amassed over 33 million views on Weibo.

Trademark Law and Cultural Heritage

Netizens are comparing Louis Vuitton’s floral monogram with ancient decorative motifs that predate the brand by over a millennium. A Weibo user stated, “International brands like LV should not be allowed to exploit Chinese culture and then accuse others.” Another user criticized the brand’s practice of “harvesting profits from Chinese companies” while advocating intellectual property protection.

Criticism also targets the judiciary, questioning the judges’ consideration of designs’ cultural origins. Comments reflect concerns over national sovereignty in the judicial process.

The debate centers less around Louis Vuitton’s legal ownership of trademarks and more on how trademark laws address traditional cultural imagery. Designs used for centuries generally lack trademark protection on their own. However, brands promoting particular patterns for decades may acquire exclusive rights if consumers associate the design with them.

The case evokes a similar ruling earlier this year, where a Nanjing restaurant was ordered to pay damages and legal fees for infringing on LV trademarks with its vintage floral decor.

‘Toilet Bags’ Controversy

The controversy has revived jokes, with netizens mockingly referring to Louis Vuitton bags as “toilet bags.” The brand’s floral pattern is likened to traditional Chinese motifs found on window grills, floor tiles, and ceramic tiles once common in public toilets.

For inquiries about this story, contact Newsweek editors John Feng and Sam Wilson.