Molly Tea Appeals $1.52 Million Louis Vuitton Trademark Ruling in China

Q: Did Louis Vuitton’s legal victory accidentally make its Chinese rival more popular?

Yes. Louis Vuitton won in court, but the case appears to have given Molly Tea a noticeable boost in visibility and public sympathy in China. The ruling was a clear legal victory for Louis Vuitton: the Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court found Molly Tea infringed seven registered LV trademarks, ordered it to pay 10 million yuan in damages and 300,000 yuan in legal fees, and required public statements on its website and social media. The judgment also fits a broader pattern of tougher trademark enforcement in China, especially for well-known brands. But in the court of public opinion, the effect was more mixed. After Molly Tea said it would appeal, the dispute spread quickly on Weibo and other platforms. Hashtags tied to the case drew millions of views, and many users rallied behind Molly Tea as a domestic underdog. Some argued the disputed floral motif resembled long-standing Chinese decorative patterns and even elements seen in traditional instruments and architecture, framing the issue as one of cultural ownership rather than simple copying. That does not prove a lasting commercial gain. There is no hard evidence yet in the available reporting of higher sales, store traffic, or long-term brand growth for Molly Tea. But the case clearly delivered something valuable: massive attention, stronger name recognition, and a wave of consumer sympathy that Louis Vuitton likely did not intend to create. So legally, Louis Vuitton prevailed; reputationally, Molly Tea may have benefited.

3 articles · Updated · Global Times · Jul 3

Molly Tea said it will appeal after a Suzhou court ordered it to pay 10.3 million yuan ($1.52 million) to Louis Vuitton in a first-instance trademark infringement ruling.
The court found Molly Tea and a Suzhou franchise store infringed seven Louis Vuitton four-petal flower trademarks and ordered them to stop using the design immediately.
The judgment requires Molly Tea's parent to pay 10 million yuan in losses plus 300,000 yuan in rights-protection costs, while the franchise store bears joint liability up to 100,000 yuan.
About 295,800 yuan in litigation and preservation fees were also imposed, and the company must publish statements on its website and major social platforms once the ruling takes effect.
On Weibo, the case drew about 350 million views, with debate split between claims that Molly Tea kept using the motif after trademark rejections and arguments that the flower pattern reflects older Chinese designs.