The logo immediately reminded them of Louis Vuitton
In a Suzhou courtroom, the ancient tension between imitation and originality found modern expression as a Chinese tea chain with over 2,000 global locations was ordered to pay Louis Vuitton more than 10 million yuan for borrowing too freely from the French house's iconic floral monogram. The ruling is less a story about logos than about the maturing of intellectual property culture in China — a signal that rapid commercial growth no longer offers shelter from the obligations of originality. For brands scaling across borders at speed, the case is a quiet reminder that visual identity carries legal weight, and that the world's trademark offices are watching.
- A Suzhou court gave Molly Tea just ten days to pay 10.3 million yuan — a deadline that turns a legal ruling into an immediate financial emergency for the fast-growing chain.
- Beyond the money, the court ordered Molly Tea to publicly confess the infringement across six major Chinese platforms, transforming a private legal loss into a reputational reckoning.
- Molly Tea has already quietly swapped its black-and-white logo for a colored version, a visible concession that signals compliance even as the company prepares to appeal.
- Chinese social media split sharply — some defended the tea brand by pointing to ancient four-petalled motifs in Chinese design, but the dominant voice found the resemblance to Louis Vuitton impossible to explain away.
- With outlets in the US, UK, Australia, Thailand, and beyond, Molly Tea now faces the daunting prospect of rebranding across multiple markets and legal jurisdictions simultaneously.
- The ruling sends a clear message to every emerging brand watching: China's intellectual property enforcement has sharpened, and trademark similarity to a global luxury house is no longer a calculated risk worth taking.
A Chinese court has ordered Molly Tea — a tea chain that grew from nothing to more than 2,000 global locations in just five years — to pay Louis Vuitton 10.3 million yuan for using a logo too similar to the French luxury brand's trademarked four-petalled floral monogram. The Suzhou Intermediate People's Court gave the Shenzhen-based company ten days to settle, with 10 million yuan designated as compensation for economic losses and 300,000 yuan to cover Louis Vuitton's legal costs.
The financial penalty is only part of the court's reach. Molly Tea must also publish acknowledgments of the infringement across six official platforms — its website, mini-program, and accounts on Weibo, WeChat, RedNote, and Douyin — to help repair any reputational harm done to the luxury brand. The company has already begun adjusting, switching its logo from a black-and-white design to a colored version, though it has signaled its intention to appeal.
The case dates to May of last year, when Louis Vuitton filed suit. China's National Intellectual Property Administration had separately rejected Molly Tea's own trademark applications, confirming that Louis Vuitton's monogram already held registered protection in China. The denial made the legal ground beneath Molly Tea's logo increasingly unstable.
The ruling sparked debate on Chinese social media, with some users arguing the two brands occupy entirely different industries and that four-petalled patterns have deep roots in traditional Chinese design. But the prevailing sentiment sided with Louis Vuitton — most commenters said the logo immediately called the French brand to mind.
With operations spanning the United States, Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, Thailand, Indonesia, and Singapore, Molly Tea now faces the complex task of rebranding across multiple markets. For other fast-growing companies, the case offers an unambiguous lesson: in an era of strengthened IP enforcement, borrowing from the visual language of established luxury houses carries consequences that no amount of rapid growth can outrun.
A Chinese court has ordered Molly Tea, a tea chain that has grown to more than 2,000 locations worldwide since its founding in 2021, to pay Louis Vuitton 10.3 million yuan—roughly 50 million baht—for using a logo that too closely resembled the French luxury house's iconic four-petalled floral monogram. The Suzhou Intermediate People's Court in Jiangsu province issued the ruling this week, giving the Shenzhen-based company ten days to settle the bill.
The damages break down into two parts: 10 million yuan assigned as compensation for economic losses Louis Vuitton sustained, and an additional 300,000 yuan to cover the brand's reasonable legal expenses in bringing the case. The court's decision carries teeth beyond the financial penalty. Molly Tea has been ordered to post public statements across six official platforms—its website, mini-program, and accounts on Weibo, WeChat, RedNote, and Douyin—explicitly acknowledging the infringement and working to undo any damage to Louis Vuitton's reputation.
The company has already begun compliance. Molly Tea switched its logo from a black-and-white design to a colored version on its mini-program, a visible concession to the court's authority. Yet the chain is not accepting defeat quietly. A company spokesperson indicated that Molly Tea intends to file an appeal, suggesting the fight over the logo is far from over. Louis Vuitton, for its part, has declined to comment on the victory.
The case itself traces back to May of last year, when Louis Vuitton filed suit. The China National Intellectual Property Administration had already rejected Molly Tea's own trademark applications filed in 2024, placing them under review. The agency confirmed that Louis Vuitton's monogram pattern holds registered protection in China, giving the luxury brand legal ground to stand on. When Molly Tea attempted to secure its own trademark rights, the administration flagged the similarity and denied the application.
The ruling has ignited debate across Chinese social media. Some users defended Molly Tea, arguing that the two brands operate in entirely different industries—luxury fashion versus beverage—and that similar four-petalled patterns appeared in ancient Chinese design. But the weight of online sentiment tilted toward Louis Vuitton's position. Many commenters said the logo immediately evoked the French brand, making the resemblance difficult to dismiss as coincidence.
Molly Tea's global footprint makes the ruling particularly significant. The chain operates outlets not only across China but also in the United States, Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, Thailand, Indonesia, and Singapore. A company that has scaled to thousands of locations in just five years now faces the prospect of rebranding efforts across multiple markets and jurisdictions. The decision signals that even rapidly expanding Chinese brands cannot assume they can borrow from the visual language of established international luxury houses without consequence. For other emerging companies watching from the sidelines, the message is clear: intellectual property enforcement in China has teeth, and trademark registration offices are paying attention.
Notable Quotes
Molly Tea said it planned to file an appeal— Molly Tea company statement
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does a tea chain's logo matter enough to warrant a 50 million baht judgment?
Because Louis Vuitton's monogram isn't just a design—it's a symbol of exclusivity and heritage that the brand has spent decades building. When another company uses something visually similar, even in a different industry, it dilutes that association and creates confusion in the marketplace.
But they sell tea, not handbags. How does that create actual economic harm?
The harm isn't direct sales loss. It's brand dilution. If people see that four-petalled flower on a tea cup and start associating it with a casual beverage chain instead of luxury craftsmanship, Louis Vuitton's symbol loses some of its power. The court quantified that loss at 10 million yuan.
Molly Tea says it's appealing. Do they have a real case?
Possibly. The online debate in China shows there's genuine disagreement about whether the logos are similar enough to constitute infringement. Ancient Chinese patterns did use four-petalled flowers. But the court has already ruled, and Louis Vuitton's trademark registration in China is solid ground.
What does this mean for other Chinese brands trying to go global?
It's a warning. If you're scaling internationally, you can't cut corners on trademark clearance. The intellectual property administration is reviewing applications more carefully now, and courts are enforcing those protections. A company like Molly Tea can afford the legal fight, but smaller startups might not.
Will Molly Tea actually rebrand globally, or just in China?
That's the real question. The court order applies to China, but if they're serious about international expansion, they'll likely rebrand everywhere to avoid similar suits in other jurisdictions. Consistency matters for a global brand anyway.
Does Louis Vuitton actually care about a tea chain, or is this about sending a message?
Probably both. They protect their trademark aggressively everywhere—it's how luxury brands maintain their exclusivity. But yes, a ruling like this does send a signal to other companies watching: intellectual property matters, and we will enforce it.