A Suzhou court has sent a shockwave through China’s competitive tea market by ordering Moli Naibai, a rising star in the domestic 'new tea' sector, to pay 10.3 million RMB ($1.4 million) to LVMH. The first-instance ruling found that the tea brand’s four-leaf flower logo infringed upon Louis Vuitton’s iconic Monogram trademark, marking a rare instance where a global luxury titan successfully sued a domestic beverage chain for such a significant sum.
Founded less than five years ago, Moli Naibai—translated as 'Jasmine Milk White'—has rapidly expanded to over 2,400 locations across China and several overseas markets. While its early branding leaned into traditional Chinese aesthetics, a 2024 shift toward a 'light luxury' minimalist style introduced a geometric four-petal floral logo. This design bore a striking resemblance to the flower motif found in the LV Monogram, leading social media users to dub the brand a 'high-end LV alternative' for milk tea.
The Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court ruled that Moli Naibai’s use of the logo constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition. The court noted that because LV’s flower pattern is recognized as a 'well-known trademark' in China, it enjoys cross-category protection. Even though tea and luxury leather goods occupy different industries, the visual similarity was deemed likely to cause consumer confusion regarding potential collaborations or authorized licensing.
The case has ignited a fierce debate on Chinese social media, where some nationalists argue that LV’s designs originally drew inspiration from ancient Chinese patterns or Japanese family crests. These critics claim that basic geometric florals should remain in the public domain. However, legal experts point out that Moli Naibai’s repeated attempts to register the logo were rejected by the trademark office, yet the company continued its large-scale rollout, indicating a degree of legal negligence or intent.
Moli Naibai’s founder, Zhang Bocheng, has signaled an intent to appeal the ruling within fifteen days. Beyond the immediate financial penalty, the company faces a logistical nightmare: the potential total rebranding of its 2,400 storefronts. This verdict serves as a stern warning to Chinese 'new consumption' brands that the era of 'borrowed' aesthetics is closing as the judiciary moves to align with international intellectual property standards.