Louis Vuitton is facing backlash after the Suzhou Intermediate People's Court ordered Chinese bubble tea chain Molly Tea to pay the luxury house 10.3 million yuan (roughly £1.1 million) over its four-petal flower logo. The ruling found Molly Tea had infringed seven of Louis Vuitton's registered trademarks. The penalty splits cleanly: 10 million yuan for economic losses, plus 300,000 yuan to cover LV's legal costs.
The court also ordered Molly Tea to publish a public statement across six official channels, its website, mini-programme, Weibo, WeChat, Xiaohongshu and Douyin, to address the damage caused.
What Netizens Are Saying
The backlash has been loud. Under a trending Weibo hashtag that drew over 350 million views, commentators heavily criticised the verdict. One blogger, 'Xiaoye's Melon', pointed to ancient Chinese architectural elements and motifs from the traditional pipa (a rosewood lute), arguing that Louis Vuitton had co-opted China's ancestral ideas.
State-owned media outlet Global Times went further, running features that accused the French house of trying to 'monopolise ancient motifs' that inherently belong in the public cultural domain.
So, Who Copied Who?
Picture the two logos side by side. Louis Vuitton's monogram is a flat, symmetrical four-petal flower woven into its wider canvas pattern, registered in China back in 1997. Molly Tea's original emblem was a softer, diamond-shaped floral design the brand built its identity around after launching in Shenzhen in 2021.
In 2023, the company worked with the Shenzhen studio Tenkiiiii Design to develop a new look, as part of a broader 'oriental aesthetics' rebrand. This means the look evolved two years into operation, rather than being there from the start.
A Tang Dynasty rosewood pipa carved with a similar floral motif has circulated online as proof the pattern predates both brands. That's true of the decorative motif itself. What's protected here isn't the flower shape, but Louis Vuitton's specific registered graphic mark.
China's First-to-File Rule, Explained
Louis Vuitton didn't win because a court agreed it owns a flower. It won because China runs a strict first-to-file system, and its marks were registered decades before Molly Tea existed.
Furthermore, Molly Tea had early warning signs. Since March 2024, the tea chain filed multiple trademark applications for floral designs covering catering, advertising and convenience foods. Nearly all were rejected for clashing with existing LV filings, with only a mark for the literal Chinese characters 'Molly Tea' going through.
Legal experts note infringement hinges on registration and commercial use, not historical inspiration. The Suzhou court itself noted that in a retail market full of cross-industry tie-ups, a similar logo risks consumers assuming a partnership exists, a co-branding deal or sponsorship, between a tea chain and a luxury house.
A David and Goliath Case?
The 'small tea chain versus global luxury giant' framing doesn't hold up either. Molly Tea has grown to more than 2,300 stores across mainland China and over 50 abroad, spanning the US, Canada, Australia, the UK, Singapore, Thailand and Indonesia. Since the ruling, it has swapped its black-and-white logo for a three-dimensional purple design with a gold emblem and confirmed plans to appeal.
Louis Vuitton has won the legal battle, but at a cost. Defending a motif so many see as culturally Chinese risks alienating the very market it's fighting to protect. This flower fight may be over in Suzhou, but the reputational fallout is only just beginning.
