LV Molly Tea Infringement – A Chinese court has ordered popular tea chain Molly Tea to pay Louis Vuitton 10.3 million yuan (approximately US$1.5 million) in damages. The court found that Molly Tea’s floral logo infringed Louis Vuitton’s registered trademarks.
The LV Molly Tea Infringement case has attracted considerable attention because the two businesses operate in very different industries. Louis Vuitton is one of the world’s best-known luxury fashion brands. In contrast, Molly Tea operates a chain of beverage outlets.
The decision highlights an important principle of trademark law. A highly recognised trademark may receive protection beyond the specific goods or services for which it is primarily known.
Why Did Loius Vuitton Sue Molly Tea?
The dispute centred on Molly Tea’s four-petal floral logo. Louis Vuitton argued that the logo was similar to the floral motifs in its famous monogram.
The Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court in Jiangsu Province reportedly ruled in favour of Louis Vuitton. The court found that Molly Tea and a franchise store had infringed seven of Louis Vuitton’s registered four-petal flower trademarks.
Louis Vuitton commenced the lawsuit in May 2025. The court delivered its first-instance judgment on 29 June 2026.
LV Wins Trademark Infringement Case Against Molly Tea in China
The court ordered Molly Tea to:
- stop using the infringing logo;
- pay 10.3 million yuan (approximately US$1.5 million) in damages and related expenses; and
- take steps to address the impact of the infringement.
Molly Tea has indicated that it intends to appeal the decision.
Molly Tea Attempted to Register Its Floral Trademarks
Another important aspect of the case concerns Molly Tea’s attempts to secure trademark protection for its floral designs.
Since March 2024, Molly Tea and its related companies have reportedly filed several trademark applications with the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). These applications featured various floral designs.
The applications covered restaurant and accommodation services, advertising, food products and other areas.
However, most of the applications failed to secure registration. According to reports, only a trademark incorporating the Chinese characters for “Molly Tea” successfully proceeded to registration.
The case therefore highlights an important distinction between commercially using a logo and successfully securing trademark rights over that logo.
Can a Fashion Trademark Be Enforced Against a Tea Business?
This is perhaps the most interesting aspect of the LV Molly Tea Infringement case.
At first glance, consumers may wonder how a luxury fashion company can enforce its trademarks against a beverage business. After all, the parties sell entirely different products.
However, trademark protection does not always stop at the boundaries of a trademark’s registered classes.
Well-known or highly recognised trademarks may enjoy broader protection. In certain circumstances, this protection may extend to different or unrelated goods and services.
Louis Vuitton registered its trademarks before Molly Tea began using the disputed logo. Its trademarks also enjoy substantial recognition. These factors strengthened Louis Vuitton’s argument for protection beyond its core luxury fashion products.
This principle is important for businesses developing new brands. Operating in a different industry does not necessarily make it safe to adopt a logo or name resembling a famous trademark.
Different Trademark Classes Do Not Eliminate Infringement Risk
The LV Molly Tea Infringement case also highlights a common misconception about trademark classes.
Some businesses assume that they can safely use similar trademarks if their goods or services fall within different classes. However, this is not necessarily the case.
Trademark classification plays an important role in the registration process. Nevertheless, classification alone does not determine whether trademark infringement or conflict exists.
Relevant factors may include:
- similarity between the trademarks;
- distinctiveness of the earlier trademark;
- reputation and recognition of the earlier brand;
- how the respective trademarks are used;
- whether consumers may assume an association between the businesses; and
- whether the later trademark unfairly benefits from or harms the reputation of the earlier trademark.
The LV Molly Tea Infringement dispute provides a useful example. Businesses should not rely solely on different trademark classes when assessing whether a proposed brand is safe to use.
What About Traditional Cultural Designs?
The case has also generated debate in China. Some commentators have argued that four-petal floral motifs appear in traditional Chinese decorative designs.
Traditional cultural patterns and common design elements may form part of the public domain. However, businesses may still acquire trademark rights over a specific and distinctive representation of a common element.
Therefore, the legal question is not simply whether a flower, geometric pattern or traditional motif existed historically.
Instead, the issue may depend on the particular commercial representation of that element. Courts may also consider whether the design has acquired trademark significance.
Another important consideration is the effect of the later trademark. For example, its use may create confusion or suggest an association with the earlier brand.
Key Trademark Lessons for Businesses
The Louis Vuitton v. Molly Tea dispute offers several practical lessons for businesses developing a new brand.
1. Conduct a trademark search before adopting a logo
A trademark search should not focus only on identical names. Businesses should also consider similar words, logos, devices and other distinctive elements.
2. Do not assume different industries mean there is no conflict
Famous or well-known trademarks may enjoy protection beyond their principal goods and services.
3. Trademark classes are not an absolute defence
Registration in a different Nice Classification class does not automatically make a similar trademark safe to register or use.
4. Registration and actual use are separate considerations
Businesses should consider whether their proposed trademark is registrable. They should also assess whether its use could infringe existing third-party rights.
5. Clear your branding before making a significant investment
Rebranding can become expensive after a business has invested in outlets, packaging, advertising, websites and promotional materials. Conducting proper trademark clearance at an early stage can help reduce this risk.
Why Trademark Clearance Matters
A trademark is more than a registration certificate. It is a valuable business asset that identifies the commercial origin of goods or services.
A strong trademark also helps consumers distinguish one business from another.
Before investing substantially in a new brand, businesses should consider conducting a professional trademark availability search and registrability assessment.
A proper trademark search can identify potentially conflicting earlier rights. It also allows businesses to evaluate legal risks before investing heavily in their branding.
The LV Molly Tea Infringement case serves as an important reminder for brand owners. Businesses in completely different industries can still become involved in costly trademark disputes.
Therefore, businesses should conduct trademark clearance before launching or registering a new brand. Early clearance can reduce the risk of objections, infringement disputes and expensive rebranding.
Questions about ip? Click here to reach out to us or you can fill in contact form here.
Email: lymejuice@lymesol.com Or Follow us for more updates:
Facebook. LinkedIn. Instagram. Tiktok.
Source: The Star. CNIPA.