LV won a ¥10.3M trademark case in China — then celebrities skipped its Shanghai show

Louis Vuitton has filed more than 1,600 trademark lawsuits in China over five years, treating aggressive IP enforcement as routine brand protection. In June 2026 it won its most publicised case yet: a Suzhou court ordered tea chain Molly Tea to pay ¥10.3M ($1.4M) for using a four-leaf flower pattern similar to LV's Monogram — and to change its logo overnight.

The verdict produced the opposite of what LV expected. Chinese social media accused the French brand of 'monopolising traditional patterns' and bullying a small local business. The hashtag drew over 50 million reads. LV escalated the damage by also suing China's National Intellectual Property Administration and a residential community for a decorative pattern — each new case refreshed the backlash.

By July 25, when LV staged its 2027 Resort collection in Shanghai, the consequences were visible. There were no promotional posters, no celebrity announcements, no live stream. Liu Yifei, LV's global ambassador, was notably absent. Jackson Wang and other long-term partners also skipped the event. Only three minor celebrities attended; none posted about it. LV stopped posting on its Chinese social media channels altogether. Secondary-market bag prices reportedly fell sharply, and multiple stores saw near-empty foot traffic.

LVMH's CFO addressed the controversy at the H1 2026 earnings call on July 28, defending IP protection as an 'absolute core asset' and declining to link the backlash to the company's weak China performance (Asia ex-Japan organic growth was just 4% in Q2). The call did not change the public narrative.

The win triggered a backlash that emptied its Shanghai show: no celebrities, no posts, and bag prices fell sharply.

LV treated a Chinese tea chain like a counterfeiter — a routine IP move — without anticipating how the public would see a foreign luxury giant suing a small local business over a floral motif.

LV escalated instead of de-escalating: two more high-profile lawsuits in the same month kept the backlash alive through each news cycle.

LV failed to read the reputational risk of cross-industry trademark enforcement in China, where public sympathy leans toward the smaller domestic party in a foreign-versus-local dispute.

A legally correct win can be a reputational loss when the plaintiff is a foreign giant and the defendant is a local small business — what works in court may backfire in public opinion.