Why trademark boundaries matter for brand building

A recent million-dollar damages ruling pushed a trademark dispute between Chinese tea chain Molly Tea and luxury house Louis Vuitton into public view — and with it, a broader question about where trademark protection begins and ends. In 2025, Louis Vuitton sued for trademark infringement, arguing that signs used by Molly Tea were similar to its registered trademarks and likely to confuse consumers. It sought an injunction and damages. On June 29, 2026, the Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court ruled at first instance that the tea brand’s graphic signs infringed Louis Vuitton’s trademarks, ordering it to stop the infringement and pay damages. The case quickly moved beyond a commercial dispute. As the debate came to encompass traditional motifs such as the Tang-dynasty baoxiang flower and persimmon-calyx patterns, the question shifted: when elements of shared cultural heritage enter the trademark system, does that make them the private property of a brand? Or is the law protecting something narrower — the distinct identity a brand has built through design and sustained use? On August 6, 2026, People’s Daily published an article titled Where Are the Boundaries of Trademark Rights?, examining the relationship between traditional cultural elements, trademarks’ source-identifying function and commercial compliance. The article argued that treating trademark registration as the “enclosure” or “monopolisation” of traditional culture is a misunderstanding: cultural inheritance and commercial compliance are not inherently at odds. At the same time, brands drawing on traditional culture must respect existing rights, invest in original design and secure trademark protection in a timely way. Notably, the article was later reposted by the official WeChat account of theIntellectual Property Court of the Supreme People’s Court, bringing the discussion further into the realm of professional IP law. Against that backdrop, this article asks three questions: What, exactly, does a trademark protect? When traditional cultural elements become part of a trademark, where do the rights begin and end? And for brands, how can long-term value be built and protected while respecting both the rules and the rights of others? The value of a trademark goes beyond a logo To understand the debate, it helps to return to a basic question: What is a trademark for? At its core, a trademark helps consumers identify where a product or service comes from. Brands in the same category may sell similar products, but names, logos and other trademarked signs give consumers a clear way to tell them apart. Coca-Cola and Pepsi, for example, both sell cola, yet their identities are immediately distinct: Coca-Cola through its script logo and red palette, Pepsi through its circular emblem and blue. These signs do more than tell consumers which brand they are looking at. Over time, they come to carry memories of taste, purchasing habits, advertising and the occasions in which the products are consumed. That is why a trademark’s value goes beyond differentiation. Through sustained use, a name or symbol can accumulate associations with a brand’s products, quality, service, reputation and even emotional experience. What begins as a word or graphic can, over time, become a commercially valuable brand asset. Can traditional motifs become trademarks? When a symbol carrying brand value incorporates public cultural elements such as traditional motifs or opera figures, the question becomes more complex: where should the line be drawn between a brand’s rights over a specific trademark and the public’s use of shared cultural resources? The presence of cultural elements alone does not automatically exclude a mark from trademark protection. China’s Trademark Law sets out clear restrictions on signs that cannot be used or registered as trademarks, but traditional motifs and other public cultural elements are not prohibited simply because they belong to cultural heritage. In other words, being part of the public cultural domain and being eligible to become a trademark are two separate questions. If a brand transforms these elements through its own design — through composition, lines, colors or combinations — and creates a distinctive mark capable of identifying the source of goods or services, that mark may qualify for trademark registration and protection. Chagee offers one example. The tea brand has registered opera-inspired character imagery as trademarks and expanded those registrations into markets including the United States, Malaysia and the Philippines. What receives protection is not the opera figure itself as a cultural resource, but the specific visual expression and commercial identity the brand has built around that cultural element. Drawing inspiration from shared cultural resources is, in fact, a common practice in commercial design and is not unique to any country or category of brands. Yang Ming, executive deputy dean of the Intellectual Property School at Peking University, noted that traditional motifs have long been integrated into commercial practice. Chinese companies have also transformed cultural references from different regions and historical backgrounds into brand names and commercial identities, such as Alibaba, Apollo and Tsingtao Brewery’s Augerta series. Trademark protection does not mean owning culture But this raises another question: if public cultural elements can become part of a trademark, does registration mean that others can no longer use similar elements? The answer is no. Trademark rights do not give brands unlimited ownership over every visual element contained in a mark. Instead, they protect the specific commercial identifier that has been established around that mark. Once registered, the trademark owner may use it within the approved categories of goods or services and can prevent others from using identical or similar signs on related goods or services when such use is likely to cause confusion. Take the apple as an example. No company can register an apple-shaped trademark and then prevent others from drawing apples, photographing apples or using apple imagery in ordinary design contexts. What is protected is a specific design that, in a particular commercial setting, allows consumers to identify a particular brand. Likewise, flowers, leaves, geometric forms and traditional motifs do not become a company’s private property simply because they appear in a trademark. At the same time, public cultural elements can, through long-term and consistent commercial use, develop into powerful brand identifiers. The siren, for example, is a mythological figure that belongs to cultural history rather than any single company. But through decades of design and use, Starbucks has transformed its particular siren graphic into a symbol consumers associate with the brand. What the law protects is the brand recognition created by that specific design — not the siren itself as a cultural image. Yang Ming noted that viewing trademark registration as the “enclosure” or “monopolisation” of traditional cultural resources is a misunderstanding. Trademark law protects the goodwill and source identification a brand has built through long-term commercial use. Even when a registered trademark contains public cultural elements, it does not prevent the public from using those elements in legitimate cultural contexts. The key distinction, therefore, lies between general cultural expression and trademark use. Determining whether a mark falls within trademark protection is not only about what elements it contains, but whether it functions in a specific commercial context to identify the source of goods or services. Peng Xuelong, director of the Intellectual Property Research Center at Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, described the principle simply: trademark law is not asking “Who owns this pattern forever?” but rather “Who does this pattern make people think of?” The same motif can have very different legal meanings depending on how it is used. A traditional pattern displayed in decoration, art or cultural exhibitions remains part of public cultural expression; the same pattern prominently used on product packaging, store signage or advertising as a brand identifier may require further examination if it could confuse consumers about the source of goods or services. A trademark containing traditional cultural elements, therefore, does not mean a company owns that culture. Trademark protection applies to brand identification in specific commercial contexts, while public cultural resources remain available for use, interpretation and transmission. Cultural resources can be shared, while brand identities can be protected within clear legal boundaries — the two are not in conflict. Why trademark boundaries matter for brand building As intellectual property becomes an increasingly important part of brand value, understanding the rules and boundaries of trademarks is no longer a specialist concern reserved for major corporations. It is a fundamental task for any brand seeking long-term growth. For brands with ambitions to build lasting value, trademark compliance must begin before major commercial investment. When choosing a name, logo or other core identifiers, the first step is not to rush into the market, but to conduct a thorough rights search — checking whether similar or identical trademarks have already been registered or applied for in relevant categories, and whether other existing rights could create conflicts. Once a mark is considered eligible for registration, brands need to secure protection across the appropriate categories based on their actual products and services. If they plan to expand into new categories or overseas markets, trademark strategies must evolve accordingly. In other words, trademark management is not simply about designing a logo and filing an application afterward. It is a long-term process that involves risk assessment, building original identifiers, securing legal protection, using marks properly and maintaining those rights over time. More importantly, trademark protection is not only about preventing imitation. It is also about safeguarding the trust and commercial value that brands accumulate over time. Yang Ming noted that some domestic companies attempt to benefit from established brands by copying their names, logos or visual identities, using the awareness and consumer recognition others have built — a practice often described as “free-riding” on another brand’s reputation. Such shortcuts may appear effective in the short term, but they can ultimately lead to legal consequences and damage to brand credibility. Healthy brand competition depends on shared respect for the rules. A fair market does not exist to protect only one group of brands; it requires all participants to uphold the same standards. Peng Xuelong said that Chinese brands expanding overseas also need an environment where domestic and international companies receive equal protection. “If a domestic market tolerates free-riding, Chinese brands may face the same challenges when they go global, while also struggling to gain the trust of partners. Only when companies have stable and predictable rights protection at home can they build the confidence and experience needed to navigate intellectual property challenges abroad.” This is why protecting your own trademarks and respecting those of others are ultimately two sides of the same principle. The former safeguards the brand assets built through years of investment; the latter recognises that every brand has the right to establish its own identity. A brand with lasting strength does not grow by relying on someone else’s recognition — it builds its own foundation and develops its own distinctiveness. The purpose of trademark protection is precisely this: to allow every brand to protect its identity and reputation, respect the boundaries others have established, and create lasting value through originality and long-term commitment.

Why trademark boundaries matter for brand building

How Bottega Veneta weaved China’s forever it bag

Upgrade to Pro

Sectors

Insights

Company

Why trademark boundaries matter for brand building

How Bottega Veneta weaved China’s forever it bag