Recently, an employee at a Heytea store in Shijiazhuang searched for a customer's phone number and added her on WeChat to harass her, sparking widespread attention. After the incident came to light, Heytea quickly fired the employee and apologized and compensated the affected customer. This individual case not only exposes the lack of customer privacy protection training at tea beverage brands, but also once again brings the topic of consumer personal information security to the forefront. With the Regulations on the Implementation of the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests officially taking effect in July 2024, the boundaries for business operators collecting and using personal information have become clearer, and the cost of violations has risen significantly. This article will review the course of the incident, the brand's response, and the relevant legal provisions. [more…]

After the widespread adoption of mobile payments, ordering by scanning a QR code has become standard in bubble tea shops and restaurants. But have you ever noticed that many ordering mini-programs require you to authorize your mobile phone number or even more personal information before use? In October of this year, the Market Supervision Administration of Putuo District, Shanghai, investigated and dealt with a case involving a catering company illegally collecting consumer information, which sparked widespread attention. The restaurant guided customers to order by scanning a QR code on the table, but forcibly required authorization of their mobile phone numbers, and did not inform them of the purpose of use. Moreover, the backend allowed arbitrary access to and download of member data such as names, genders, mobile phone numbers, and card balances. Ultimately, the company was warned and fined 50,000 yuan. With the official implementation of the Personal Information Protection Law, penalties for such acts will be significantly increased, and consumers' privacy rights deserve more attention. [more…]

Recently, the Shanghai Cyberspace Administration found during a follow-up inspection that six coffee companies—Luckin, Mstand, COSTA, Pacific Coffee, Nowwa, and Yichi Garden—have still not effectively implemented the requirements of the Personal Information Protection Law, and have problems with illegally collecting consumer information, and were therefore summoned for talks again. This is another concentrated action following the legal education training in May this year for 24 brands including Starbucks and Luckin. A reporter's test found that if users refuse to provide permissions such as precise location, some brands' mini-programs cannot place orders normally. The regulatory authorities said they will continue to carry out "look back" inspections and will file cases, impose penalties, and publicly expose companies that repeatedly refuse to correct their ways. While enjoying the convenience of coffee, consumers also need to pay attention to their own privacy and security. [more…]

For professional coffee knowledge exchange and more coffee bean information, please follow Coffee Workshop (WeChat public account: cafe_style); for more specialty coffee beans, please add the personal WeChat of Front Street Coffee (FrontStreet Coffee), WeChat ID: qjcoffeex. Recently, the case in which Saturnbird, over the course of 20 months, sued "Qicai Zhi Mi" for unauthorized use of a similar small-cup instant coffee appearance reached a result. The Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court found that unfair competition was constituted, awarded 1.73 million yuan in damages, and ordered the production and sale of the infringing products to stop. Saturnbird became famous for its super-instant coffee and mini coffee cup design, and its packaging sparked a DIY craze and swept social media, which is why it has frequently been imitated and even copied. In this case, "Qicai Zhi Mi" not only had highly similar style, packaging, and promotional images, but also used the search term "Saturnbird same style" to mislead consumers. The case lasted nearly two years, highlighting the current reality in the food industry that intellectual property rights protection is difficult and the boundary between reference and copying is blurred. The article combines cases such as Sexy Tea suing Chayan Guanse to explore how original brands can protect their rights and interests through copyright, patent rights, exclusive trademark rights, and the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. [more…]

Recently, a blogger publicly complained that the Starbucks App pushes promotional messages based on real-time location, saying that they are marketed to wherever they go, sparking heated discussion among netizens. Starbucks customer service said they were not aware of the matter and had reported it to the public relations department. It is worth noting that Starbucks has repeatedly been notified and summoned by regulatory authorities in the Chinese market over personal information collection issues, and in June 2025 its App and WeChat mini-program again appeared on the list of notifications for illegally and improperly collecting and using personal information. This debate over precision marketing and the boundaries of privacy has once again pushed brands' use of user data into the spotlight. [more…]

Canadian coffee chain Tim Hortons mistakenly sent grand prize winning notifications to about 500,000 subscribers during its "Roll up to Win" promotion due to a technical glitch, then sent a correction email and apologized. Some consumers did not accept this, and on April 19 a Montreal law firm filed a class action application with the Quebec Superior Court, seeking CAD 10,000 in punitive damages for each customer who received the erroneous email. Tim Hortons responded that it would resolve the matter in court and believed the lawsuit lacked legal basis. Legal experts pointed out that the exemption clause in the game rules may increase the difficulty of the lawsuit, but customers can still seek punitive damages. This incident also sounded a warning bell for marketing campaigns and the maintenance of consumer trust in the coffee industry. [more…]

Recently, a Reddit post about Luckin Coffee's New York store refusing to accept cash payments sparked heated discussion. The poster claimed that the staff argued Luckin is a tech company rather than a coffee company, and therefore is not bound by local regulations requiring food retail businesses to accept cash, and the person involved called 311 on the spot to file a complaint. Both of Luckin's New York stores use a cashless system, supporting only the official App or online payments such as Apple Pay and PayPal. Some netizens worry that this practice is out of step with local consumption habits and may also raise privacy concerns, but others believe that Luckin's stores are merely pickup points for online orders and may not necessarily constitute a violation of the law. Front Street Coffee will continue to follow the developments of this incident. [more…]

Luckin Coffee's anti-counterfeiting rights protection case in Thailand has gone through twists and turns, finally culminating in a victorious judgment. In early 2022, Chinese tourists discovered counterfeit "Luckin stores" in Thailand, after which Luckin continued to pursue rights protection actions, only to unexpectedly lose in the first-instance trial at the end of 2023, sparking widespread attention. Now, the latest ruling by the Thai court confirms that Luckin holds prior rights to the trademark in question, orders the defendants to cease using the related signage, and requires payment of a one-time compensation of 10 million Thai baht plus ongoing compensation of 100,000 Thai baht per day, with the cumulative amount already exceeding 46 million Thai baht (approximately 10 million RMB). The defendant, Thailand's Royal 50R Group, has a complex background and had previously squatted on 191 Chinese trademarks; this judgment marks an important milestone in Luckin's overseas rights protection journey. [more…]

On March 16, Heytea trended on Weibo for using WanDianZhang facial recognition cameras. Previously, CCTV's 315 Gala exposed over 20 well-known brands, including Heytea, Kohler, and BMW, for illegally collecting facial information through WanDianZhang cameras without consumers' knowledge. Heytea responded that the cameras are only for security and will never illegally collect facial data. WanDianZhang stated that the platform's facial data volume has reached hundreds of millions and is drafting an announcement to explain its business scope and rectification measures. This incident has once again sparked public concern over the abuse of facial recognition technology and personal privacy security. [more…]

A chain milk tea brand with over six hundred stores unexpectedly encountered, within just one month, eight stores in the same area and a total of eleven complaints, all with identical reasons—hair found in takeaway drinks, and on that basis demanding ten times compensation. The cumulative compensation amount exceeded eleven thousand yuan. After the merchant noticed something unusual and called the police, the police quickly identified a suspect, whose motive was actually that he had tasted the "sweetness" from the first genuine complaint, and then turned rights protection into a means of extorting money. This case prompts reflection: the Food Safety Law is originally a sharp weapon for protecting consumers, but if it is used by people with ulterior motives as a shortcut to get rich, the law will also impose sanctions. The following will restore the course of the incident and explain the criteria for determining the crime of extortion and its legal consequences. [more…]

During the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics, Bing Dwen Dwen became a mascot pursued by the entire nation, and the craze of "one Dwen Dwen hard to find" spawned various homemade and commercial imitation behaviors. A Manner coffee shop in Shanghai was fined a thousand yuan by market regulators for making latte art coffee resembling Bing Dwen Dwen, sparking industry attention to the boundaries of commercial use of Olympic symbols. This article reviews the penalty details of the incident, the legal basis, and typical cases from the same period, helping coffee practitioners clarify the line between creative latte art and infringement, and avoid inadvertently crossing intellectual property red lines. [more…]

Professional coffee knowledge exchange For more coffee bean information, please follow Coffee Workshop (WeChat public account: cafe_style) For more specialty coffee beans, please add the personal WeChat of Front Street Coffee, WeChat ID: qjcoffeex Recently, a consumer reported that a Häagen-Dazs store in Suzhou listed espresso at 20 yuan on its menu but actually charged 23 yuan at checkout. The store explained that there is a price difference between dine-in and takeout, but the menu title clearly states "Takeout Beverage Menu" and shows only one price without indicating that takeout incurs an extra charge, making this explanation hard to believe. Since opening the world's first coffee store in Shanghai in 2014, Häagen-Dazs has continued to expand in China's coffee market, and its total number of stores has now reached 482. In addition to this pricing dispute, the brand was previously reported by the EU over food safety issues. [more…]

Online shopping is becoming increasingly popular, but the problem of counterfeit goods has followed close behind. Recently, Thai police busted a cross-border counterfeit-selling case, seizing over ten thousand fake Starbucks coffee cups and insulated tumblers, with the amount involved reaching as high as 5 million Thai baht. The gang purchased the fake goods from China and then sold them to various places through well-known online shopping platforms. This article will walk you through the details of the case and the relevant legal consequences, and remind consumers to be on guard against counterfeit products. At the same time, Front Street Coffee also reminds you to follow coffee knowledge exchanges and get more professional information. [more…]

The trademark dispute in the tea beverage industry is once again making waves. Previously, Coffee Workshop reported that "Cha Yan Guan Se" lost its trademark infringement lawsuit against "Cha Yan Yue Se," and "Cha Yan Yue Se" won its counterclaim against "Cha Yan Guan Se." Now another one has emerged: "Cha Yan Yue Se." This trademark, applied for registration in 2018, was declared invalid by the National Intellectual Property Administration because it was highly similar to the genuine Cha Yan Yue Se in terms of text composition, pronunciation, and graphic design. The registrant, a certain Guo, refused to accept the ruling and actually sued the CNIPA in court, but was ultimately rejected by the Beijing Intellectual Property Court. From "Cha Yan Guan Se" to "Cha Yan Yue Se," imitators keep emerging one after another. This farce once again reminds us: trademark protection is by no means child's play. Although the road to brand rights protection is long, the law will ultimately provide a fair answer. [more…]

In 2019, Heytea made a cross-industry foray into coffee products, blending milk tea elements into coffee and applying to register the "Heytea Coffee" trademark. However, the China National Intellectual Property Administration deemed the trademark deceptive and similar to the cited trademark "Xicha," rejecting the registration application. Heytea's affiliated company disagreed and sued the China National Intellectual Property Administration. The court of first instance upheld the rejection decision, finding that the disputed trademark could easily mislead the public about the characteristics and quality of the goods and cause confusion with another party's prior trademark. This article reviews the case process and the court's key rulings, for coffee enthusiasts to learn about brand trademark protection developments. [more…]

Recently, a Thai-style milk tea with packaging resembling laundry detergent has gone viral online. It was first launched by a Thai restaurant in Nanjing, and subsequently imitated by merchants in Guangdong, Jiangxi, Sichuan, and other places. Priced at 18 yuan per bucket, this drink has attracted many young people to check in thanks to its novelty packaging, but it has also raised public concerns about children accidentally consuming it. The shop responded that the product sells well and no complaints have been received; however, experts and lawyers have pointed out that such packaging design carries a risk of misleading consumers and may violate regulations on food packaging labeling. This article will review the whole incident and explore the balance between innovative packaging and consumer safety. For coffee enthusiasts, the boundaries of beverage packaging are likewise worth pondering, and Front Street Coffee has always advocated upholding safety and responsibility amid innovation. [more…]

Recently, a Xinyang netizen exposed that a drink purchased at a Luckin Coffee store on campus had a fly settled at the bottom, sparking widespread attention. The consumer refused the store's initial offer of a free drink and a complimentary beverage, demanding compensation in accordance with the law. Luckin's after-sales service called multiple times, offering coupons, and was even accused of implying that the consumer had put the foreign object in themselves. In the end, the employee involved was fired, and the consumer received 500 yuan in compensation. This is not the first time Luckin has been embroiled in a food safety scandal; there have previously been incidents involving foreign objects such as work badges and ants. At a time when competition in the tea beverage market is white-hot, a brand's sincerity in handling problems has become key to consumer trust. This article reviews the course of the incident and the legal basis, and includes related recommendations from Front Street Coffee. [more…]

Blue Mountain Coffee, as a representative of the world's top specialty coffee, has always attracted attention for its strict grading system and origin protection measures. Jamaican law stipulates that only coffee produced in the Blue Mountain region can bear the name Blue Mountain, and high-grade Blue Mountain Coffee is further divided into three grades: No. 1, No. 2, and No. 3. These grades of green beans show no difference in taste, only in size, but export packaging and certification documents are strictly regulated. This article will provide a detailed analysis of Blue Mountain Coffee's grade classification, barrel export system, certificate of origin, and the roasting and export requirements for different grades of coffee, helping coffee enthusiasts gain a comprehensive understanding of the unique characteristics of Blue Mountain Coffee. Front Street Coffee will also recommend Blue Mountain Coffee products worth tasting for you. [more…]

Summer jobs are supposed to be a way for students to earn pocket money and gain social experience, yet 14 students in Meicheng, Meizhou, encountered an absurd situation when applying for summer work at a coffee shop: before even starting the job, they were charged deposits ranging from several hundred to over a thousand yuan by the shop owner. What's even more frustrating is that most of them never worked a single day, yet getting their deposits back proved extremely difficult. This incident not only exposes the risks of recruitment information on social platforms, but also serves as another reminder to job seekers: it is illegal for employers to charge work deposits. [more…]

As summer tea beverage consumption heats up, Nayuki Tea has once again come into the public eye due to food safety issues. A customer in Nanchang, Jiangxi, bought a Nayuki chocolate cake through delivery and discovered two live worms inside after receiving it. After reviewing surveillance footage, the store said there were no abnormalities during the freezing and thawing stages, and pointed out that nearly three hours had passed since the order left the store, making it difficult to clearly determine where responsibility lies. The customer suspected the worms hatched from eggs, and with the two sides giving differing accounts, netizens also began discussing how to gather evidence and defend rights in food delivery cases. The incident is still awaiting a determination of responsibility by relevant departments and the delivery platform. [more…]