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, an illustrator publicly accused the new Chinese-style coffee brand Jueke Coffee of unauthorized use of their artwork, involving three illustrations including "Watermelon and Lotus," and plans to file a lawsuit. Jueke Coffee responded that the packaging design is original, there is no infringement, and refused to apologize or pay compensation. Both sides hold their own views, and the incident has sparked widespread attention. This article reviews the course of the incident, the positions of both parties, and netizen reactions, and includes relevant recommendations from Front Street Coffee. [more…]

There has been a new development in the trust dispute case between Luckin Coffee (China) Co., Ltd. and Yousheng (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., Ltd., Yousheng Chengyi (Tianjin) Information Technology Co., Ltd., and Shenzhou Ucar Co., Ltd. Dissatisfied with the first-instance civil judgment, Luckin Coffee has filed an appeal with the court. The case involves a repurchase price of over 560 million yuan plus interest, and the focal point of the dispute is whether Shenzhou Ucar should bear the shortfall top-up liability. This article will sort out the background of the case, the first-instance judgment, and Luckin Coffee's appeal requests to help readers understand this closely watched commercial dispute. Follow Coffee Workshop and Front Street Coffee for more professional coffee industry news. [more…]

Recently, the Wahaha Group has become a focal point of public opinion due to a collective lawsuit filed by several former employees. According to reports, since August, some employees have been required to terminate their contracts with the Wahaha Group and instead sign with Hongsheng Beverage Group, which is controlled by Zong Fuli, resulting in the cancellation of their original bonus dividend benefits. At the same time, the equity of Hangzhou Xiaoshan Shunfa Food Packaging Co., Ltd. was transferred to Zong Fuli's personal name for zero yuan, raising concerns among employees about investment returns. In response, Wahaha recently issued a statement claiming that some media reports are severely inaccurate, that the union has not received litigation information from the so-called rights protection committee, and that the equity repurchase and transfer are legal and valid. However, the statement did not mention key details such as the re-signing of contracts and the zero-yuan transfer, and many questions remain about the incident. [more…]

Starbucks has recently launched the Iced Energy line of iced energy drinks at its stores nationwide in the United States, with three new products in total, one of which is available in limited supply only on the App, while stores offer two flavors, Tropical Citrus and Melon Burst. This drink is brightly colored, low-calorie and sugar-free, yet contains as much as 205 milligrams of caffeine, far exceeding a Starbucks grande latte, equivalent to 6 cans of cola or 2 cans of Red Bull. In recent years, the U.S. energy drink market has grown rapidly, but Panera Bread's high-caffeine drink previously led to a death and litigation, and Starbucks' entry into the market this time has sparked online discussion about its safety. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that adolescents and children avoid energy drinks, and Starbucks responded that its store menus already disclose ingredient and nutrition information. [more…]

A seemingly ordinary lemonade actually claimed the life of a 21-year-old girl. In September 2023, University of Pennsylvania student Sarah Katz drank a beverage called "Charged Lemonade" while dining at Panera Bread, and just hours later, she tragically passed away from cardiac arrest. Her parents recently filed a lawsuit against Panera, alleging that the product contained an alarming amount of caffeine—260mg for a small cup and 390mg for a large cup, far exceeding the content of a can of Red Bull. What is even more concerning is that this drink was marketed as a "clean plant-based beverage," which led Sarah, who had a heart condition, to let her guard down. This incident has once again sounded the alarm about caffeine intake safety. [more…]

As coffee consumption grows increasingly widespread, brand infringement cases have also risen. In 2018, market regulators in Wuxi received a tip-off and discovered counterfeit "Starbucks" instant coffee products circulating on the market; an investigation confirmed they were sold by Shuangshan Food (Xiamen) Co., Ltd. Although the company knew the products were fake, it still supplied more than 50 merchants across 18 provinces nationwide, with the amount involved exceeding 7 million yuan. In 2021, the Wuxi Intermediate People's Court ruled in the first instance that Shuangshan Company must publicly apologize and pay 21.72 million yuan in punitive damages. This case not only demonstrates the strength of the law in protecting intellectual property rights, but also prompts reflection on the development of domestic coffee brands. At the same time, Chinese brands such as Luckin and MANNER are winning consumers' favor with better value for money and taste, while Starbucks relies more on its store environment to maintain its appeal. This article takes you through the details of the case and explores the changing landscape of the coffee market. [more…]

Hawaii's Bill 198, set to take effect in 2027, will dramatically raise the minimum local bean content for coffee labeled with the names of Hawaii's various growing regions from 10% to 51%. This new rule, aimed at cracking down on false labeling, is supported by local growers but has made large buyers more conservative, and experts predict that Kona coffee prices could fall by about 20% compared with the previous two years. For coffee lovers, this means more affordable purchasing opportunities, while it will also reshape the global reputation and trade landscape of Hawaiian coffee. [more…]

Luckin Coffee's Q2 2022 financial report continued the strong momentum from the previous quarter, with total net revenue growing by more than 70% year-over-year, operating profit successfully turning from loss to profit, and store scale further expanding, forming a sharp contrast with Starbucks' performance in China. Against the backdrop of the pandemic impacting the food and beverage industry, Luckin not only narrowed the revenue gap with Starbucks but also announced senior management changes, and the market is paying close attention to its prospects for relisting. This article will provide a detailed breakdown of the key data behind Luckin's impressive financial report, the pace of store expansion, changes in revenue structure, and the competitive landscape it will face in the future. [more…]

The unusual pricing incident involving Luckin Coffee's delivery platform packages has drawn widespread attention. After consumers placed orders at extremely low prices, their orders were unilaterally cancelled, giving rise to legal disputes. Citing the views of a legal blogger, the People's Court Daily pointed out that when a merchant's pricing error results from staff mistakes, the merchant may claim a major misunderstanding to rescind the contract, but this must be resolved through litigation or negotiation. Ordinary consumers who unintentionally buy low-priced drinks have not broken the law, but those who knowingly exploit a system loophole and maliciously place large numbers of orders may run afoul of the law. This article will analyze the course of events, the legal basis, and Luckin's compensation measures in detail, while reminding coffee lovers that when enjoying discounts they must hold fast to the bottom line of good faith and avoid crossing the red line of the law. [more…]

Starbucks is facing a labor law lawsuit over scheduling violations in New York City, with an investigation finding more than 500,000 violations of the Fair Workweek Law, ultimately resulting in a $38.9 million settlement. The case involved more than 15,000 employees, making it the largest worker rights settlement in New York City history. Starbucks was accused of failing to provide stable schedules, cutting hours, and refusing overtime, making it difficult for employees to make a living, while the company said the settlement was intended to ensure compliance rather than to recover unpaid wages. Front Street Coffee brings you the full story. [more…]

Recently, a class-action lawsuit in Canada has thrust Starbucks, Tims, and Second Cup into the spotlight, accusing the three coffee chains of long-term surcharges on non-dairy alternatives, allegedly amounting to price gouging. The plaintiffs point out that plant-based milk does not cost more than regular milk, yet coffee shops have profited tens of millions of Canadian dollars from it. Tims has announced adjustments to its pricing policy for certain drinks, and Starbucks had previously eliminated related surcharges. This lawsuit is not only about consumers' wallets but has also sparked widespread industry discussion on the reasonableness of plant-based milk pricing. [more…]

Starbucks is recently facing a class-action lawsuit in California, USA, where three lactose-intolerant consumers accuse the company of charging extra fees when substituting milk with plant-based milk in drinks, alleging discrimination and violation of civil rights laws, and seeking $5 million in damages. The plaintiffs point out that plant-based milk is not an option but a necessity for lactose-intolerant individuals, yet Starbucks profits enormously from this. Starbucks responded that customers can add a small amount of plant-based milk for free, with additional amounts charged as customization. Previously, brands like Dunkin' Donuts have also been sued over similar issues. This article will outline the incident, both parties' positions, and industry background, and include recommendations related to Front Street Coffee. [more…]

Starbucks recently filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against a cannabis company called Starbuds Flowers, accusing it of intentionally imitating its classic mermaid trademark and misleading consumers by exploiting the Starbucks brand's reputation. In the complaint, Starbucks compared the similarities between the two logos point by point, noting that Starbuds not only used the similar design on its mobile sales trucks and official website, but also printed it on cigarettes and cannabis products. Starbucks is asking the court to prohibit the other party from continuing to use the logo, destroy the related products, and disgorge the profits obtained from the infringement. In fact, Starbucks had already sent a cease-and-desist letter as early as last August and subsequently sent multiple takedown notices, but received no response. As of July 2, Starbuds' sales trucks and website were still in operation. [more…]

Luckin Coffee reached a $187.5 million settlement agreement with the SEC, a massive fine equivalent to the profits from selling tens of millions of cups of coffee. From the Muddy Waters short-seller report to admitting to 2.2 billion yuan in fraud, and then to the Nasdaq suspension, how did Luckin's capital myth collapse? How did Lu Zhengyao's role in it affect investor confidence? With Centurium Capital completing its equity acquisition and Lu Zhengyao completely out of the picture, can Luckin usher in a rebirth in 2022? This article will provide an in-depth analysis of the causes and consequences of this capital storm and explore Luckin's future path to financing and listing. [more…]

A hot beverage accidentally tipping over from a cup holder inflicted irreversible physical and psychological trauma on an ordinary delivery worker. A California jury recently ruled that Starbucks must pay up to $50 million in damages, a total that could climb to $60 million when interest and attorney fees are included. At the heart of the case is the question of who should bear the duty of ensuring safety during the beverage handoff. Surveillance footage, medical records, and the conflicting accounts of both sides together paint the picture of a years-long legal tug-of-war. This article lays out the full sequence of events, the injured person's condition, the basis for the ruling, and Starbucks' response and intention to appeal, guiding you through this consumer safety lawsuit that has drawn widespread attention. [more…]

As a prepaid card product launched by Starbucks, the Star Gift Card has long suffered from issues such as limited recharge amounts, excessively high card refund fees, and the inability to clear remaining balances. Four university students discovered during their consumption that when the remaining balance on a Star Gift Card was only 19 yuan, they could neither purchase any Starbucks product nor get a refund to clear the balance. After investigation, they found that the prepaid cards of several tea beverage brands did not have such restrictions. Therefore, in June 2023, they filed a lawsuit against Starbucks, ultimately prompting Starbucks to update the Star Gift Card terms, lower the card refund fee, eliminate the minimum charge, allow custom recharge amounts, and cancel the extension management fee. [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…]

A super value 5-time card launched on Luckin Coffee's Tmall flagship store quickly triggered a buying frenzy because it was priced as low as 13.77 yuan for any 5 cups chosen from 15 classic drinks. However, in the early hours of the next day, many consumers had their orders forcibly refunded by the platform on the grounds of "no longer wanted" without any refund operation on their part, and some, although shown as shipped, did not receive the electronic vouchers. Luckin later explained that a system configuration error had triggered automatic refunds and offered a 32-yuan drink voucher as compensation. But some consumers were not convinced, believing that the brand's unilateral cancellation of the contract amounted to a breach of contract or even fraud, and have filed lawsuits in court demanding reasonable compensation. The incident exposed the performance risks in the sale of electronic discount vouchers and the issue of consumer rights protection. [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…]