A while back, a "ladies-who-lunch afternoon tea" trend took the internet by storm. A trendy café in Ningbo drew crowds of customers checking in after it printed "LV" and "CHANEL" logos on its coffee and cakes, but it also caught the attention of market regulators. After investigation, law enforcement determined that the shop's actions did not constitute trademark infringement, but were suspected of violating the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, and it was ultimately fined and had its printing molds confiscated. Behind this case lies the delicate game between creative marketing and legal boundaries. Today, Front Street Coffee will walk everyone through what happened and talk about the bottom line and limits of brand marketing. [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…]

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…]

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…]

In recent years, Geisha coffee has continued to rise in popularity within China's specialty coffee circles, but recently a company successfully registered trademarks such as "Red Label Geisha" and "Champion Geisha," and attempted to also claim "Geisha Coffee," sparking industry concerns about the privatization of a generic name. This article traces Geisha's journey from Ethiopian forests to the Panama Hacienda La Esmeralda, explains the origins of the red, green, and blue label grading systems, as well as the meaning of "Champion Geisha" in BOP auctions, and explores the risks that registering generic names as trademarks may pose to coffee professionals — a topic worthy of attention for every coffee lover and practitioner. [more…]

Recently, Nanjing's third Chayan Yuese store sparked widespread discussion online for using "SexyTea" as its English signage. Some people believe the term clashes with the brand's classical and gentle tone, and may even be disrespectful to women; others feel that "Sexy" inherently means charming and attractive, and there's no need to overinterpret it. In fact, this is not the first time Chayan Yuese has fallen into controversy over its copy or signage. Previously, the "picking up scraps" cup copy prompted an apology for objectifying women. This article sorts out the sequence of events, various viewpoints, and regulatory responses, and includes professional coffee information channels for coffee enthusiasts and brand observers to reference. [more…]

Recently, Oatly, a giant in the oat milk industry, attempted to register the word "Barista" as a trademark in New Zealand, but encountered strong opposition from local food wholesaler Bidfood. Bidfood argued that the term has long been a generic name in the plant-based milk sector and should not be monopolized by any company. The New Zealand Intellectual Property Office ultimately supported Bidfood's position, determining that "Barista" is a descriptive term when used for dairy alternatives. This incident not only highlights the challenges of determining generic names in international trademark registration but also brings to mind similar cases in China, such as the trademark squatting of "Geisha Coffee." Where exactly is the boundary of trademark protection? What potential risks does the registration of generic names pose to the industry? This article will provide a detailed analysis for you. [more…]

Recently, a Hong Kong netizen spotted a coffee shop called "Maners" in a large local supermarket. Its logo, decor, and product posters closely resemble those of mainland Manner, and it even offers a 5-yuan discount for bringing your own cup, sparking suspicions of a knockoff. However, the truth is surprising—this store is actually Manner's legitimate outlet in Hong Kong. Because the "Manner" trademark has already been registered by another Hong Kong company, Manner was forced to adjust its name and launch as "Maners." The trademark application was rejected and failed on review. Although it can currently continue to be used, it is not legally protected and carries future infringement risks. This renaming saga not only led fans to mistakenly attack the real brand but also sounded a warning about trademark layout when brands go overseas. [more…]

Recently, a coffee shop branded "People's Coffee" sparked widespread discussion in Shijiazhuang. A subsequent media investigation found that similar stores have covered 18 provinces and 20 cities nationwide, with nearly 30 directly operated outlets. Its parent company, YaoChao (Shanghai) Culture Communication Co., Ltd., has applied for the "People's Coffee" trademark multiple times since 2022, but all applications were rejected. It only holds two registered trademarks: "Chao People's Coffee" and "YaoChao People's Coffee." However, the actual store signs do not display the words "Chao" or "YaoChao." This phenomenon has drawn public attention to commercial signage compliance, trademark usage norms, and potential legal risks, and lawyers have also offered professional interpretations. [more…]

After Luckin Coffee's co-branded sauce-flavored latte with Moutai went viral, a number of solid beverage products with highly similar packaging styles quickly emerged on the market. These products not only have similar names, but also almost copy the red background with blue-and-white diagonal bar composition of the original packaging. Some lawyers pointed out that using a similar trademark on the same or similar goods without the permission of the trademark registrant, where it is likely to cause confusion, constitutes infringement of the exclusive right to use a registered trademark. However, some manufacturers claim that the sauce-flavored latte category cannot be registered and that the color scheme is not protected by copyright, which has triggered discussion about the boundary between imitation and infringement. [more…]

A counterfeit well-known coffee brand trademark case involving over 40 million yuan was recently successfully cracked by Shanghai Qingpu police. The criminal gang recruited franchisees nationwide under the name "Starbucks Coffee Service," falsely claiming to have official franchise qualifications and guiding the opening of counterfeit stores. In January 2024, the police launched a unified arrest operation, apprehending 17 suspects led by Yin. The case exposed a complete criminal chain from production and manufacturing, warehousing and transportation, to business training and marketing consulting, and also sounded an anti-fraud alarm for investors in the franchise chain sector. [more…]

Recently, some trendy cafes in Hangzhou have come up with a new gimmick—printing luxury brand logos such as LV, Dior, and CHANEL on coffee and cakes, offering so-called "luxury afternoon tea" to attract many young people to check in. Rea.vintage cafe on Zhongshan North Road combines a vintage luxury consignment shop with coffee, quietly offering a 99-yuan set; while CHOPCHOP cafe in Guoda City Plaza prominently displays a luxury brand menu, with set prices ranging from 118 to 318 yuan, and only dine-in customers can enter the scenic area. While business is booming, netizens are raising continuous doubts: does adding a logo make coffee more fragrant? Is using big brand trademarks without authorization an infringement? A Qianjiang Evening News reporter interviewed lawyer Sun Yifan, pointing out that this behavior may face copyright infringement risks. Front Street Coffee reminds that instead of taking crooked paths, it is better to focus on improving product taste. [more…]

Recently, the Market Supervision and Administration Office of Shanghai Jiading Industrial Zone received a report from a citizen and shut down a store that used a coffee shop as a cover to impersonate a Starbucks purchasing agent on delivery platforms and produce and sell counterfeit coffee. A large number of packaging materials bearing the Starbucks logo were seized at the scene, including cups, syrups, and bags. Such incidents have been common in recent years, exposing issues behind the scenes such as loopholes in delivery platform review and the unrestricted circulation of branded materials. When buying coffee, consumers should choose legitimate stores to avoid falling into counterfeit traps. Front Street Coffee reminds you to pay attention to developments in the coffee industry, and even more to the source and quality of every cup of coffee. [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…]

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…]

After Starbucks announced to suspend its business in Russia and withdraw from the Russian market last year, the founder of the local famous catering company Pinskiy & Co, Anton Pinsky, and the Russian rap singer Timati collaborated to acquire Starbuc [more…]

Recently, the Market Supervision Bureau of Yuecheng District, Shaoxing City, investigated and penalized a popular coffee shop. The shop was found using imported coffee beans without Chinese labels and could not provide proof of legal origin. It was also involved in selling coffee equipment without Chinese labels. Ultimately, it was fined 25,000 yuan and the related products were confiscated. This case reveals a common compliance risk in the procurement and use of coffee beans by specialty coffee shops: whether self-roasting or external procurement, coffee bean raw materials require corresponding food business or production licenses and product qualification inspection reports. As market supervision intensifies, coffee operators urgently need to self-check risks to ensure legal and compliant operations. [more…]

In recent years, as public awareness of intellectual property has grown, trademark disputes surrounding well-known brands have become increasingly common. The two major new-style tea beverage brands Chayan Yuese and Mixue Bingcheng once joined forces to oppose the "Chayan Bingcheng" trademark, yet the China National Intellectual Property Administration ultimately ruled that the trademark be registered. This incident not only reflects the real-world dilemmas faced by brand protection but also sparked discussions about copycat culture and consumer choice. This article will sort out the sequence of events, review the historical origins of the copycat phenomenon, and explore the interplay between innovation and imitation in the new tea beverage industry. [more…]

Blue Bottle Coffee, deeply ingrained in people's minds with its minimalist small blue bottle image, has always been regarded as the Apple of the coffee world, and its blue-and-white colored utensils are also highly sought after by fans. However, the brand has not had a smooth journey in trademark enforcement. This week, Blue Bottle Coffee lost a trademark lawsuit in the United States, as a judge in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California denied its motion for judgment against the coffee utensil brand Blue Brew, finding that the two trademarks are clearly different and that consumers would not be confused. What impact will this ruling have on Blue Bottle Coffee's trademark protection strategy? Let's take a closer look. [more…]

A trademark dispute spanning China and Thailand is continuing to escalate. Thailand's Royal 50R Group has filed a lawsuit with the court, demanding that China's Luckin Coffee pay 10 billion Thai baht in economic damages, on the grounds that Thailand's Luckin has legally registered the local trademark, while China Luckin's infringement accusations have hindered its business plans. China's Luckin had previously issued a statement saying that the Thailand stores were counterfeits, but on December 1 the Thai court ruled against China's Luckin. At present, China's Luckin has responded that the situation remains to be verified. This article will sort out the full picture of the incident, analyze the ins and outs of this trademark dispute, and follow up on subsequent developments. [more…]