07/15/26 - “LV sues National Intellectual Property Bureau” exploded across the internet.
”My sister cried because my family was too poor.
She just finished her high school entrance exam. Today, her friends wanted her to go out with them, but she’s praying that it’s going to rain soon. She said that all her friends have a fair bit of money. If she goes out, she can’t ask her parents for money because we don’t have any, and then she burst into tears.”
Comments say, “When I was little, my parents kept saying I was a hikkikomori, that I don’t go out the door for the entirety of summer break. But where would I go out to? I don’t have any money.”
“I really want to recommend this post to people who say, “Why aren’t poor people allowed to have kids?” It’s one thing to have kids, why have multiple? Raising your kids like this…they’re better off in an orphanage.”
“What a good kid. She didn’t even pray for money. She just prayed for it to rain so she didn’t have to go out.”
“You’re allowed to leave your original family.”
“Even so, your sister didn’t even complain much. She just wants it to rain.”
“Three sisters and one brother. I’m guessing you’re in Guangdong. Turns out I’m right.”
“You girls need to go as far away as you can as soon as you graduate. Do not support your brother and become his blood bags.”
“My parents call me gloomy. I couldn’t believe it. They have no idea how much money I’ve saved for this family. I don’t travel. I don’t need pretty clothes or make up. I don’t eat snacks. I don’t eat meat. I only eat a couple of veggies and I’ve never signed up for an extracurricular class. And they call me gloomy and withdrawn.”
“This post is a really excellent response to people asking whether poor people should have kids.”
“How did they have four kids? Weren’t there policies back then to prevent this?”
#LV sued intellectual property bureau not for money but for patterns. “On the 14th of July, a news story that “LV sues National Intellectual Property Bureau” exploded across the internet.
LV has previously sued Molly Tea for trademark infringement. In the first hearing, the court ruled that Molly Tea needed to pay over 10 million. And the news story came from a court announcement in the Beijing Intellectual Property Court and didn’t explain too many details. Combined, this made many readers assume that LV has the guts to seek recompense from the national intellectual property bureau.
In actuality, this is a administrative dispute over trademarks and has nothing to do with the previous Molly Tea logo case. A reporter researched and discovered that from 2024 to 2025, multiple “four-petal flower” designs were registered as trademarks by a supposed Huang Minyao, in the domain of processed and unprocessed leather, book bags, ad promotions, etc. Some trademarks are still in the approval process or have been denied.
LV believes that some of the flower patterns are similar to their own and disputed the trademark. The National Intellectual Property Bureau reviewed the case and believed some applications should be denied, but other logos are fine, and denied LV’s protests and allowed them to be registered. So, in accordance with trademark law, LV sued the National Intellectual Property Bureau and demanded they retract their approval of these logos.
So the reason LV is suing the National Intellectual Property Buraeu is to appeal the logos that Huang Minyao registered, and not to get money out of the NIPB. This lawsuit isn’t really a lawsuit. It’s very common in intellectual property law to see lawsuits against the NIPB over trademark disputes. We don’t need to make it a bigger deal than it is.
Intellectual property protection has always been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, we need to protect existing intellectual properties like well-known logos, prevent knock offs, or grey areas like piggybacking on a brand. On the other hand, we have to prevent businesses from hogging common patterns and letters to monopolise unearned profits. This involves a very complicated back and forth of power and isn’t black and white. It’s certainly not that the law should always favour the weaker side. It’s all case-by-case. The courts rule based on evidence on an individual basis.
As a luxury, well-known brand, LV enjoys the protection of the Chinese legal system and the international trademark treaties that China has entered into, but LV does not enjoy any privileges outside of the law. They cannot monopolise commonly seen patterns and letters through registering trademarks.
Based on the intellectual property lawsuits they’ve attempted around the globe, LV’s goal is very obvious. They want to monoopolise all chess grid patterns and four-petal flower designs around the world. In 2008, LV registered two dual-colour grid-patterns as their EU trademark and tried to make it their own. In 2009, a German retailer sued and in the end, the EU intellectual property bureau and courts both believed that a “chess grid pattern” is a simple geometric design common to humanity, and LV lost the case.
China’s trademark law also requires logo be “identifiable”. Theoretically speaking, if the logo merely comprises of common shapes, basic geometry, or public decorations, then it cannot be registered as a trademark. The goal of this law is to prevent any business from monopolising basic visual designs. The point of protecting trademarks is that a trademark shows the true origins of a product. It’s to prevent misleading consumers. It is not to allow trademark holders to monopolise basic patterns.
The reason all of society was against LV suing Molly Tea isn’t that the public doesn’t approve of intellectual property protection, but that people believe a basic pattern like a four-petal flower which has appeared on pipa in the Tang Dynasty and in the art of the RMB bills and even on building tiles, should not belong to an individual business.
Right now, this “LV sued NIPB” case’s core dispute is: Is this logo a basic pattern that anyone should be able to use? Or would it actually be confused with LV’s well known logo and misdirect consumers? This needs to be made clear in court so the fighting can end. If the trademark is misleading, it’ll be denied. If it’s public imagery, it shouldn’t be monpolised by LV.
This case has nothing to do with the Molly Tea case, but it shares some similarities. What counts as a public image that can’t be monopolised?”
Comments say, “At the end of the day, the fundamental core of LV’s lawsuit isn’t about the law at all. China needs to connect with the international community. We need to use our laws to completely solve the problem of LV’s ambition and protect our traditional culture and art from the root. Our law cannot become an accomplice to western burglars. Now, some legal workers can start calling me an amateur.”
“Honestly, how is this image at all similar to LV?”
“Honestly, it looks more like a boomerang.”
“What does people registering this trademark have anything to do with them? It’s not similar at all.”
“I don’t even want to work a job that has 10 days off a month.
I’m probably crazy. My boss is super nice and really values me. The office has decent vibes. The commute is only 15 minute by scooter. There’s no overtime. No one bothers me after work. I get an average of 10 days off a month, sometimes 11-12 days. Decent pay too. And I often think about quitting because I don’t want to get out of bed (even if I went to bed early). I’m always testing the boundaries. Every month, I take extra days off or clock in late. And then I immediately feel guilt. And after I feel guilty, I work really hard at home. I don’t know why, every time I have 2-3 days in a row off, I hate going back to work again, but I don’t feel that way once I’m actually at work. Is everyone the same? Sometimes, I’ll be late on purpose. Do I just have some kind of mental illness?
Looking for people who resonate ahhhhhhhh”
Comments say, “Same. My company is either super busy or super chill. Lately, we’re super chill. I slack off at work all day, and my boss doesn’t PUA me at all. They’ll be the first to take a long holiday. All my coworkers are nice, the pay is around 10K a month, two day weekends plus normal public holidays plus full insurance and social security (even if it’s the lowest I’ve ever seen). But four coworkers quit in six months.”
“I totally get it. It’s like once you get into a certain rhythm of working, you’ll feel a sort of fear and pressure about having to get up on time the next day. You want to sleep without any worries. And that’ll make you want to quit. Your job is honestly really good. You should try taking some time off and doing a super packed vacation. Once you’re tired of relaxing, you’ll want to work again.”
“I feel like a black slave or something.”
“If you have too much time on your hands, pick up a hobby.”
“I also hate waking up early. Why don’t we have any jobs that you only work for 4-5 hours a day, so I can sleep in ’til noon before I go to work, and then get off of work at 5-6PM? Two day weekends + public holidays + insurance and social security + 6K a month after tax. Then I’d probably like going to work.”