How China can safeguard visual heritage against Western luxury brand exploitation

In early July, a Suzhou court ordered the Chinese tea chain Molly Tea to pay Louis Vuitton 10.3 million yuan (US$1.5 million) after ruling that its four-petal floral pattern infringed on the French luxury house’s registered trademarks.Many online users, angered by the eastern Chinese court’s ruling, shared images of similar motifs found in Tang dynasty (618–907) textiles, musical instruments, and Suzhou garden architecture, arguing that these precede Louis Vuitton’s founding in 1854 by centuries.The dispute quickly evolved in mainland social media into a deeper and more unsettling question: can a luxury company “privatise” a visual language used by a civilisation for centuries – and how should China protect its cultural heritage?Vintage Chinese blue and white porcelain vases serve as enduring symbols of the country’s rich design legacy, reflecting centuries of artistic excellence. Photo: ShutterstockWang Jia, an intellectual property lawyer at Sichuan Henghexin Law Firm, told the SCMP that trademark law does not grant Louis Vuitton a monopoly over every four-petalled floral motif.“What the law protects is the mark’s function as an indicator of commercial origin – the system of brand recognition built through long-term use,” she explained.Some online observers have argued that traditional Chinese motifs are treated as “freely available” under a global intellectual property framework, while Chinese creators risk legal action for using elements from their own culture.Wang contended that this interpretation goes too far. Traditional motifs shaped through collective creativity are part of humanity’s shared artistic heritage, she stated, and elements in the public domain may be utilised by anyone.Legal risk arises not from creators drawing on Chinese culture, but from trading on another company’s reputation or misleading consumers.Celine’s double-C “Chain Blason” logo draws inspiration from the chain’s surrounding Paris’ Arc de Triomphe, intriguingly mirroring China’s longevity character pattern — an emblematic symbol cherished in Qing dynasty (1644–1912) jade bracelets and embroideries. Photo: Handout“This reflects the differing subject matter protected by trademark and copyright law, rather than any inherent cultural bias in the law itself,” she elaborated.The lawyer also noted that China’s trademark regime generally follows a first-to-file principle and does not favour rights holders based on nationality. Louis Vuitton registered its signature monogram in China in 1986.The existence of a similar form in nature or ancient art does not automatically invalidate a modern trademark. For example, Wang pointed out that the technology company Apple does not have a monopoly over the use of apple imagery. Similarly, the Bank of China’s coin-shaped emblem does not grant it rights over every design inspired by ancient coins.The case raises a more important question for China’s legal community: whether such graphic marks should have been registered in the first place and how broadly they should be protected.Further ReadingHowever, legal doctrine alone does not explain why the ruling resonated so deeply in China.Xu Ruolan, a scholar at the National Cultural Industry Research Centre, told the SCMP that China’s rise has sharpened public awareness of its limited influence in shaping global rules on cultural intellectual property.Louis Vuitton’s iconic monogram, characterised by interlocking flowers and quatrefoils, was officially registered in 1905. Although the brand attributes its design to Japanese emblems of the Victorian era, it strikingly resembles China’s “Treasure Flower” pattern, which thrived during the Tang dynasty (618–907). Photo: HandoutChinese visual motifs have traversed civilisations for centuries through trade, war, migration, and religion. Xu noted that the West’s engagement with Eastern imagery has gradually shifted from “gaze and imagination” to “commercialisation and symbolisation.”Chinoiserie, or “Chinese style,” which flourished in 18th century France and Britain, is an early example. Drawing on Chinese, Japanese, and other Asian motifs, European designers transformed pagodas, gardens, bamboo, dragons, and floral patterns into a romanticised vision of the East rather than an accurate representation of Asian life.By the 20th century, film, fashion, and mass consumer culture placed such reinterpretations increasingly within the framework of the market. Xu cited Disney’s 1998 film Mulan, which framed the character’s decision to take her father’s place in the army as a Western tale of individual heroism, obscuring her filial and clan duty.Today, Xu stated, much of China’s visual heritage remains “exposed” because centuries-old traditions have not been translated into evidence recognised by modern trademark systems – an instance of “institutional cultural aphasia.”Consequently, disputes over ancient Chinese motifs often play out first in social media’s court of public opinion.In 2022, Dior faced protests over a pleated skirt accused of resembling the traditional Chinese mamianqun, or horse-face skirt. In 2025, Fendi removed promotional posts after facing criticism for labelling a bag design resembling a traditional Chinese knot as Korean-inspired.Traditional Chinese red knot buttons on patterned silk dresses frequently inspire Western fashion designs, showcasing the beautiful blend of cultures. Photo: ShutterstockHowever, institutional cultural aphasia does not render every visual similarity an act of plagiarism. For designers, the boundaries between borrowing, homage, and appropriation are often far less clear than social media verdicts suggest.Alan Yang, a Berlin-based Chinese architect speaking under a pseudonym, noted that no design culture develops in isolation.He referenced the European-style palaces at Beijing’s Old Summer Palace and Guangdong’s diaolou towers, where foreign forms were adapted to local climates, materials, and building practices. The result, he argued, is not imitation but a hybrid architecture with its own identity.Yang suggested that reworking old forms through new narratives could be seen as “cultural reinvention.” The distinction between reinvention and plagiarism, he added, depends on whether a design merely borrows visual elements or replicates the creative logic behind them.For cultural scholars, China’s more urgent task is to revitalise its visual heritage through stronger systems.The persimmon calyx pattern has been a cornerstone of Chinese structural ornamentation for thousands of years, as seen in the traditional window screen pictured above. Photo: HandoutXu explained that China has started digitising traditional motifs and artefacts, with the goal of providing each with a searchable “identity card” documenting its age, cultural origins, licensing status, and value.She advocated for making these digital archives accessible through global bodies, including the World Intellectual Property Organisation, allowing trademark examiners to consult verified historical records.Furthermore, China should play a more significant role in shaping international rules designed to protect traditional cultural expressions, she added, collaborating with other developing countries to promote reform.Overseas examples also provide potential models for China.India established the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library, cataloguing Ayurveda, Siddha medicine, and yoga in formats accessible to patent examiners worldwide.Scotland launched an official tartan register in 2009 to document existing patterns and register new designs.Gucci’s GG monogram channels the artistry of Bronze Age Chinese designs, notably found on Warring States hu vessels, bridging ancient traditions with modern luxury. Photo: HandoutAt the same time, some insiders cautioned that a greater freedom to reinterpret tradition should not result in cultural expression being reduced to a collage of motifs and symbols.Fung Cheungchung, a Chinese fashion designer based in Belgium, told the SCMP that efforts to protect traditional culture should not dictate how creators articulate their identities.A designer’s cultural background, he argued, should not be simplified to a set of symbols instantly recognisable as “Chinese.” Instead, cultural experiences can be explored through contemporary issues that resonate across societies.