Muji Loses Trademark Battle in China, Barred from Using “Muji” Brand Name

Beijing – In a major blow to the Japanese retail chain, Muji has lost a protracted trademark lawsuit in China, effectively barring the company from using its iconic brand name in the country for certain products. The ruling, finalized on August 27, 2025, stems from a long-standing dispute over intellectual property rights.

The Trademark Dispute Explained

The core of the legal battle centers around the registration of the “Muji” trademark in China. A Chinese entity had previously registered the trademark, precluding Muji from its continued use. Reports indicate that the initial registration predates Muji’s meaningful expansion into the chinese market. This legal challenge highlights the complexities of Intellectual Property protection in China and the importance of proactive trademark registration.

The legal outcome has already begun to impact Muji’s presence on the mainland.Several business districts have already dropped the brand, leading to widespread store closures. According to recent reports, the brand previously faced difficulties in 2023 after experiencing a 3.8 billion yuan loss but had begun a recovery, boasting over 1,300 stores globally.

Impact on Retail Operations

The immediate consequence of the ruling is the restriction on the use of the “Muji” name for specific product lines. This forces Muji to explore alternative branding strategies for its Chinese market offerings, a potentially costly and complex undertaking. Some analysts suggest that Muji may need to rebrand entirely,which would involve significant marketing investment and could risk brand recognition and consumer loyalty.

Aspect	Details
Legal Ruling	Muji lost the trademark lawsuit.
Trademark Status	“Muji” trademark already registered by a Chinese entity.
Impact	Restricted use of “Muji” branding in China.
Store Closures	Reported closures in multiple business districts.

“Did You Know?”: China operates on a ‘first-to-file’ trademark system, meaning the first entity to register a trademark generally owns the rights, regardless of prior usage elsewhere.

Looking Ahead: Muji’s Potential Strategies

Despite this setback, Muji isn’t abandoning the Chinese market entirely. The company is reportedly exploring legal avenues to challenge the ruling and negotiate with the trademark holder. furthermore, it is likely to recalibrate its market strategy, potentially focusing on alternative branding or emphasizing product quality and innovation as a differentiator. A Pro Tip: Companies expanding into China should prioritize complete trademark registration and monitoring to avoid similar disputes.

The situation serves as a cautionary tale for international brands operating in China, underscoring the critical importance of securing intellectual property rights early on. The case also has broader implications for the enforcement of trademark laws in the region.

Understanding Trademark Law in china

China’s trademark laws have evolved significantly in recent years, but challenges remain. The ‘first-to-file’ system creates a competitive landscape for trademark registration, and the enforcement of intellectual property rights can be complex. Foreign companies should engage legal counsel with expertise in Chinese trademark law to navigate these challenges effectively.

Frequently Asked Questions about the Muji Trademark Dispute

• What caused Muji to loose the trademark case in China? A Chinese entity had previously registered the “Muji” trademark, preempting Muji’s claim.
• what are the immediate consequences of this ruling? Muji is restricted from using the “Muji” name for certain products in China, leading to potential rebranding efforts.
• Is Muji leaving China? No, Muji is exploring legal options and alternative strategies to continue operating in the Chinese market.
• What does this mean for other foreign brands in China? This case highlights the importance of proactive trademark registration and diligent intellectual property protection.
• What is a ‘first-to-file’ trademark system? It is a system where the first applicant to register a trademark generally owns the rights, regardless of prior use.

What are your thoughts on Muji’s strategy moving forward? Do you believe this trademark dispute will significantly impact their brand image in China?

What strategic errors led to Muji losing the trademark dispute in China, and what proactive measures could they have taken to avoid this outcome?

The Landmark Ruling: What Happened?

In a meaningful blow to the Japanese retail giant, Muji (無印良品) has lost a long-standing trademark dispute in China. As of August 27, 2025, the Beijing High People’s Court has upheld a previous ruling preventing Muji from using its iconic “muji” (無印良品) brand name in the country.This decision stems from a case initiated in 2019 by a Chinese businessman,Zhao Guojun,who registered the “無印良品” trademark in 2011 – before Muji officially sought trademark protection in China for that specific Chinese translation.

The core of the dispute revolves around the Chinese translation of the Muji brand name. while Muji had registered trademarks in China using the romanized “MUJI,” it failed to secure the rights to the Chinese characters “無印良品” until after Zhao Guojun’s registration. Chinese trademark law prioritizes the first to register, nonetheless of prior international recognition.This is a critical lesson for international brands expanding into the Chinese market.

Implications for Muji’s Operations in China

This ruling has immediate and far-reaching consequences for Muji’s operations across mainland China.

Brand Name Restrictions: Muji is now legally barred from using “無印良品” on its products, stores, and online platforms.

Rebranding Efforts: The company is forced to undertake a costly and complex rebranding exercise,potentially adopting alternative names or variations.Reports suggest they are currently using “MUJI” (romanized) and a modified logo in some locations.

Potential for Counterfeiting: The loss of the trademark creates an possibility for counterfeiters to exploit the brand’s popularity, potentially selling fake products under the “無印良品” name.

Financial Impact: The rebranding and potential loss of market share are expected to have a significant financial impact on Muji’s Chinese operations.

The Role of Trademark Law in China: A Cautionary Tale

This case highlights the unique challenges of intellectual property protection in China. Several key aspects of Chinese trademark law contributed to this outcome:

First-to-File System: China operates on a “first-to-file” trademark system, meaning the first entity to register a trademark has priority, even if another party has prior use or international recognition.

Trademark Squatting: This practice, where individuals or companies register trademarks solely to sell them to the legitimate brand owner at a profit, is common in China. Zhao Guojun reportedly offered to sell the trademark to Muji for a substantial sum, which the company refused.

Importance of Chinese Character Registration: International brands must proactively register their brand names in Chinese characters before entering the market.Relying solely on romanized trademarks is insufficient.

Muji’s Response and Future Strategy

muji has expressed disappointment with the court’s decision and has indicated it will continue to explore all available legal options. Tho, the likelihood of overturning the ruling is slim.

Currently, Muji is focusing on:

Utilizing the “MUJI” Romanized Trademark: Leveraging its existing registration of the romanized “MUJI” trademark.

Developing Alternative Branding: Exploring alternative branding strategies to maintain brand recognition and customer loyalty.

Strengthening IP Protection: Taking proactive steps to protect its intellectual property rights in China, including registering additional trademarks and actively monitoring for counterfeiting.

Focusing on Product Quality: Reinforcing its reputation for high-quality, minimalist design to differentiate itself from potential imitators.

Real-world Examples & Similar Cases

Muji isn’t alone in facing trademark challenges in China. Several other international brands have encountered similar issues:

New Balance: Faced a lengthy legal battle over its Chinese name, “New Balance,” ultimately reaching a settlement with a local sportswear company.

Apple: Lost a trademark dispute over the “iPad” name in China, forcing them to pay a settlement to a local electronics manufacturer.

Louis Vuitton: Has consistently battled counterfeiters and trademark squatters in China, investing heavily in IP protection.

these cases underscore the importance of a robust IP strategy when operating in the Chinese market