According to the final judgment of the Jiangsu Provincial High People's Court (2025) Su Min Zhong No. 519), Mengniu Company was found to have engaged in unfair competition for using packaging and decoration on its "Selected Ranch" pure milk products that were highly similar to Yili's "Jindian" pure milk. The court ruled that Mengniu should immediately cease its infringement behavior and compensate Yili for economic losses and reasonable expenses totaling 5 million yuan. In addition, Yili requested that Mengniu publish a statement in media outlets such as China Intellectual Property News and Rule of Law Daily to eliminate any negative impact.
1、 Frequent infringement incidents
2015 "Future Star" dispute:
Mengniu has launched the "Future Star" yogurt drink, which has packaging similar to Yili's "QQ Star" product. The Haidian District Court of Beijing ruled that Mengniu constituted unfair competition and ordered it to stop infringing and compensate Yili more than 2 million yuan.
Dispute over "Modern Animal Husbandry" in 2023:
Yili sues Mengniu's Modern Dairy Company for infringement of pure milk packaging decoration. Mengniu changed the packaging and paid a compensation of 980000 yuan after the first trial, and the two parties reached a settlement.
Trademark dispute in 2010:
Mengniu has applied for registration of the "Qiaochuzi" trademark, which is highly similar to the "Qiaolezi" trademark of Yili. The Trademark Office has ruled not to approve the registration of the Mengniu trademark.
2、 Packaging similarity analysis
Visual comparison:
Yili's "Jindian" (launched in 2006) and Mengniu's "Selected Ranch" (launched in 2013) both use green and white color schemes, ranch and cow elements, with highly similar overall layout. The court pointed out that Mengniu did not highlight the main trademark "Mengniu" on the front of the packaging, weakening the brand recognition.
Market Background:
As a high-end brand, Yili's "Jindian" has a sales revenue of over 20 billion yuan in 2024, accounting for more than 10% of the market share of room temperature white milk.
Mengniu argued that its packaging was a continuation of its own design, but the court did not adopt it.




3、 Consumer confusion evidence
Third party investigation report:
82.6% of respondents believe that the packaging of the two products is similar, mainly due to the overall visual effect and color similarity. 83.9% of respondents believe that there is a correlation between the two products.
Basis for court determination:
The main parts of the packaging and the overall visual effect are similar. Based on product awareness, confusion in sales scenarios, and actual consumer feedback, it is determined that Mengniu's behavior is likely to cause confusion among the public. Although Mengniu uses some prior elements, the overall design differences are significant, and the deliberate adherence to Yili packaging is established.
4、 Industry competition background
Comparison of Corporate Performance (First Half of 2024):
Yili's operating revenue was 61.933 billion yuan, with a net profit of 7.2 billion yuan. Mengniu's operating revenue was 41.567 billion yuan, with a net profit of 2.046 billion yuan, a year-on-year decrease of 6.95% and 16.37% respectively.
Differences in brand strategy:
Yili achieves multi category collaboration through sub brands such as "Jindian", with high gross profit brands contributing over 50% of revenue. Mengniu lacks a second growth curve, leading to a widening gap in performance compared to Yili.
Potential impacts of unfair competition:
Imitating packaging may mislead consumers, damage brand image and consumers' right to know and fair trade. If the infringing enterprise has quality control loopholes, it may violate the Product Quality Law or the Food Safety Law, posing a threat to consumer health.
5. Summary
This case has once again clarified the regulation of similar packaging and decoration behaviors through judicial judgment, reflecting the intensified competition among leading dairy enterprises in the high-end market. Intellectual property protection is not only a necessary measure to maintain market order, but also related to the protection of consumer rights and interests. Consumers' choice of branded products is essentially based on trust in brand reputation, product quality, and after-sales support. Some companies currently use unfair competition methods such as imitating packaging, product labeling, and names, which clearly have the intention of misleading consumers and causing them to mistakenly purchase non genuine products. Such behavior not only damages the brand image, but also infringes on consumers' rights to information, fair trade, and reasonable trust interests. In addition, companies engaged in trademark infringement often have loopholes in management standards and quality control. If their products violate the Product Quality Law or Food Safety Law, it will pose a potential threat to consumers' personal health. Strengthening intellectual property protection is not only necessary for maintaining market order, but also an important measure to safeguard consumer rights and interests.