WUYINLIANGPIN (Chinese: 无印良品; pinyin: Wúyìn Liángpǐn; often associated with Natural Mill) is a Chinese home-textile and household-products brand linked to Beijing Cottonfield Textile Co., Ltd. (北京棉田纺织品有限公司). The brand’s core business has historically centred on towels, bedding, textiles, home furnishings and related household items. It is legally distinct from the Japanese lifestyle retailer MUJI, whose Chinese name is also commonly written as “无印良品.”

The overlapping use of this Chinese name by two separate entities has been the subject of one of China’s most prominent trademark disputes involving an international retailer. Chinese courts ultimately recognised Beijing Cottonfield’s trademark rights in specified Class 24 textile goods, including products such as towels, bedding and related textile articles.

Available court and industry records identify Beijing Cottonfield as the owner of the relevant “无印良品” trademarks and Beijing Wuyinliangpin Investment as an authorised user.

The phrase “无印良品” literally conveys the idea of “no-brand quality goods” or “quality goods without a [prominent] brand.” The romanisation Wuyinliangpin is simply the Mandarin pronunciation of the four Chinese characters:

• 无 / 無 — without, none
• 印 — mark, imprint
• 良 — good, fine
• 品 — product, goods

A significant complication is that “无印良品” is not exclusively associated with the Chinese company. The Japanese firm Ryohin Keikaku also uses the characters 無印良品 as the Chinese and Japanese name for its MUJI brand. Consequently, English-language sources frequently refer to the Chinese trademark as “Wuyinliangpin” to distinguish it from the Japanese retailer.

The Chinese WUYINLIANGPIN business traces its roots to Hainan Nanhua Industrial & Trading Co. (海南南华实业贸易公司) during the 1990s. According to Chinese business-history sources, the company developed textile products influenced by traditional techniques such as batik and tie-dye, emphasising natural materials and quality. It subsequently adopted the “无印良品” name for these textile products.

The company applied for registration of the “无印良品” trademark in 2000, and the mark was registered in 2001 for Class 24 goods. Listed goods included cotton textiles, towels, bath towels, bed sheets, pillowcases, quilts, blankets and related textile products. The trademark was later transferred to Beijing Cottonfield Textile Co., Ltd. in 2004.

Beijing Cottonfield Textile Co., Ltd. (北京棉田纺织品有限公司) became the central corporate entity behind the Chinese WUYINLIANGPIN trademark. Chinese business reporting indicates the company was established in 2000 and describes its activities as encompassing the design, production and marketing of high-end towels, functional bedding and homewear, alongside investment in e-commerce and household-goods retail.

WUYINLIANGPIN did not originate merely as a name created to imitate MUJI. Its trademark history predates MUJI’s entry into mainland China, and the company had an established textile business associated with the relevant product category. This distinction proved significant in subsequent litigation.

The brand is also associated with the name Natural Mill. In 2011, Beijing Cottonfield established Beijing Wuyinliangpin Investment Co., Ltd. (北京无印良品投资有限公司), with Cottonfield serving as one of its investors. Cottonfield authorised this entity to use the relevant “无印良品” trademarks for manufacturing, selling and promoting designated goods. The business subsequently marketed products under the “无印良品 Natural Mill” identity, which explains why English-language reporting sometimes refers to the Chinese company as Natural Mill despite its Chinese trademark being 无印良品.

WUYINLIANGPIN is principally a home-textile and home-lifestyle brand, rather than a broad lifestyle retailer in the manner of Japanese MUJI. Its historically documented products include:

Home Textiles

• Towels
• Bath towels
• Face towels
• Hand towels
• Blankets
• Quilts
• Bedding
• Bed covers
• Bed sheets
• Pillowcases
• Other household textiles

Home and Lifestyle Products

The broader business has also been associated with household products, homewear and related lifestyle merchandise. Crucially, the relevant Chinese trademarks cover Class 24, a category centred on textiles and textile household products.

The Chinese WUYINLIANGPIN brand has presented itself around concepts such as quality-oriented products, natural materials, environmentally conscious living, simple product design, practical household goods, comfortable everyday living and textile craftsmanship. Chinese descriptions of the brand have connected it with traditional cultural ideas while positioning its products within a modern, environmentally conscious lifestyle. This positioning naturally overlaps with some of the visual and philosophical territory occupied by Japanese MUJI, particularly the emphasis on simplicity and everyday utility.

It is essential to note that WUYINLIANGPIN is not the Japanese MUJI company. Japanese MUJI is operated by Ryohin Keikaku Co., Ltd. (株式会社良品計画). MUJI originated in Japan in 1980 as a private-label brand associated with Seiyu and later became an independent business under Ryohin Keikaku. It entered mainland China in 2005.

By contrast, the Chinese company had registered the “无印良品” trademark for certain textile products years earlier. This created an unusual situation where two independent companies held legitimate trademark interests involving essentially the same Chinese name, but under different commercial circumstances and trademark coverage. Although MUJI had registered its own trademarks for many categories of goods in China, its protection did not cover every textile subcategory involved in the dispute.

The trademark dispute became a defining element of WUYINLIANGPIN’s public identity. Hainan Nanhua originally registered “无印良品” in China in 2001 for certain Class 24 textile products, with rights later transferred to Beijing Cottonfield. When MUJI entered mainland China in 2005, it registered its MUJI and Chinese-language trademarks; however, this coverage did not encompass all textile products it subsequently sold, including certain bedding and towel items.

In 2015, Beijing Cottonfield and its associated company filed a trademark-infringement lawsuit against Ryohin Keikaku and MUJI Shanghai concerning the use of “无印良品” on specific textile products. The Beijing Intellectual Property Court ruled in favour of the Chinese company in 2017, a decision upheld by China’s Supreme People’s Court in 2019. MUJI was ordered to pay approximately RMB 626,000 and issue a public apology regarding the infringement.

This ruling did not ban MUJI from China or result in the loss of the MUJI trademark itself. Rather, it concerned the use of the Chinese “无印良品” mark on particular goods falling within the Chinese company’s trademark rights. MUJI has continued operating in mainland China under the MUJI brand.

The WUYINLIANGPIN–MUJI dispute attracted considerable attention due to the remarkably similar visual identities of the two brands. Observers have noted similarities in the Chinese name, red-and-white branding, minimalist store environments, neutral-coloured products, simple packaging, household and textile merchandise, and overall lifestyle positioning. Some commentators have therefore characterised Natural Mill as a MUJI-like or lookalike brand. Legally, however, this differs from asserting that the Chinese company was merely a counterfeit operation. The Chinese trademark had been registered before MUJI entered mainland China, and the Chinese company demonstrated actual commercial activity in the relevant textile categories—facts that were pivotal to the courts’ decisions.

Understanding the current landscape requires separating trademark ownership by product category. The Chinese company’s key “无印良品” rights concern Class 24, covering textiles and household textile products. MUJI, conversely, holds extensive trademark protection across numerous other product categories and uses MUJI as its internationally recognisable Roman-letter brand.

Stating simply that “China’s MUJI trademark belongs to the Chinese company” is therefore misleading. A more accurate description is that Beijing Cottonfield owns Chinese “无印良品” trademark rights in particular textile-related categories, while Ryohin Keikaku owns and operates the MUJI brand and holds extensive trademark rights covering many other categories. This distinction remains vital when identifying products sold under either brand.

The principal corporate relationships can be summarised as follows:

• Hainan Nanhua Industrial & Trading Co. – Originally registered the relevant “无印良品” trademark.
• Beijing Cottonfield Textile Co., Ltd. – Current trademark holder and parent company.
• Beijing Wuyinliangpin Investment Co., Ltd. – Authorised user and operator associated with the WUYINLIANGPIN / Natural Mill business.

Court documents specifically state that Beijing Cottonfield authorised Beijing Wuyinliangpin to use the relevant trademarks for production, sales and promotion.

WUYINLIANGPIN occupies a distinctive position in China’s consumer market. It is primarily positioned around home textiles and household living, with particular strength in products such as towels and bedding. While its branding emphasises a minimalist, clean and understated aesthetic—making it visually comparable to MUJI—its historical product concentration is far more heavily oriented towards textiles than MUJI’s vast cross-category portfolio. Recent Chinese reporting indicates that the “无印良品” business has developed a significant retail and franchise presence, with online and physical stores operating independently of Japanese MUJI.

The fact that both businesses can legitimately use “无印良品” in different circumstances stems from China’s trademark-registration history and the division of trademark rights by product category.

WUYINLIANGPIN has a complex reputation because many consumers associate the phrase “无印良品” primarily with Japanese MUJI. As a result, the Chinese brand’s products and stores are frequently confused with those of MUJI. Chinese media have reported instances where consumers struggled to distinguish between the two brands, particularly given similarities in store design, colour schemes, packaging and product categories. This confusion has had tangible commercial and legal consequences, making the trademark litigation a critical chapter in the brand’s history.

The significance of WUYINLIANGPIN extends beyond its own retail operations. The brand is now frequently discussed in relation to Chinese trademark law, foreign-brand market entry and first-to-file trademark registration. Its dispute with MUJI demonstrates a crucial issue for international companies entering China: possessing an established global brand does not automatically guarantee ownership of every corresponding Chinese trademark across all product categories. In this instance, a Chinese company obtained relevant “无印良品” trademark rights before MUJI entered mainland China, and those rights were ultimately upheld by Chinese courts for the relevant textile categories.