Core Viewpoint - The olive essence incident has reshaped the responsibility boundaries in the beauty live-streaming sales industry, highlighting the need for accountability among brands and influencers [1] Group 1: Incident Overview - The olive essence controversy began in February 2024 when a beauty influencer claimed that CSS's olive essence products failed to meet ingredient standards, leading to widespread scrutiny [6][19] - Following the incident, CSS's domestic operator, Shanghai Jingyue, announced the termination of its partnership with the American brand and the closure of all official online stores in China due to lack of support [3][13] - The regulatory body fined Shanghai Jingyue 500,000 yuan for false advertising related to the olive essence product, marking a significant conclusion to the incident [8][15] Group 2: Brand and Market Impact - CSS, which previously achieved significant sales growth, reported a drop in market presence following the incident, with its sales figures declining from 1.8 billion yuan to uncertain levels [17][21] - The brand's domestic operator underwent several changes, including a shift in legal representation and ownership, indicating instability within the company [18] - The incident has led to a broader discussion about the responsibilities of influencers and brands in the live-streaming sales sector, with some industry leaders acknowledging the inevitability of product issues in a rapidly growing market [19][20] Group 3: Regulatory and Industry Response - The incident has prompted calls for clearer standards regarding ingredient testing and labeling in the beauty industry, particularly concerning plant-derived components [21] - Influencers and brands are now more cautious, with many opting to provide detailed ingredient information to mitigate regulatory risks [21] - The olive essence incident is seen as a pivotal moment in the live-streaming sales industry, potentially influencing future practices and regulations [19][20]

Core Viewpoint - The implementation of the "Private Economy Promotion Law" on May 20 marks a new phase in the protection of intellectual property rights for private enterprises in China, highlighted by the recent Supreme Court ruling in favor of Cottonfield Company regarding the "Muji" trademark dispute with Japan's Muji [2][6]. Group 1: Trademark Dispute Background - The trademark dispute between Cottonfield Company and Japan's Muji has lasted over 20 years, originating from Cottonfield's establishment in the 1990s and the registration of the "Muji" trademark in 2000 [3][4]. - Cottonfield's trademark was officially registered in 2004, while Japan's Muji had previously registered trademarks in other categories but not in the textile category [3][4]. - The Supreme Court confirmed the coexistence of the "Muji" trademarks in 2012, ruling that Japan's Muji could not prove its trademark's influence in mainland China for the textile category [4][5]. Group 2: Legal Developments - Despite the 2012 ruling, Japan's Muji continued to pursue trademark registration in the textile category, leading to a lengthy legal battle that culminated in another Supreme Court ruling on June 23, 2025, which upheld Cottonfield's trademark rights [5][6]. - Ongoing legal disputes remain between the two companies, particularly regarding the use of the "Muji" name in online and offline retail [5][6]. Group 3: Importance of Intellectual Property - The case exemplifies the significance of intellectual property rights for private enterprises in China, as emphasized by the new law that aims to enhance protection and support for innovation [6][7]. - Cottonfield's experience highlights the need for private companies to clearly define their market positioning and actively communicate their brand value to consumers [6][7]. Group 4: Company Strategy and Future Outlook - Cottonfield is focusing on technological development and high-quality products, achieving significant advancements in product performance, such as a towel that absorbs water in less than one second [7]. - The company has diversified into various sectors, including textiles, traditional Chinese medicine, and e-commerce, boasting over 1,000 proprietary intellectual properties and patents [7]. - Cottonfield anticipates revenue exceeding 5 billion yuan in 2024, driven by innovations such as the popular soybean fiber products developed during the pandemic [7].

日前，德勤《2025 全球零售力量》研究报告发布，该报告以 2023 年 7 月 - 2024 年 6 月财年数据为锚，勾勒出全球零售行业在复苏与压力交织下的发展脉 络。 当全球零售总收入创下 6.03 万亿美元（约合人民币 43.4 万亿 ）新高，当行业集中度持续攀升、业态与区域分化加剧，中国零售企业的 13 席身影，既承 载着内需市场的深厚底气，也折射出在全球竞争中破局的迫切与挑战。 全球零售全景：增长、分化与势力版图 | 地区 | 国家 | 公司数量 | 平均零售收入 (亿 元人民币) | 海外零售业务占比 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 非洲 / 中东 | 南非 | 4 | 563 | 16.40% | | 非洲 / 中东 | 干直演 | 3 | 512 | 4.30% | | 非洲 / 中东 | 阿拉伯联合酋长国 | 2 | 502 | 55.30% | | 亚太 | 日本 | 20 | 925 | 27.70% | | 亚太 | 中国(含港澳台) | 13 | 1677 | 18.10% | | 亚太 | 韩国 | 7 | 763 | 4.80% | | 亚 ...