Labubu Infringement Case Decided: The Lure of 100x Price Arbitrage—3D Printing Enthusiasts Beware the "10,000 CNY Bill"

The soaring popularity of Labubu—now selling for close to CNY 1,000—has met the friction of reality: anyone with a desktop 3D printer and a few CNY’s worth of filament can replicate it at home. As rapid prototyping becomes mainstream, intellectual property awareness is being tested in the fast-moving current of technological convenience.

Case Ruling Highlights Emerging Legal Front in 3D Printing IP

On June 18, 2025, the first official court ruling involving Labubu’s copyright was made public. The defendant had displayed and sold products based on Pop Mart’s “Labubu” art design in an online shop without authorization, thereby infringing on the company’s rights of distribution and online communication. Although Pop Mart could not provide exact loss figures and the defendant failed to appear in court, the judge awarded damages of CNY 10,000 at the court’s discretion.

This case was filed in December 2024, indicating that Pop Mart had already begun laying the groundwork for rights enforcement last year. Meanwhile, in both domestic and international 3D printing communities, Labubu model files have been downloaded hundreds of times. Some enthusiasts have replicated the character for as little as CNY 3 in material costs—and others have profited tens of thousands by selling prints. Now, such actions may be under direct legal scrutiny, as Pop Mart is likely conducting notarized evidence collection in preparation for further lawsuits.

△Multi-color Labubu figurines reproduced via 3D printing

Labubu’s resale value can exceed CNY 1,000, with Western collectors paying premiums and celebrities promoting it as a kind of “social currency.” Pop Mart’s spiky-toothed “plastic Maotai” has triggered global frenzy.

But the cost comparison is staggering: one kilogram of PLA filament costs less than CNY 40, and printing a 13.4 cm-tall Labubu consumes less than 100 grams of material—meaning the cost is under CNY 4. That’s a more than 100x difference from the original retail price.

△Platforms like MakerWorld, Cults3D, and Creality Cloud have seen high download volumes for Labubu models

It is likely, Panda3dp.com speculates, that Labubu model files on platforms like MakerWorld and Cults3D will soon be taken down. While private, one-off prints for personal use exist in a legal gray area, mass production and sales clearly constitute infringement.

IP Awareness and the Fragility of Copyright in the 3D Printing Era

This case underscores how deeply complex intellectual property protection for designer toys has become. A single figure may involve character copyright, design patents, and trademarks. Add to this the frequent model modifications and derivative designs by fans, and infringement becomes increasingly difficult to define clearly.

The ruling serves as a public reminder of the structural boundaries of creative rights. Within enthusiast circles, however, IP considerations are often sidelined: freely shared model files, unauthorized physical reproductions, and blatant online sales are commonplace. In a world where digital tools allow anyone to produce a physical object from a model file, the traditional respect for intellectual property is dissolving—quietly, but decisively.

The line between "file" and "product" is vanishing. Once someone obtains a detailed Labubu model file—whether leaked or cracked—it takes only minutes to create a full physical replica. Even more concerning, the infringement risk occurs *before* the printer is turned on: unauthorized acquisition and distribution of the model file itself violates reproduction rights. While private home printing may remain ambiguous in legal terms, the moment an item enters mass production or online sale—especially on e-commerce platforms—clear violations of distribution and network communication rights occur.

The Broader Impact: Defining Legal Boundaries in the Digital Age

The implications of the Labubu case extend far beyond the CNY 10,000 fine. As digital files become physical objects, the boundaries of law must evolve. Every leap in manufacturing technology shifts the perimeter of civil responsibility. 3D printing has blurred—and in some cases, erased—the lines drawn by traditional copyright frameworks.

Going forward, it is imperative to protect creative work with both regulation and innovation. Only by fostering an environment where creation is encouraged but also responsibly protected can the digital manufacturing ecosystem support true coexistence between open sharing and original authorship.