Chinese toy giant Pop Mart has filed a Bambu Lab MakerWorld Labubu copyright lawsuit at the People’s Court of Pudong New Area in Shanghai, targeting the world’s most active 3D model sharing platform over user-uploaded replicas of its blockbuster character Labubu. The trial is scheduled for April 2, 2026. At the heart of the case is a question that has never been clearly answered in the 3D printing industry: when users upload copyrighted content to a platform, where does the platform’s legal responsibility begin — and end?
Pop Mart Takes Bambu Lab MakerWorld Labubu Copyright Lawsuit to Shanghai Court
Pop Mart filed the suit against Bambu Lab (深圳拓竹科技有限公司) and its subsidiaries, including Shenzhen Maker World Technology and Shanghai Contour Technology. The complaint centers on thousands of Labubu 3D model files that users had uploaded and shared freely on MakerWorld — none of which were created or uploaded by Bambu Lab itself.
MakerWorld, launched in 2023, has grown into the world’s largest 3D model sharing community by monthly active users, hosting over one million models across categories ranging from home furnishings to toys and figurines, with nearly 10 million monthly active users. Bambu Lab itself was founded in 2020 by former members of drone giant DJI and has since grown into a unicorn company.
Labubu, meanwhile, is no minor IP. The character surged to global fame in 2025, accounting for more than 30% of Pop Mart’s total sales revenue that year. Chinese customs authorities seized 1.83 million counterfeit Labubu products in 2025 alone, underscoring the commercial stakes involved.
Following the lawsuit, Bambu Lab moved quickly to remove all Pop Mart-related models from MakerWorld. However, an operational error during the mass takedown resulted in a large number of completely unrelated models — including locksmithing tools, cable clips, and paint brush holders — being delisted alongside the infringing files. Bambu Lab subsequently apologized and restored most of the affected models.
Platform Liability and the Limits of Safe Harbor
The legal core of this case is whether a 3D model sharing platform can be held liable for copyright infringement committed by its users — a question that draws direct parallels to the early days of digital music sharing platforms such as Napster.
Legal experts in China have pointed out that as both the manufacturer of 3D printers and the operator of MakerWorld, Bambu Lab was in a position where it knew, or should have known, that users uploading and sharing 3D models of Labubu and other popular IPs on the platform would constitute copyright infringement. Pop Mart’s legal representatives argue that Bambu Lab violated its reproduction, distribution, and information network dissemination rights over the Labubu character.
Bambu Lab is expected to invoke the “safe harbor” principle in its defense — the legal doctrine under which platform operators are shielded from liability if they were unaware of infringing content, or acted swiftly to remove it upon notification. However, the fact that Bambu Lab only removed the content after the lawsuit was filed — rather than proactively — significantly weakens this argument. At the scale of 10 million monthly active users, and with Labubu being one of the most talked-about IPs globally in 2025, claiming ignorance is a difficult position to sustain.
Broader Implications for China’s 3D Printing Industry
The Pop Mart vs. Bambu Lab case is not an isolated dispute. Similar issues have been identified across competing platforms: Creality’s Creality Cloud, ELEGOO’s Nexprint, and Anycubic’s MakerOnline have all been reported to host unauthorized models based on popular IPs. Even beyond 3D printing, laser engraving machine maker xTool’s community platform Atomm has seen users openly sharing print designs of Nintendo’s Pikachu and Disney characters from Zootopia.
The irony of Bambu Lab’s position is difficult to overlook. In October 2025, the company itself initiated legal action against Creality Cloud, Nexprint, and MakerOnline for allegedly hosting unauthorized reuploads of models originally published by creators on MakerWorld. Bambu Lab was simultaneously pursuing copyright enforcement for its own ecosystem while allowing other IP holders’ content to circulate freely on its platform.
Industry analysts point to a structural risk embedded in the “hardware + ecosystem” business model that has driven growth across China’s consumer 3D printing sector. Platforms have built massive user bases partly on the appeal of freely available models based on popular culture IPs. As monthly active user counts climb into the tens of millions, the commercial damage to original IP holders becomes material — and the “personal use” argument loses its legal footing.
For companies like Creality and Anycubic that are in the process of going public, IP liability risks in their platform ecosystems may increasingly attract scrutiny from investors and regulators alike.
AM Insight Asia Perspective
The contradiction at the heart of the growth model: This lawsuit exposes a fundamental tension in consumer 3D printing’s growth story. Platforms like MakerWorld built their massive user bases partly on the appeal of printable pop culture content. At 10 million monthly active users, the “gray area” argument is no longer a credible defense against IP holders who have the resources and motivation to pursue legal action.
A warning for Asia’s 3D printing industry: This case is not simply a bilateral dispute between two Chinese companies — it is a signal to the broader 3D printing industry across Asia. With Creality, ELEGOO, and Anycubic facing similar scrutiny, the “hardware + ecosystem” model must now clearly define where platform responsibility ends and user freedom begins. The question is no longer theoretical.
A legal turning point: The April 2 trial could set a precedent that reshapes how 3D printing companies across Asia — and globally — design and moderate their model-sharing communities. A ruling that holds platform operators liable for user-uploaded copyrighted content would fundamentally alter the risk calculus for every major player in the space.
Bambu Lab should have acted before the lawsuit: Perhaps the most damaging aspect of Bambu Lab’s position is not the lawsuit itself, but the sequence of events that led to it. Labubu was one of the most globally visible IPs of 2025. Thousands of Labubu files circulated on MakerWorld. At that scale, claiming ignorance is not a viable defense. Bambu Lab only acted after Pop Mart filed suit — not before. Meanwhile, the company had no hesitation in pursuing legal action against competing platforms for hosting unauthorized versions of content from its own creator community. This double standard — aggressively protecting its own ecosystem while allowing other IP holders’ rights to go unenforced — may prove to be Bambu Lab’s most difficult argument to answer in court on April 2.
