What Is Registerability?
Understanding the Abercrombie distinctiveness spectrum and how the USPTO evaluates whether your mark qualifies for federal registration.
The Distinctiveness Spectrum
Not all trademarks are created equal. The strength of a trademark is measured on a spectrum of distinctiveness established by the landmark case Abercrombie & Fitch Co. v. Hunting World, Inc. From weakest to strongest, the five categories are: Generic, Descriptive, Suggestive, Arbitrary, and Fanciful. Where your mark falls on this spectrum determines whether it qualifies for federal registration — and how broad your legal protection will be.
Generic Marks
Generic terms identify a class of products or services rather than a particular source. The word "Computer" for computers, or "Coffee" for a coffee shop, can never function as a trademark because they are the common name for the product itself. Generic marks cannot be registered under any circumstances — granting exclusive rights to a common name would be anti-competitive.
Descriptive Marks
Descriptive marks describe an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of the goods or services. For example, "Cold and Creamy" for ice cream is descriptive. Descriptive marks cannot be registered on the Principal Register unless the applicant can demonstrate "acquired distinctiveness" — also called "secondary meaning" — meaning consumers have come to associate the term with a single source over time. This typically requires five or more years of substantially exclusive use.
Suggestive Marks
Suggestive marks hint at a quality or characteristic of the goods without directly describing them. The consumer must use imagination or thought to connect the mark with the product. Classic examples include COPPERTONE for suntan lotion (suggests copper-toned skin) and NETFLIX for streaming video (suggests internet movies). Suggestive marks are inherently distinctive and qualify for immediate registration.
Arbitrary Marks
Arbitrary marks use common words in unexpected contexts with no logical connection to the goods or services. APPLE for computers, AMAZON for e-commerce, and SHELL for gasoline are all arbitrary. These marks receive strong protection because consumers would never expect the word to relate to the product category.
Fanciful Marks
Fanciful marks are coined or invented terms that have no meaning outside of their use as a trademark. Examples include XEROX, KODAK, EXXON, and VERIZON. Fanciful marks receive the broadest protection of all because they are entirely unique — there is no possible argument that the term is merely descriptive or generic.
Why It Matters for Your Filing
Choosing a strong mark is one of the most impactful decisions you can make before filing. A mark that falls on the stronger end of the spectrum is more likely to be approved by the USPTO, less vulnerable to challenges from competitors, and easier to enforce against infringers. If your mark is on the weaker end, an attorney can evaluate whether it has enough distinctiveness to proceed or whether modifications could strengthen your position.
Disclaimer: This article provides general information about trademark law and is not legal advice. Every situation is unique, and the information here may not apply to your specific circumstances. Consult a licensed attorney for advice tailored to your situation.
Attorney filing includes an optional AI-powered registerability analysis that evaluates where your mark falls on the distinctiveness spectrum.
File a TrademarkMore Resources
What Is Likelihood of Confusion?
The DuPont factors explained: how the USPTO and courts determine whether two marks are too similar to coexist.
Trademark Opposition: What You Need to Know
When to file an opposition, what it costs, the timeline involved, and how to protect your brand before a conflicting mark registers.
Petitions to Cancel a Trademark
Grounds for cancellation, the process before the TTAB, costs, and when cancellation is the right strategy.
What Is a Trademark Specimen?
Requirements for acceptable specimens, types of specimens for goods vs. services, and common reasons for refusal.