Trademark descriptiveness: top 10 words in cosmetics that might get your trademark rejected

Trademarks are the words, logos, phrases, or symbols that make a brand instantly recognizable. They help customers tell your business apart from others in the market. Think of Apple’s bitten apple logo, McDonald’s catchy slogan “I’m Lovin’ It,” or Verizon’s bold brand name. These are all trademarks that signal a specific company and its reputation.

A trademark can take many forms: it might be just a word, an image, a sound, or a mix of these elements. It’s closely tied to your brand identity and shapes how people recognize and remember your business. By registering a trademark, you're legally protecting those distinctive brand elements from being copied or misused.

Without proper protection, competitors could imitate your brand’s key features, potentially confusing customers or damaging your reputation. A registered trademark gives you the legal right to stop others from using similar branding and helps keep your business identity secure.

Descriptive trademarks are essentially brand names that refer directly to the nature or quality of the goods or services offered. For example, a car dealership simply named “Fast Cars” would have a difficult time registering that mark. While they may sound intuitive, these names are generally not registrable because they lack the key requirement of distinctiveness.

Distinctive elements are all of the elements that make your brand name or brand identity unique. Whether that's having an arbitrary brand name, unique visual elements in your logo, or even more specific things like sounds or colors, these are all of the things that consumers associated with your brand specifically.

However, as consumers, we've gotten so used to descriptors in certain industries, to the point where they become meaningless in a brand name and might only signal the industry in which that brand operates. Here are 10 such examples in the cosmetics industry:

Hydrating

“Hydrating” is a common term used to describe the moisturizing effect of skincare products. Trademark offices often reject it for lacking distinctiveness, as consumers naturally associate the term with water-based benefits. In a notable EU case, the mark HYDRABIO was deemed too descriptive because it combined “hydra” (hydration) with “bio” (natural), both of which are seen as generic indicators of product function and character.

Radiance

The word “Radiance” is frequently used in marketing to suggest glowing, healthy-looking skin. However, that very popularity works against it in trademark law. Because the term directly refers to a desirable result of cosmetic use, it’s often flagged as descriptive and not inherently distinctive without secondary meaning.

Natural

“Natural” is one of the most commonly used (and rejected) descriptors in beauty and wellness branding. It speaks to the origin or purity of a product’s ingredients, making it highly generic. To succeed with a trademark using “Natural,” applicants typically need to provide strong evidence that consumers associate the term uniquely with their brand.

Creamy

Although more often rejected in food categories like yogurt or cheese, “Creamy” can also pose challenges in cosmetics. The term refers to texture or consistency, i.e. qualities that are often sought after in lotions or serums. Since it describes a physical characteristic of the product, it’s usually considered too descriptive to function as a trademark on its own.

Soothing

“Soothing” directly describes a calming or anti-irritation effect, which is a major selling point in skincare. Because it communicates the intended result rather than indicating a unique source, it’s likely to be rejected under Section 2(e)(1) of the Lanham Act in the U.S., unless the brand can prove acquired distinctiveness.

Gentle

“Gentle” is commonly used in cosmetics and personal care to suggest mildness, especially for sensitive skin. While it may seem appealing in marketing, it lacks trademark strength. The term describes product quality rather than origin and is often viewed as merely laudatory or descriptive.

Revitalizing

Often used to imply energy or skin renewal, “Revitalizing” is another functional term. It tells consumers exactly what the product claims to do (revive or refresh), which undermines its ability to serve as a unique brand identifier. Like others on this list, it generally needs strong secondary meaning to qualify for protection.

Soft Touch

The phrase “Soft Touch” has been deemed descriptive by the USPTO for products like textiles and apparel, and the same logic applies to skincare. If it merely describes the texture or feel of a lotion or cream, it doesn’t qualify as distinctive. Without creative branding or market recognition, it likely won’t pass the trademark bar.

Brightening

“Brightening” clearly communicates the intended cosmetic effect, making skin look lighter or more luminous. While attractive to consumers, that transparency makes it problematic from a trademark standpoint. It’s considered a generic, functional term and not capable of identifying a specific brand without extensive evidence of secondary meaning.

Pure

The word “Pure” is often used to indicate the absence of harmful additives or the simplicity of ingredients. However, it’s one of the most overused and weak descriptors in both food and skincare. U.S. and EU trademark offices routinely reject it as being too generic to distinguish one product from another, especially without additional distinctive elements.

But, now that we know what doesn't work, what can you do to make your trademark more distinctive?

To improve your chances of securing trademark protection, especially in the crowded and highly descriptive field of cosmetics, we recommend choosing a brand name that is more distinctive. Descriptive terms like “Hydrating” or “Brightening” may communicate your product’s benefits clearly, but they don’t help distinguish your brand in a legal sense. Trademark offices generally prefer names that go beyond literal descriptions. These stronger, more distinctive names usually fall into three main categories:

These names hint at a product’s qualities or benefits without stating them outright. They require a mental leap from the consumer, which helps them qualify as distinctive under trademark law. For example, “Netflix” suggests a digital or entertainment-related experience, but it doesn’t directly say “streaming service.” In cosmetics, a suggestive name might allude to beauty, rejuvenation, or transformation without plainly describing it—for instance, “Glowelle” or “Skinology.”

These names use terms borrowed from unrelated contexts, which makes them more unique and protectable. “Amazon” has nothing to do with online shopping in its original context, but now it’s synonymous with e-commerce. In the cosmetics space, metaphorical names like “Milk” (a skincare brand) or “Drunk Elephant” (which evokes curiosity rather than clarity) work well because they evoke emotion or imagery without describing ingredients or functions.

These are entirely made-up words with no dictionary definition. Think “Kodak,” “Zynga,” or “Glossier.” They offer the highest level of distinctiveness and are the easiest to trademark, provided they’re not too hard to remember or pronounce. In cosmetics, coined terms often blend syllables from relevant concepts to feel familiar without being descriptive (e.g., “L’Occitane” or “Aesop”).

By steering away from overly descriptive or generic terms and leaning into creativity, metaphor, or invention, your brand stands a much better chance of securing exclusive rights and standing out on the shelf.

If your trademark directly refers to your product’s qualities, like “Soothing,” “Creamy,” or “Natural,” the trademark office may view it as too generic. These terms describe the product rather than distinguish your brand, which fails the key legal test of distinctiveness.

Yes, but only under certain conditions. You’ll need to prove that your brand has acquired secondary meaning. In other words, that consumers associate the word with your brand specifically. This usually requires long-term use, advertising, and consumer recognition.

Trademark offices favor names that don’t describe the product directly. Suggestive names (like “Skinology”), metaphorical ones (like “Milk”), or coined words (like “Glossier”) tend to perform better in registration. These names feel unique, stand out in the marketplace, and pass legal scrutiny more easily.