Is Your Mark Too Descriptive? Understanding Section 7(1)(c) for Singapore Applications

One of the most common reasons for refusal of a trade mark application in Singapore is descriptiveness. Under Section 7(1)(c) of the Trade Marks Act, a mark that consists exclusively of signs or indications describing the goods or services cannot be registered. The rationale is straightforward: descriptive terms must remain free for all traders to use, and no single business should be able to monopolise the vocabulary of its industry.

The Legal Standard: Section 7(1)(c)

Section 7(1)(c) provides that a trade mark shall not be registered if it consists exclusively of signs or indications which may serve, in trade, to designate the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, the time of production of goods or of rendering of services, or other characteristics of goods or services.

The key word is “exclusively.” If the mark does nothing more than describe a characteristic of the goods or services, it fails this test. The provision ensures that the basic language of commerce remains available to all competitors.

What “Merely Descriptive” Means

A mark is merely descriptive when the relevant public — typically the average consumer in Singapore — would immediately and without further thought perceive the sign as providing information about the goods or services, rather than identifying a particular commercial source.

The assessment is made with reference to the specific goods or services in the application. A word may be perfectly registrable for one category of products but descriptive for another. For example, the word “TABLET” would likely be refused for pharmaceutical products but could be acceptable for toys.

Common Types of Descriptive Marks

Descriptive marks typically fall into the following categories:

• Quality or characteristic descriptors: Terms like “Super Soft” for blankets, “Ultra Clean” for cleaning products, or “Fast Charge” for electronic accessories.
• Intended purpose: Marks that describe what the product is for, such as “Pain Relief” for pharmaceutical preparations.
• Geographical origin: Terms such as “Singapore Coffee” or “Hokkaido Milk” that indicate where the goods come from or are associated with.
• Material or ingredient: Marks that identify what the product is made of, such as “Pure Silk” for textiles or “Aloe Vera” for skincare products.
• Time of production: Terms like “Morning Fresh” for bakery products or “Harvest Season” for agricultural goods.

The “Other Characteristics” Catch-All

The list of descriptive characteristics in Section 7(1)(c) is not exhaustive. The phrase “other characteristics” gives IPOS the authority to refuse marks that describe any attribute of the goods or services, even if that attribute is not specifically listed in the statute.

This catch-all provision has been applied to refuse marks describing, for example, the target audience of a product, its method of use, or a technical feature. In a recent IPOS decision, the abbreviation “IP-PA1” was refused for Class 3 goods because it merely described the active ingredient contained in the products, even though the term was primarily known to technical specialists.

The Perspective of the Average Consumer

The assessment of descriptiveness is made from the perspective of the average consumer of the relevant goods or services in Singapore. This consumer is deemed to be reasonably well-informed, observant, and circumspect. They do not conduct detailed linguistic analysis but do perceive the ordinary meaning of common words.

For specialised or professional goods, the relevant public may include professionals in that field. Technical terms that are descriptive to a specialist audience may therefore be refused, even if the general public would not understand them.

The Language Dimension in Singapore

Singapore’s multilingual population adds a layer of complexity. IPOS considers whether the mark is descriptive in any of the languages commonly understood in Singapore, including English, Mandarin, Malay, and Tamil. A word that is descriptive in Mandarin may be refused even if it has no meaning in English, if the relevant public includes Mandarin-speaking consumers.

English, as the primary language of commerce, receives particular scrutiny. Basic English words that describe product attributes are almost certain to face objections.

Descriptiveness vs. Suggestiveness

Not every mark that alludes to the goods is descriptive. There is an important distinction between a descriptive mark and a suggestive one. A suggestive mark hints at the nature of the goods but requires the consumer to take a mental leap to understand the connection. Suggestive marks are registrable because they function as identifiers of origin rather than descriptions of the product.

For example, “JAGUAR” for cars is suggestive (evoking speed and power) rather than descriptive (it does not describe a characteristic of cars). “SPEEDY DELIVERY” for courier services, on the other hand, is likely descriptive because it directly communicates the service’s key attribute.

The Escape Route: Acquired Distinctiveness

Under Section 7(2) of the Trade Marks Act, a descriptive mark may still be registered if the applicant can prove that it has acquired a distinctive character as a result of use before the date of the application. This exception is explored in detail in a separate article on acquired distinctiveness.

However, applicants should be aware that this is a high evidentiary bar. IPOS requires evidence of use specifically in Singapore, and proof must demonstrate that the relevant public now perceives the sign as a trade mark rather than a description.

Common Mistakes

• Choosing a name that “tells people what we do”: While this seems like good marketing, it is the definition of a descriptive mark that cannot be registered.
• Assuming a combination of descriptive words is registrable: Two descriptive words combined (e.g., “Fresh Juice”) remain descriptive if the combination merely describes the product.
• Ignoring Singapore’s multilingual context: A mark may be distinctive in English but descriptive in Mandarin, Malay, or Tamil.
• Relying on stylisation to save a descriptive word: Adding a font or colour to a descriptive word mark does not overcome the objection if the word itself is the dominant element and remains descriptive.

Key Takeaway

Section 7(1)(c) exists to keep the language of trade free for all competitors. A mark that merely describes the goods or services — their quality, purpose, origin, or any other characteristic — will be refused registration. The safest strategy is to choose marks that are arbitrary or fanciful in relation to the goods, avoiding the costly and uncertain path of trying to register words that belong to everyone.