Many founders assume that inventing a completely new word is the safest path to trademark registration. After all, if a word doesn’t exist in the dictionary, how could it possibly conflict with existing brands or be considered descriptive?
In the UK, that assumption regularly proves wrong.
The UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) is often more skeptical of invented words than applicants anticipate, and many trademark refusals come as a surprise precisely because the brand name feels “made up.”
So why does UKIPO treat coined terms with such caution?
Invented Doesn’t Automatically Mean Distinctive
UK trademark law doesn’t reward creativity for its own sake. What matters is how a word functions in the mind of the average consumer, not whether it appears in a dictionary.
If an invented word clearly hints at the nature, purpose, or characteristics of the goods or services, UKIPO may still consider it insufficiently distinctive.
For example, a newly coined word that sounds technical, medical, eco-friendly, or digital may be seen as a clever variation of common industry language rather than a true badge of origin.
In other words, invention alone is not enough. Distinctiveness must be perceived, not declared.
The “Too Close for Comfort” Problem
Another reason UKIPO is strict with invented words is phonetic and visual similarity.
Even when a word is technically new, it may be rejected if it resembles existing trademarks in sound, structure, or rhythm. UKIPO examiners pay close attention to how a word would be pronounced aloud, remembered, or misheard.
A minor spelling change or creative twist does not guarantee safety. If the invented word feels like a variation of something already on the register, UKIPO may see a real risk of consumer confusion.
From a legal perspective, originality is less important than clear separation.
Invented Words Can Still Be Descriptive
This is one of the most misunderstood aspects of UK trademark practice.
A coined term can still be descriptive if it is immediately understandable. If consumers can quickly decode the meaning of the word — even subconsciously — UKIPO may conclude that the mark simply describes what the business does.
This often happens with:
Tech-inspired names
“Green” or sustainability-related terms
Health, wellness, and AI branding
Compound invented words built from familiar roots
The more effort UKIPO believes consumers need to identify the brand (rather than the product), the stronger the trademark.
UKIPO’s Consumer-Centric Approach
UKIPO places significant weight on consumer perception, sometimes more than applicants expect.
The question examiners ask is not:
“Is this word invented?”
But rather:
“Will consumers see this as a brand, or merely as information?”
If the invented word feels like a product feature, a category label, or a trend-based term, it may fail — regardless of how creative it looks on paper.
The Strategic Mistake Applicants Keep Making
Many businesses choose invented words specifically to avoid legal risk. Ironically, this can backfire.
Applicants often:
Skip deeper clearance searches
Assume invented words are “automatically registrable”
Underestimate the importance of context and industry norms
UKIPO’s stricter stance exists precisely because invented words are not neutral. They live within language, trends, and consumer expectations.
What Actually Works Better
In practice, the strongest trademarks in the UK are not always the most unusual-looking words, but the ones that:
Don’t describe the product or service
Don’t echo existing market language
Require imagination to connect to the goods
Feel arbitrary rather than clever
Sometimes, a simple, unexpected word performs better than a carefully engineered invention.
Final Thought
UKIPO’s approach to invented words isn’t about limiting creativity. It’s about ensuring that trademarks genuinely function as indicators of origin — not as disguised descriptions.
Inventing a word is only the beginning.
Making it legally distinctive is the real challenge.
