Trademarks not only identify goods and services, but also represent a commercial value and a promise of quality for consumers, since their essential function is to indicate the business origin of a good or service, allowing consumers to identify the company from which they are purchasing and to distinguish it from other identical or similar goods on the market. However, there is a curious phenomenon: a trademark that was born to identify a good or service may, over time, become the common name by which that good or service is designated.[1]

This phenomenon is known as trademark genericization, which occurs when a trademark becomes so popular that consumers begin to use it to refer to the product in general, regardless of who makes it, ceasing to associate it with a specific manufacturer and relating it only to certain characteristics of the product or even to the entire category to which it belongs. [2]

For companies, this phenomenon represents a major challenge, because they must ensure that their trademark is still recognised as distinctive, even when it is very successful. When a trademark starts to be used as a common word, the company runs a significant risk of losing the exclusive rights to it.

Moreover, trademarks have an important commercial value for a company, and when their owner does not take measures to protect their use and prevent them from becoming a common term, it not only weakens their distinctive identity, but may also allow a third party to legally request their cancellation due to genericization, thereby penalising the lack of care in their protection.

This risk is covered by Article 169 of Decision 486 of the Andean Community from the year 2000, which states that a trademark can be cancelled if it is allowed to become a common name for the goods or services it distinguishes. That is, if the public starts using it as a generic term and the owner does not act to prevent this, legal protection may be lost.[3]

This procedure is known as cancellation due to generalization, and its purpose is to prevent a trademark that no longer fulfils its distinctive function from continuing to be protected, especially when it has become a word in general use.[4] To understand when and why this risk may occur, it is important to understand the main causes of trademark genericization.

Main causes of genericization.

Trademark genericization can occur for a number of reasons, the main ones being: [5]

1. Widespread use of the trademark by the public: When the trademark is used to designate an entire category of goods and not only those manufactured by the owner.

One example would be when the word “Aspirin” is used to name any painkiller, regardless of whether it was manufactured by Bayer or another company.

2. Improper or uncontrolled use of the trademark by third parties: Whether this occurs in advertising, media or informal trade, this weakens their distinctiveness.

One example would be the use of “Kleenex” in advertising or in conversation to refer to any disposable tissue.

3. The choice of descriptive or generic names: This makes it easier for the trademark to be perceived as a common term from its origin.

For example, “ Escalator” eventually became the generic name of the product.

4. Cultural influence: This causes certain trademarks to become part of everyday language and to be used on a regular basis in daily communication.

One example is “to Google”, used as a verb to refer to the action of searching for information on the internet, regardless of the search engine used.

5. The use of the trademark in inappropriate contexts: This occurs when the trademark is used outside its commercial context.

For example, in casual conversations, TV programmes or social media, such as saying “pass me a Tupper” to refer to any plastic container.

6. Lack of quality control: This prevents the consumer from clearly identifying the goods or services associated with the original trademark.

If the trademark owner allows products of a different quality to be marketed under their name, the consumer no longer associates the trademark with a specific business origin. This can lead to confusion and weaken the identity of the trademark.

There are numerous cases where famous trademarks have become part of everyday language, becoming generic names for goods or services. These examples help to understand how commercial success can, paradoxically, jeopardise the distinctiveness of a trademark and, therefore, its legal protection. The following are some of the best-known cases of trademarks that have been genericised.

A clear example is the Velcro trademark, created in 1957 by George de Mestral, who patented the system and was the first to market this type of fastener. The name Velcro comes from the combination of the French words velours (velvet) and crochet (hook).[6] The trademark became so popular that its name came to be used generically to refer to any hook-and-loop fastener. Although this type of system is very common today, almost no one calls it by its descriptive name. Most simply identify it as “Velcro”, regardless of the manufacturer.

Faced with this situation, the company had to take measures to avoid the loss of distinctiveness of the trademark. Therefore, it launched a campaign called “Don’t Say Velcro”, in which, through a humorous video starring its “lawyers”, they asked the public to stop using VELCROas a generic name to refer to any hook-and-loop fastener[7]. The campaign is available here: https://youtu.be/rRi8LptvFZY

The case of Velcro demonstrates how even an innovative and widely recognised trademark can be threatened when its name becomes a generic term. This happens when the sign loses its ability to distinguish an entrepreneur’s goods from those of their competitors, because consumers begin to use the trademark to refer generally to a whole category of goods, such as “hook-and-loop fasteners”. This example shows how important it is for companies to actively monitor the use of their distinctive signs, ensuring that the public can clearly differentiate the trademark from the product name, for example by using the name VELCRO together with the expression “hook-and-loop fastener”. Otherwise, the distinctive force of the trademark may be progressively diluted, putting its legal protection and the exclusive rights deriving from it at risk.

Since a trademark can lose its identity and legal protection if it becomes a common term, companies must be careful how they use it and teach others how to use it correctly. It is not enough to react to misuse. It is important to actively promote the correct use of the sign by the public and the organisation.

One way to achieve this is for consumers and employees to understand what makes the trademark special. This can be achieved through campaigns, social media and promotional materials, which help to ensure that the trademark is always associated with the company and its products, rather than with similar products from other companies. It is also essential to monitor how the trademark is used in the market. This makes it possible to quickly detect if someone is misusing it and to take measures to protect it.

To prevent a trademark from being genericised (i.e. from ceasing to identify a business origin and becoming the generic name of the product), an entrepreneur should take a number of constant and preventive measures:

1. Always use the trademark as an adjective and not as a noun: For example, instead of saying “Pass me a Kleenex”, one should say “Pass me a Kleenex tissue”.
2. Accompany the trademark with the ® or ™ symbol: For example, in “Velcro® contact fastening”, to remind the public and competitors that this is a protected sign.
3. Giving guidelines to distributors, employees and the media: The company must use the trademark correctly in its communications and teach its employees to do the same, for example, by always mentioning it together with the product it represents and avoiding its use as a generic term.[8]
4. Promote an official “generic name” for the product: The purpose is so that the public has alternatives to refer to it without resorting to the trademark. For example, instead of saying “Aspirin” as a synonym for any analgesic, use “analgesic”.
5. Monitor and take action against misuse: Constant monitoring of the use of the trademark in the market allows for early detection of potential misuse, whether by competitors or in mass media, and for action to be taken to correct it.
6. Maintain advertising that reinforces the trademark as a business origin: This can be done through messaging that highlight the relationship between the trademark and the company.
7. Register variations and extensions of the trademark: Registering variations, extensions, logos and slogans strengthens the trademark’s portfolio and positioning, helping to ensure that its distinctiveness remains protected from genericization.

These actions, together with the correct use of the trademark, establishing guidelines for collaborators and consumers, and constant vigilance, form a set of preventive measures that allow the trademark’s distinctive strength to be maintained over time. Implementing them consistently helps to minimise the risk of genericization, ensuring that the trademark retains its ability to clearly identify the business origin of the products and maintains the trust that consumers have placed in it.

In conclusion, generalization is one of the most silent and, at the same time, most underestimated risks in trademark management. Although it arises as a consequence of commercial success, it can end up becoming a real threat that cuts across the entire organisation, weakening the positioning built up over the years and making it more difficult to sustain an identity vis-à-vis similar products. When a trademark starts to be confused with the common name of a product, it not only loses its ability to identify origin but also to sustain the consumer’s trust.

That is why prevention should not be an afterthought, but rather a permanent strategy. Keeping a trademark alive, recognisable and legally sound depends, to a large extent, on how it is cared for on a daily basis. Preserving that value is not only a legal duty: it is an investment in identity and long-term competitiveness.

Written by: Stephanie Ortíz. Lawyer at PONS IP Colombia.

If this content raised concerns for you, contact us at colombia@ponsip.com to support you in the protection and strategic management of your trademark.

[1] Legales, A. (11 May 2020). El riesgo de que su signo se convierta en común o genérico. Asuntos Legales. https://www.asuntoslegales.com.co/consultorio/el-riesgo-de-que-su-signo-se-convierta-en-comun-o-generico-3003721

[2] ¿Qué es la vulgarización de la marca? (2 February 2021). Curell Suñol. https://curell.com/que-es-la-vulgarizacion-de-la-marca/

[3] Andean Community. (2000). Decision 486: Common Provisions on Industrial Property. https://www.comunidadandina.org/StaticFiles/DocOf/DEC486.pdf

[4] Velasco Ordóñez, P. A. (no date). DE LAS ACCIONES DE CANCELACIÓN Y SU RELEVANCIA PRÁCTICA. Com.co. Retrieved on 9 December 2025 from https://velasco.com.co/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/ACCIONES-DE-CANCELACI%C3%93N.pdf

[5] Editorial staff. (13 June 2023). La vulgarización de una marca en propiedad industrial: ¿Qué significa y cómo afecta a las empresas? Alvamark. https://www.alvamark.com/blog/la-vulgarizacion-de-una-marca-en-propiedad-industrial-que-significa-como-afecta-las-empresas/

[6] George de Mestral: Velcro® inventor. (no date). Invention.si.edu. Retrieved on 9 December 2025 from https://invention.si.edu/invention-stories/george-de-mestral-velcror-inventor

[7] ¿Qué es la vulgarización de la marca? (2 February 2021). Curell Suñol. https://curell.com/que-es-la-vulgarizacion-de-la-marca/

[8] Editorial staff. (13 June 2023). La vulgarización de una marca en propiedad industrial: ¿Qué significa y cómo afecta a las empresas? Alvamark. https://www.alvamark.com/blog/la-vulgarizacion-de-una-marca-en-propiedad-industrial-que-significa-como-afecta-las-empresas/