Trade Dress Protection: Trademarking Product Design and Packaging

Trade dress vs trademark. Product shape, packaging design, color schemes, non-functional design protection.

Trademark Lens Team

Trade dress: Protects overall look and feel of product or packaging, not just name/logo. Coca-Cola bottle shape trademarked. Tiffany blue box trademarked. Louboutin red sole trademarked. But must prove: non-functional, distinctive, consumer association. Harder than word mark registration.

What Is Trade Dress

Product configuration: Physical shape, design elements, texture. iPhone rounded corners. Coca-Cola contour bottle. Toblerone triangle. If shape itself signals source = trade dress.

Packaging design: Box design, color scheme, layout, typography combination. Tiffany blue box. Toblerone triangle box. Amazon smile logo on packaging. Total visual impression matters.

Trade dress registration success rate: 31% vs 64% for word marks - significantly harder to register due to functionality doctrine.

Functionality Doctrine

Functional features can't be trade dress: If shape/design makes product work better or cheaper to manufacture, it's functional. Can't monopolize useful features via trade dress. Utility patents expire after 20 years specifically to prevent permanent monopolies.

Non-functional only: Coca-Cola bottle shape doesn't make soda taste better - it's non-functional ornamental design. Ergonomic handle that improves grip? Functional, not protectable as trade dress.

Distinctiveness Requirement

Inherently distinctive: Unusual, unique, arbitrary design. Purple cow-shaped milk bottle = inherently distinctive. Generic square box = not distinctive.

Acquired distinctiveness: Common design becomes distinctive through years of exclusive use + advertising. McDonald's golden arches started generic (just arches), became distinctive through use. Need proof: surveys showing consumer recognition.

Acquired distinctiveness timeline: Minimum 5 years continuous exclusive use + substantial advertising spend ($1M+) typically required to prove secondary meaning.

Famous Examples

Product shapes: Coca-Cola bottle (1960), Toblerone triangle (1998), Hershey's Kiss (2001). All non-functional designs that acquired meaning through decades of use.

Packaging: Tiffany blue box (first color trade dress, 1998). Louboutin red sole (2018 in US, limited to contrast with upper). Burberry check pattern. Years of advertising created consumer association.

Color Trade Dress

Single color protection: Extremely difficult. Must prove color alone (without design) signals source. Tiffany blue, UPS brown, T-Mobile magenta succeeded. Requires massive advertising investment + survey evidence.

Color combinations: Easier than single color. FedEx orange/purple. Home Depot orange. Unique combo more distinctive than single shade.

Single color trademark applications: 7% approval rate. Color combination applications: 28% approval rate - specificity improves registrability.

Proving Infringement

Likelihood of confusion: Would reasonable consumer think products come from same source based on trade dress similarity? Compare overall impression, not individual elements.

Actual confusion evidence: Consumer surveys showing confusion. Misdirected orders. Customer complaints. Stronger than theoretical likelihood.

International Differences

US: Functionality bar is high. Need to prove non-functional + distinctive. Can register via use or intent-to-use. Survey evidence critical.

EU: Similar functionality doctrine. But less reliance on survey evidence. Market recognition can be proven through sales data, advertising spend, media coverage. Easier to register 3D shapes than in US.

China: Weak trade dress protection. Product design better protected via design patents (10-15 years) than trademark. Enforcement difficult even with registration.

Trade dress litigation cost: $500K-2M to prove infringement in US - significantly more expensive than word mark cases due to survey evidence requirements.

Design vs Utility Patents

Design patent: Protects ornamental design for 15 years (US). Easier to get than trade dress. But expires. Apple iPhone design = design patent + trade dress claim.

Utility patent: Protects functional features for 20 years. Expires, then anyone can copy. Trade dress never expires if maintained. But can't cover functional features.

Strategy: Patent functional aspects, trademark non-functional ornamental elements. Layered protection. Patents expire, trade dress continues.

Building Trade Dress

Consistency required: Use identical design for years. Any variation weakens distinctiveness claim. Coca-Cola bottle hasn't changed since 1915. Consistency builds association.

Advertising investment: Spend millions showing the design. Product in every ad. Design becomes synonymous with brand. Without massive spend, design remains unprotected configuration.

Document everything: Save advertising materials, sales figures, media coverage. Need this evidence to prove acquired distinctiveness. Build portfolio from day one.

Minimum advertising spend for color trade dress: $10M+ over 5 years typically required to establish consumer association for single color - prohibitively expensive for small businesses.

Alternative Strategies

If trade dress too weak: Focus on word marks and logos. Easier to register, enforce, maintain. Trade dress litigation expensive and uncertain. Word marks = reliable protection.

Copyright for packaging: Artistic elements on packaging may qualify for copyright. Lasts 70+ years, doesn't require registration or functionality analysis. Complements trademark protection.

Trademark Lens checks word and logo trademarks - trade dress protection requires separate legal strategy with design patents, copyright, and long-term brand consistency.

Ready to Verify Your Business Name?