Have you ever wondered what stops you from starting a new tech company and calling it “Apple”? Or why you can’t just launch a search engine named “Google”? It feels like these companies own the very words themselves. But can you really own a word? And if so, what prevents a corporation from, say, trademarking the word “the” and charging us all a micro-transaction every time we use it?

The answer is a fascinating journey into the intersection of language and law. It reveals that while you can’t truly “own” a word in the way you own a car, you can control how it’s used in a very specific context. The key isn’t in copyright, but in a different area of intellectual property altogether.

The Copyright Conundrum: Words vs. Works

Let’s get the first big question out of the way: Can you copyright a single word?

The answer is a clear and simple no.

Copyright law is designed to protect “original works of authorship”. Think of things like novels, poems, songs, paintings, photographs, and software code. These are creations that involve a degree of originality and creative expression. The U.S. Copyright Office is very explicit that it does not grant copyrights for individual words, short phrases, names, titles, or slogans.

Why? Because words are the fundamental building blocks of language. They are considered raw materials, not the finished product. Allowing someone to copyright a word like “love” or “sun” or “computer” would cripple communication. It would be like allowing a brick manufacturer to copyright the concept of a single brick, preventing anyone else from building a house.

You can’t copyright the brick, but you can copyright the unique blueprint for the house you build with it. Similarly, you can’t copyright the word “dragon”, but you can absolutely copyright your 800-page fantasy novel about one.

Enter the Trademark: The Real Way to “Own” a Word

So, if copyright is out, how does a company like Google protect its name? This is where the mighty trademark comes in.

A trademark is not about protecting creative expression; it’s about protecting brand identity in the marketplace. Its primary legal purpose is to prevent consumer confusion. A trademark is a recognizable sign, design, or expression which identifies products or services of a particular source from those of others.

When Apple, Inc. trademarked the word “Apple”, they didn’t gain ownership of the word in every context. You are still free to:

• Sell apples (the fruit) at a farmer’s market.
• Write a book about apples.
• Name your child Apple (though they might have some opinions about that later).

What you can’t do is start selling computers, phones, or related electronics under the name “Apple”. Doing so would confuse consumers into thinking your products are affiliated with the famous tech giant from Cupertino. The trademark gives Apple the exclusive right to use that word as a brand name for its specific categories of goods and services.

The Spectrum of Distinctiveness: Why Some Words are Better Than Others

This brings us to the linguistic heart of the matter. Not all words are created equal in the eyes of trademark law. To be eligible for trademark protection, a word must be distinctive. Legal experts and courts place words on a “spectrum of distinctiveness” to determine how strong—or weak—a potential trademark is.

Fanciful Marks (Strongest)

These are completely invented words, created for the sole purpose of being a trademark. They have no other meaning in the language.

• Examples: Kodak, Xerox, Exxon, Google.

These are the strongest and most easily protected trademarks because they are inherently distinctive and have no prior association.

Arbitrary Marks

These are real words from the dictionary, but they are used in a way that is completely unrelated to the product or service they represent.

• Examples: Apple (for computers), Shell (for gasoline), Camel (for cigarettes).

The word “apple” has nothing to do with electronics, making it an arbitrary—and therefore very strong—mark.

Suggestive Marks

These marks hint at a quality or characteristic of the product without directly describing it. They require a little bit of imagination from the consumer to make the connection.

• Examples: Microsoft (suggests software for microcomputers), Netflix (suggests movies, or “flicks”, on the internet), Coppertone (suggests the copper-colored tan you might get from the lotion).

These are also strong trademarks, as they are considered inherently distinctive.

Descriptive Marks (Weak)

These words directly describe the product, a feature of it, or its geographic origin.

• Examples: International Business Machines (describes what IBM does), American Airlines (describes where the airline is from).

These marks are initially considered weak and not trademarkable. However, they can gain protection if they acquire “secondary meaning”—that is, if the company uses the name so extensively that the public comes to associate that descriptive phrase with that one specific company.

Generic Terms (Not Trademarkable)

This is the bottom of the barrel. A generic term is the common name for the product or service itself. You cannot trademark the word “Computer” for a company that sells computers. This is where we find our answer to the question about “the”.

• Examples: Clock, Car, Word, The, A, And.

Words like “the” are so fundamental and generic to the language that granting one entity control over their commercial use would be nonsensical and against public policy. They belong to everyone and must remain in the public domain.

The Danger of “Genericide”

Ironically, a trademark can become so successful that it dies. This linguistic phenomenon, known as genericide, happens when a brand name becomes the default, generic term for an entire category of products. When people stop associating the word with the brand and start using it as a common noun or verb, the company can lose its trademark protection.

Famous victims of genericde include:

• Aspirin: Originally a brand name for acetylsalicylic acid by Bayer.
• Escalator: Once a trademark of the Otis Elevator Company.
• Thermos: A former brand name for vacuum flasks.
• Zipper: Was a trademark of the B.F. Goodrich Company.

This is why companies like Xerox fought hard to get people to say “make a photocopy” instead of “make a xerox”. It’s also why Google’s lawyers prefer you say you’re “searching with Google” rather than just “googling” something. The more a brand name becomes a part of our everyday vocabulary, the closer it gets to losing the very legal protection that made it so valuable.

Words for All, Brands for Some

So, can you own a word? The answer is a nuanced “yes and no”.

No, you cannot use copyright to claim a single word from the dictionary as your exclusive property. Language must remain a shared resource for all of us to build upon.

But yes, you can use trademark law to carve out a specific commercial use for a word, transforming it from a simple piece of language into a powerful brand identity. The system is a delicate balance, designed to protect businesses from unfair competition while ensuring that the core of our language—from “apple” to “the”—remains free for everyone to use, write, and speak.