First, that the first producer or vendor of any article gains no right of property in that article so as to prevent others from manufacturing, producing or vending it. Thirdly, the right to use or restrain others from using any mark or name of a firm, is in the nature of goodwill, and therefore goes to the surviving or continuing partner in such firm, and the personal representative of a deceased partner has an interest in it. Fifthly, if the legal title be so doubtful as not to induce the court to grant the injunction, yet it will put the parties in a position to try the legal right at law, notwithstanding the suit. In various countries the law regulates the rights of merchants and manufacturers as to their trade marks with great minuteness. In re Moody's Investor Serv.
Generic terms are invalid.
A ground for reconsideration is evidence that the terms are suggestive, or perhaps descriptive, but not generic. A descriptive term is not necessarily invalid, and a suggestive term is automatically valid. See Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. A competitors' usage of a term is evidence of whether it is generic. One term may have different meanings to different groups of listeners.