Instagram's latest branding trend is simple: remove the logo, remove the name, and leave only colour swatches to choose from. Surprisingly, as it would appear from the comments and user engagement, most people can still identify the brand's colour palette and even a specific pantone within seconds.

Whether it is the unmistakable purple of Cadbury, Tiffany's iconic blue, or Louboutin's famous red sole, the trend is a reminder that colour on its own has become one of the most powerful branding tools available.

It also raises an interesting legal question: can a business monopolise a colour?

Unlike traditional trade marks such as words or logos, colours are subjected to greater scrutiny before being considered indicators of origin. The reason is straightforward. Colours are a limited resource, and granting businesses exclusive rights too readily could unfairly prevent competitors from using ordinary colours in the marketplace.

That does not mean, however, that colour can never function as a trade mark. South African trade mark law recognises colours as registrable marks, provided they distinguish goods or services of one trader from those of others. The challenge lies in proving that consumers have come to associate a particular colour, by itself, with a single commercial source.

That is a high evidential threshold.

It is not enough for a business to use a particular colour or for consumers to think, "That reminds me of brand X." Instead, the colour itself must be capable of distinguishing such that it functions as a badge of origin in its own right.

The trend is fascinating because it demonstrates exactly what every brand owner hopes to achieve: instant recognition without saying a word. But from a legal perspective, being recognised is only half the battle won.

Two of the world's most famous colour trade mark disputes illustrate why.

Cadbury has spent decades trying to protect its distinctive purple for chocolate packaging with mixed results having proved in some territories that consumers associate that shade of purple with Cadbury, but it has also suffered setbacks where courts found that the description of the colour mark was insufficiently precise. The cases highlight that it is not enough for consumers to recognise a colour and that the scope of the monopoly being claimed must also be clearly defined or appropriately limited.

Christian Louboutin's famous red sole tells a similar story. After years of consistent use and extensive promotion, Louboutin successfully established that the contrasting red lacquered sole of its high-heeled shoes had acquired distinctiveness and functioned as an indicator of trade origin. However, when Yves Saint Laurent introduced an entirely monochrome red shoe, the dispute clarified the limits of those rights. The court held that Louboutin did not enjoy a monopoly over the colour red itself. Rather, its trade mark rights were confined to the specific use of a red outsole contrasted against the remainder of the shoe. This clarified that the scope of protection turned on the precise manner in which the colour is used and recognised by consumers as a source of origin.

The Instagram trend is fascinating because it demonstrates exactly what every brand owner hopes to achieve: instant brand association. From a legal perspective, however, the real question is whether the colour itself has become so distinctive that consumers perceive it as indicating the commercial source of the goods or services, rather than merely as an attractive design choice.

The trend suggests that some brands have successfully embedded their colour palettes but South African trade mark law requires considerably more than a viral guessing game before granting exclusive rights in a colour. Establishing a colour trade mark requires compelling evidence that the colour has acquired distinctiveness through consistent use and has therefore come to function as a badge of origin. In addition, an application for registration must adequately set out the protection claimed.

For now, the trend is a clever marketing exercise and exposé of consumer perception. Although brands may not be securing colour trade mark rights through a single Instagram post, they are doing something equally important – strengthening the very consumer association that, over time, could support a claim to distinctiveness.

Source: Adams & Adams (South Africa), 7 August 2026. Original: https://www.adams.africa/nontando-tusi/can-you-recognise-a-brand-by-colour-alone-the-latest-instagram-trend-says-yes-but-trade-mark-law-isnt-quite-so-simple/