How to Write Your Trademark Goods and Services List

Writing a goods and services list (Waren- und Dienstleistungsverzeichnis) means putting in concrete words what your trademark should cover, and assigning each term to a Nice class. This list is not a formality, it is the boundary of your protection. Per DPMA (2026), a bare class number is not enough; you have to name every good and service. The main thing up front: protection reaches identical and similar goods under Section 14 MarkenG (the German Trade Mark Act), but only starting from what the list contains. Phrase it too narrowly and gaps stay open. Phrase it too broadly and the trademark becomes vulnerable after five years. And once you have filed, the list can no longer be expanded. This guide shows you how to name and format things cleanly. It is general orientation, not legal advice.

Key Takeaways

• Name every good and service concretely; a bare class number is not enough (DPMA, 2026).
• Pull terms from the eKDB, around 73,000 accepted terms in 23 languages, which avoids objections (DPMA, 2026).
• Separate terms with a semicolon and group them by class in ascending order.
• Class headings do not cover the whole class; only the literal meaning counts (CJEU, IP TRANSLATOR).
• After filing you can only limit, not expand (Section 39 MarkenG), so plan the scope beforehand.

Before you lock down your list, it pays to look at similar trademarks already registered in exactly your classes. You can research similar trademarks at any time before you file. Which class actually fits your offering is covered in choosing Nice classes.

What is the goods and services list, and why does it define your protection?

The goods and services list is the concrete list of what your trademark should cover. Per DPMA (2026), a trademark is always registered only for specific, named goods and services, never for everything. This list sets the scope of protection. What is not on it is not protected. Simple to say, big in consequence.

The link to protection is direct. Your trademark works against identical and similar signs under Section 14 MarkenG, but only for identical and similar goods and services. The starting point of that similarity assessment is always your list. If a good is not on it, it is also no yardstick against which a later conflict can be measured.

The list is the boundary of your protection. What counts is not what you could offer, but what you have named.

Behind this sits the principle of speciality. A trademark never applies universally, only ever to the goods and services it is registered for. Your list later sits publicly in the register. Competitors read there exactly how far your protection reaches and where it ends. That is precisely why every minute you put into a clean list pays off.

So the list is the part of the application where real mistakes come back to bite you. Anyone who quickly enters the one obvious good often overlooks the service they actually earn money with. How protection extends to similar goods is explored in judging likelihood of confusion.

Why is a class number not enough, and how do you name things concretely?

A class number is not enough because it names nothing. Per DPMA (2026), a bare entry like 12, 22 or 36 does not suffice; you have to designate each good and service concretely. The number only sorts, it does not describe. Without concrete terms the office cannot register your list and will object to the application.

Naming concretely means writing out the good or service so it is clear what is meant. So instead of class 25, you write clothing, footwear, headgear. Instead of class 35, for example, business consulting or retail services for clothing. The more precise the term, the clearer it is later how far your protection reaches.

A common slip is confusing your industry with a term. Your industry is not a good. A cafe does not sell "hospitality," it serves coffee drinks in class 30 and provides catering for guests in class 43. So break your business down into its individual offerings and name each one. This translation from everyday word to official term is the real core of the work on the list.

The contrast between vague and concrete makes the difference tangible. Vague sounds like "products around sports" or "services on the internet." Concrete, by contrast, sounds like sports clothing, sports bags, gymnastics equipment, or provision of online software, operation of a trading platform on the internet. The second version tells the office and every reader exactly what is meant. The first almost certainly triggers a query.

This precision is not harassment, it is your safeguard. In my experience, most delays in applications arise right here, at vague or freely invented wording. A precise list takes the queries off the office and the waiting time off you. A clear list is also easier to defend in a dispute than a fuzzy one.

Why should you take terms from the eKDB and TMclass?

Because official terms avoid objections. The DPMA provides its classification database for this, the eKDB (the harmonised classification database). It holds around 73,000 accepted terms for goods and services in 23 languages, per DPMA (2026). Anyone who uses only terms from it or fitting group titles makes further clarification unnecessary and spares themselves long formal objections.

For the EU there is the counterpart TMclass, based on the EUIPO harmonised database. Both tools show you two things at once: which class a term sits in and how it is officially phrased. You search for your product, and the tool returns the vetted wording along with the class. That takes the assignment off your hands.

Conversely, a self-invented term is not the end of the world, but it is a detour. If you use wording that is not accepted in the database, the office reviews it individually. If it does not fit clearly into a class, an objection with a deadline follows. You then have to fix it, and registration is delayed. Accepted terms save you this whole detour from the start.

Here is how to do it in practice. You type your product into the search of the eKDB or TMclass, say leather jacket, and get the accepted term along with its class. If a suggested group title fits several of your goods, you take that. If the database does not find your exact term, you pick the closest accepted entry instead of your own wording.

A change of perspective also helps. The eKDB is not just a lookup list, it is also a source of ideas. Browsing the terms in your class often reveals an obvious service you had not yet considered. That way you close gaps before they open. How the classes are built up in detail is shown in the overview of the Nice classes explained.

Class headings do not cover the whole class

A class heading only protects as far as its literal meaning reaches. Per the CJEU in IP TRANSLATOR (C-307/10), the specifications must be clear and precise so the scope of protection stays identifiable. A general class heading therefore does not automatically cover every good in the class, only what its wording actually captures.

This principle is called "what you see is what you get." It is also anchored in Art. 33 EUTMR. For you this means: do not rely on a broad umbrella term to include everything. What you name is what you get, and only that. Anything beyond stays out, even if it formally belongs in the same class.

An example shows the trap. Class 9 carries a heading that many associate only with software. In fact the class also contains eyewear, fire extinguishers and safety helmets. File only the heading and you do not automatically get software covered as well if your wording does not clearly deliver it. The broad term lulls you into false security.

This point is often underestimated. Many believe a broad heading covers the whole class, and in a dispute they end up with less protection than they thought. The safe solution is unspectacular: list the individual goods and services you actually need instead of relying on a catch-all phrase.

How to group and format the list correctly

You separate terms with a semicolon and order them by class. Per DPMA (2026), you file the list grouped by class, the classes in ascending numerical order, and within a class you separate the individual terms with a semicolon. This form is mandatory and speeds up processing.

In practice it looks like this: you first gather all terms per class, then sort the classes in ascending order. An example for a clothing shop:

• Class 25: clothing; footwear; headgear.
• Class 35: retail services relating to clothing; online advertising; operation of an online marketplace.

Watch three things and the form is right. First: each class stands together as a block, you do not mix across classes. Second: the order of classes ascends, so 25 before 35. Third: within a class the semicolon separates consistently, no comma and no period between terms. This small discipline saves you formal queries from the office.

Why is this form regulated so strictly at all? Because the register has to stay machine-searchable. The clear separation by semicolon and the sorting by class ensure that each term is unambiguously assigned to a class. If you file your list online through the official form, the input mask guides you through this structure anyway. If you prepare the list in advance in a document, you are best off following the same order there already.

How broadly should you phrase it, and why can it not be expanded later?

As broad as makes sense, as narrow as necessary, and complete from the start. The reason for the care is hard: after filing, you can only limit, withdraw or correct the list under Section 39 MarkenG. You cannot expand it. New goods or classes need a completely new application with a new fee.

From this follows a clear order in your head. When you build the list, think not only of today's offering but of the realistic business of the next few years. What you forget, you cannot simply add later. At the same time the reverse holds just as seriously: too broad is no free pass, because goods you do not seriously use after five years make your trademark vulnerable due to the use requirement.

How do you find the middle between the two mistakes? A simple test helps. For each term, ask whether you expect real revenue or serious preparation for it within the next five years. If the answer is a clear yes, the term belongs in. On a vague maybe, you weigh whether the gap will hurt you more later than the small risk today. You ask this question for each line individually.

Plan the scope before you file. What you forget cannot be added, what is superfluous becomes a risk later.

So the balance is not a compromise out of convenience but a deliberate decision. I like to go in two steps: first capture the real offering completely, then ask of each term whether I will actually use it in the next five years. What passes both checks belongs in the list. What is only a distant maybe, you leave out. What an application plus a preliminary search costs in total, you can read under cost of a trademark search.

As a memory aid, this sequence sums up the whole approach:

• Break down your offering: List every good and service you earn revenue with or concretely plan to.
• Translate the terms: Find the accepted term for each point in the eKDB or TMclass and note the class.
• Weigh the scope: Assess each term against the next five years and cut anything that is only a distant maybe.
• Format cleanly: Group by class, sort in ascending order, and separate the terms with a semicolon.

Conclusion: Name and order first, then file

The most important insight first: your goods and services list is the boundary of your protection, not a form field. Name every good and service concretely, because a bare class number is not enough per DPMA (2026). Take the terms from the eKDB with its around 73,000 accepted entries in 23 languages, which avoids objections. Separate with a semicolon, group by class and sort in ascending order. Do not rely on class headings, because per the CJEU in IP TRANSLATOR only the literal meaning counts. And plan the scope completely, because after filing you can only limit, not expand, under Section 39 MarkenG. All of this is general orientation, not legal advice; when in doubt, have your case reviewed by a lawyer. The first practical step remains: research similar trademarks in your classes before you file.