Trademarks don't have to be original. It's very common for a mark to be just a word or words written in a standard typeface. Perhaps you are thinking of copyrights?

People are hopelessly confused in this area, which is intentional FUD by the "intellectual property" advocates. People, even tech enthusiasts on a platform like this have no idea what the origin and purpose of 1) copyright, 2) trademarks and 3) patents are, even though they are very distinct from each other and even more distinct from the oft-imagined purpose of protecting the company's creative whatever. The overall original purpose of all these laws pointed towards the interests of the public, not the interests of some "intellectual property" owner, similar to protecting actual ownership rights.

The original purpose of trademarks is to prevent consumer confusion. That's it. It's not to protect the profits of a company. It's not to reward creativity and hard design work.

The original purpose of patents is to encourage disclosing new innovative ideas in order that others can build on top of the invention after having read the patent text (and in exchange for revealing how the innovation works, the inventor gets exclusive rights for a set time, but this is an instrument in achieving the former main purpose). Similarly, copyright incentivizes creative output. (But it only protects the actual expression, not the underlying general ideas etc.)