The generic-term exclusion would apply if and only if the word canvas was the generic -- as in the literal dictionary definition -- of the product.
That's why you can't register a trademark for "electric car" or "autonomous vehicle" or "html web page" for an electric car, autonomous vehicle or html web page business.
If you could, other manufacturers would not be able to describe their goods without infringing your mark. Since the product in question is metaphorically like a canvas, but is neither 1) a heavy-duty, plain-weave fabric; nor 2) the <canvas> html tag, another company could create a competing product and market it without using the word canvas, no problem. Hence, the generic exclusion would not apply.
True enough, there's also the interesting question of the difference between radio/telegraph/phonograph and television . . . innovations that have "an inventor" versus a team . . . the starter definitely has a one foot on both sides of the line.
That's why you can't register a trademark for "electric car" or "autonomous vehicle" or "html web page" for an electric car, autonomous vehicle or html web page business.
If you could, other manufacturers would not be able to describe their goods without infringing your mark. Since the product in question is metaphorically like a canvas, but is neither 1) a heavy-duty, plain-weave fabric; nor 2) the <canvas> html tag, another company could create a competing product and market it without using the word canvas, no problem. Hence, the generic exclusion would not apply.
(IANAL. However, was married to a trademark attorney for over ten years, picked up some things. Also, wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark_distinctiveness#Gene...)