Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) sues Red Cross over trademark

What is this world coming to when a long standing traditional symbol is being questioned about its rights to it.

I think this is stupid fighting over something that is a universal symbol. They are all over europe as a sign for a chemist in green. As far as I am concerned, its a free symbol for anyone to use anywhere. No one owns it.

As I understand it, the Red Cross symbol as used by the International Red Cross society, and through them the American Red Cross, is protected by international treaty and not trademark law. Reading the relevant text of the two treaties below, I am not certain but I am led to believe that Johnston and Johnston might not be able to legally hold a trademark on the red cross for any purpose. Perhaps I am mis reading them, or there has been a newer version of the treaty which does away with this language, or perhaps Congress has acted to change this portion of the treaties in some way.

Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field. Geneva, 6 July 1906.

Art. 27. The signatory powers whose legislation may not now be adequate engage to take or recommend to their legislatures such measures as may be necessary to prevent the use, by private persons or by societies other than those upon which this convention confers the right thereto, of the emblem or name of the Red Cross or Geneva Cross, particularly for commercial purposes by means of trade-marks or commercial labels. The prohibition of the use of the emblem or name in question shall take effect from the time set in each act of legislation, and at the latest five years after this convention goes into effect. After such going into effect, it shall be unlawful to use a trade-mark or commercial label contrary to such prohibition.

Full text here:
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/180?OpenDocument

Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field. Geneva, 27 July 1929.

Art. 28. The Governments of the High Contracting Parties whose legislation is not at present adequate for the purpose, shall adopt or propose to their legislatures the measures necessary to prevent at all times:

(a) The use of the emblem or designation "Red Cross" or "Geneva Cross" by private individuals orassociations, firms or companies, other than those entitled thereto under the present Convention, as well as the use of any sign or designation constituting an imitation, for commercial or any other purposes;

(b) By reason of the compliment paid to Switzerland by the adoption of the reversed Federal colours, the use by private individuals or associations, firms or companies of the arms of the Swiss Confederation or marks constituting an imitation, whether as trademarks or as parts of such marks, for a purpose contrary to commercial honesty, or in circumstances capable of wounding Swiss national sentiment. The prohibition in (a) of the use of marks or designations constituting an imitation of the emblem or designation of "Red Cross" or "Geneva Cross," as well as the prohibition in (b) of the use of the arms of the Swiss Confederation or marks constituting an imitation, shall take effect as from the date fixed by each legislature, and not later than five years after the coming into force of the present Convention. From the date of such coming into force, it shall no longer be lawful to adopt a trademark in contravention of these rules.

Fulle text here:
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/300?OpenDocument

BOYCOTT JOHNSON & JOHNSON - I'll never buy their products again and I'm going to see if I can get everyone else to agree. Sue the Red Cross for using it's logo own on products it distributes for disaster relief? I hope the owners of this company burn in hell. I'm sure they will.

This suit gives the feeling of a grown man picking on a little kid. The image of Johnson and Johnson will be tarnished for quite some time.

I agree with the Boycott J&J thought. Meanwhile I'm sure no one will object to JNJ adopting a new and unique logo, say the red swastika.

When I first heard this story reported on TV, I literally couldn't believe my ears. So I checked it out online. Yup, J&J has actually sued the American Red Cross. Sorry, but that's just outside the moral pale for me. Count me among those who will absolutely boycott ALL J&J branded products until they either drop this suit or lose it.

I think both entites are acting pretty foolishly. The Red Cross has no business licensing a logo to junky products to get retailed in stores, any more than J&J should be wasting its time trying to vindictively hurt a charitable organization...over a little red plus. This is branding nonsense. I've written more about it from a marketing perspective at DIM BULB, at http://dimbulb.typepad.com.

The management advisory below was issued last night from Corporate Communications to Johnson & Johnson leadership. As it involves our first aid brands, we wanted all Consumer Group associates to fully understand the situation.

Johnson & Johnson has a longstanding commitment to upholding the integrity of our trademarks. Yesterday the Company took an unfortunate but necessary step in the United States to protect one of our oldest trademarks - - the Red Cross design.

As many of you know, Johnson & Johnson began using the Red Cross design and "Red Cross" word trademarks in the United States in 1887, predating the chartering of the American Red Cross. The Company has had exclusive rights to use the Red Cross trademark on commercial products within our longstanding product categories for over 100 years. Since its creation, the American Red Cross has had the rights to use the Red Cross trademark only in connection with its non-profit relief services.

We were very disappointed to find that the American Red Cross started a campaign to license the trademark to several businesses for commercial purposes on all types of products being sold in many different retail and other commercial outlets. These products include baby mitts, nail clippers, combs, toothbrushes, hand sanitizers and humidifiers. This action is in direct violation of a Federal statute protecting the mark as well as in violation of our longstanding trademark rights.

For the past several months, Johnson & Johnson attempted to resolve this issue through cooperation and discussion with the American Red Cross, and recently offered mediation, all to no avail. The Company was left with no choice but to seek protection of our trademark rights through the courts.

The American Red Cross issued a strongly worded press release Wednesday evening objecting to our action. We worked energetically Wednesday night to provide the media with fair balance on this story, including public issuance of our own statement concerning the suit and select interviews to better inform reporters.

The goal of this civil complaint is simply to restore the long-held legal boundaries surrounding the use of the Red Cross trademark. We have great respect for the relief work of the American Red Cross and over the decades have consistently supported the organization through cash donations, product donations and employee volunteering. And we remain committed to supporting its primary mission through our philanthropic efforts. We regret that we had to take this step, but are confident that the courts will protect our legitimate rights to our trademark.