Yesterday, Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) took the hard-to-imagine step of taking the American Red Cross to court over the ownership of the Red Cross trademark, also known as the Greek Red Cross.

The medical supply company claims that the organizations own "separate and distinct rights" to the logo. However, JNJ protests the not-for-profit's right to license the logo to other for-profit companies for use on items as diverse as baby mitts, nail clippers and humidifiers.

The Red Cross traces the history of the symbol back to Italy in 1859, where volunteers first organized to treat battlefield wounded. In the U.S., Clara Barton of Civil War fame brought the movement to these shores. With the signing of the Geneva Convention in 1864, the Red Cross emblem was officially recognized as the symbol of those treating the sick and wounded during conflicts.

From my vantage point, I'd say a pox on both their houses. The Red Cross organization's failure to safeguard the brand from trivialization dishonors their long tradition, and Johnson & Johnson's lawsuit will only serve to sully both their names.

In a related story, rumors persist that Johnson & Johnson is considering a similar suit against the Catholic Church, as well as major Christian denominations, who persist in using the company's trademark cross in their religious ceremonies. (This is a joke. I hope, anyway.)

Starbucks refuted a potentially embarrassing rumor floating around the net last week, which had the coffee company allegedly denying the request of Marines stationed in Iraq for some gourmet coffee free-of-charge to cheer up them up.

TruthorFiction.com did a good job of summarizing and investigating the story of an email from a Marine [Sgt. Howard Wright] which said some other Marines wrote to Starbucks to say how much they liked Starbucks coffee and to request donations. The rumor began circulated that Starbucks responded with a blanket statement that they "don't support the war and will not send any coffee." Sgt. Wright then wrote the email urging a boycott of Starbucks.

Starbucks responded to Sgt. Wright by stating that the actual reason no coffee was donated "was because the official Starbucks donation policy authorizes such gifts to officially designated public charities, including libraries and schools, and that the U.S. military or military personnel do not qualify," but was never mean to be a statement about the war itself.

Starbucks further said that many individual company employees have been donating their one pound of free coffee per week benefit to members of the military or organizations that provide services to the military, and that many current and former Starbucks employees are themselves on active military duty today.  Sgt. Wright then withdrew his call for the boycott.

Whatever the initial impetus, Starbucks [Nasdaq: SBUX] and the Red Cross have now  just announced they are teaming [teamed up] to deliver hot java to U.S. service members overseas.

3:21 pm Corrections!  This rumor, as commentators below point out, is not new. However, the The Newsmax story about sbux refutation of the rumor, linked to above, is dated 30 June, 2006. Furthermore, it was indeed lame of me to misreport on the Starbucks/Red Cross partnership as being new. It is now well into its third year.