J&J suing Red Cross

[this charming man]

Article

I always thought that the "red cross" was an international symbol for emergency aid and health care. Isn't there precedent for trademarks wherein if it isn't enforced, and the mark has been used by other for years, the TM holder losses the rights to it? This seems petty on J&J's part.

Attorneys, care to speculate?

 

[webfusion]

I am really confused with this whole claim --- the Red Cross recently decided to alter their official symbol to the Red Crystal (Diamond) and yet they're now using the cross as their logo again? What's up with that?

 

[jsiv]

Wow, I didn't realize it was a trademark either. It's used as a generic symbol here too.

I guess it makes sense, most symbols have an origin.

 

[HarryKeogh]

I am really confused with this whole claim --- the Red Cross recently decided to alter their official symbol to the Red Crystal (Diamond) and yet they're now using the cross as their logo again? What's up with that?

The Red Crystal was added to the mix (along with the cross and crescent). It didn't replace them.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

According to NPR this morning, J&J is objecting to the Red Cross licensing the symbol to for-profit medical supply companies. This breaks a long-standing contract between J&J and the RC which has existed since the 1800’s.

So the story comes down to the Red Cross potentially breaking its contractual obligations.

From the article linked in the OP...

J&J said American Red Cross founder Clara Barton in 1895 signed a deal with J&J agreeing and acknowledging the company's "exclusive use of a red cross as a trademark and otherwise for chemical, surgical, pharmaceutical goods of every description."

Until recently, the two sides have cooperated amicably in enforcing their respective rights, J&J said.

 

[strathmeyer]

Here's a BBC article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6938364.stm

I find it interesting that the Red Cross keeps referring to the lawsuit as "obscene" over and over. If you're just going to pick unrelated negative words to describe the lawsuit, why not use different ones? Perhaps they just aren't very creative.

American Red Cross said allegations that it broke criminal statutes were "obscene", adding that it believed the firm's actions were financially motivated.

Well, yeah, that's why people bring lawsuits...

"Our outside lawyers have looked at this and think we are on sound ground," said Mark Everson, the charity's chief executive.

"We are helping Americans."

Oooh, I hope the "we are helping Americans" defense holds up in court!

 

[Nick Bogaerts]

I guess it makes sense, most symbols have an origin.

The red cross originates from the inverted Swiss flag. Both were designed by General Dufour, founding member and first President of the Red Cross.

 

[webfusion]

The Red Crystal was added to the mix (along with the cross and crescent). It didn't replace them.

All other symbols (Crescent, Cross and Magen David) need to be contained within the crystal.

That was the decision of the ICRC:
In June 2006 the 29th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent amended the Movement's statutes to incorporate the new emblem and formally adopted the red crystal.

I see no reason whatsoever for the continued use of the Red Cross by itself to denote any function or representation of the "Red Cross Organization" ----- and if they want to distribute materials, those materials should be emblazoned with the Red Cross, surrounded by the Crystal, as the proper emblem.

Which would be perfectly fine with Johnson & Johnson, I have no doubt.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Well, yeah, that's why people bring lawsuits...

Oooh, I hope the "we are helping Americans" defense holds up in court!

"Our outside lawyers have looked at this and think we are on sound ground," said Mark Everson, the charity's chief executive.

"We are helping Americans."

This is a variation on the usual line:

Why does J & J hate America?

DR

 

[HarryKeogh]

All other symbols (Crescent, Cross and Magen David) need to be contained within the crystal.

That was the decision of the ICRC:
In June 2006 the 29th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent amended the Movement's statutes to incorporate the new emblem and formally adopted the red crystal.

I see no reason whatsoever for the continued use of the Red Cross by itself to denote any function or representation of the "Red Cross Organization" ----- and if they want to distribute materials, those materials should be emblazoned with the Red Cross, surrounded by the Crystal, as the proper emblem.

Which would be perfectly fine with Johnson & Johnson, I have no doubt.

I believe you are mistaken. It's a matter of choice if a society wishes to display the cross, crescent, diamond or combination of them.

http://www.ifrc.org/who/emblem.asp

Unfortunately, the emblems are sometimes perceived as having religious, cultural or political connotations. This has affected respect for the emblems especially in certain conflict situations and has diminished the protection the emblems offer to victims and to humanitarian and medical personnel.
The adoption of an additional emblem will enable Societies that find it difficult to use either the red cross or the red crescent to become members of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.

What will happen to the emblem now in use in my country?

There will be no change unless the State wants to change. States and National Societies that currently use and want to keep using the red cross or the red crescent will continue to do so.

Will the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies or the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement change their names or current emblems?

No. The preamble of the Third Additional Protocol notes the determination of the international components of the Movement to retain their current names and emblems.

Will it be possible to incorporate the red cross, the red crescent or another emblem inside the red crystal?

For indicative use only, National Societies may choose to incorporate, inside the red crystal, a distinctive emblem recognized by the Geneva Conventions or a combination of such emblems.

 

[webfusion]

HarryKeogh is correct, thank you.

The entire issue of the crystal came about in reaction to Israel wishing to utilize the Magen David six-pointed star and join the ICRC, amid opposition from muslim nations.

In any case, I'm pretty sure that J&J would be satisfied if the Red Cross organization just placed their Crystal around the Cross, and this legal problem would be solved.

(IMAGE LINK)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ross.svg/600px-Red_Crystal_with_Cross.svg.png


Sometimes, the easiest solutions are the ones right there in plain sight.