Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Johnson & Johnson Loses Major Trademark Lawsuit

Posted by kdawson on from the pass-the-tylenol dept.

Dekortage writes "As previously discussed here, the health-products giant Johnson & Johnson sued the American Red Cross over use of the ubiquitous 'red cross' logo. J&J has now lost. The presiding judge said Johnson & Johnson's claim against the organization was doubtful because the manufacturer entered into a brand-sharing promotional agreement with the American Red Cross in 1986 — not to mention that the two organizations agreed to share the logo way back in 1895. Sounds like J&J may need to crack open some Tylenol and Band-Aids."

4 of 176 comments (clear)

  1. Re:When you're hiring lawyers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nobody sees the WWF as the assholes who bullied the WWE. Ok, but we are talking about the Red Cross--a group that people actually care about. This is the group that you go to when your house burns down and you need a place to sleep. Or the group that you turn to when your government is too inept to handle some disaster.

    The Red Cross doesn't have a perfect image, but bullying them is about as good for public opinion as bullying the Girl Scouts.

    If Johnson & Johnson would have won this lawsuit, Congress almost certainly would have unamimously passed a law giving the Red Cross the right to the red cross logo.
  2. Re:Unless you use our likeness... we support you. by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Kind of... the Red Cross (as a humanitarian symbol) has been in use since the 1860s. Johnson & Johnson started using the symbol in the 1880s, and trademarked it in 1905. Although the symbol is protected by international law US law made an exception for Johnson & Johnson as they had trademarked it before the US got round to passing a law to protect the humanitarian use of the symbol. I'm not hugely impressed with the ARC licensing the internationally recognised and protected humanitarian symbol to anyone but let's not kid ourselves that J&J are some sort of martyr here - back in the late 1880s they saw an opportunity to exploit a respected symbol before the law changed to prevent it. It's pretty cold of J&J to try this; not because they're legally wrong (which, from TFA, was found to be the case in court) but because morally it's chutzpah.

    --
    This is where the serious fun begins.
  3. Re:The Red Cross caused this problem by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Interesting

    <sarcasm>Don't know why. It's not like we obey any other parts of the Geneva Conventions these days (Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, et al). Why should this part be any different?</sarcasm>

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  4. Re:When you're hiring lawyers... by sconeu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Red Cross doesn't have a perfect image, but bullying them is about as good for public opinion as bullying the Girl Scouts.

    Yea, because nobody would go after the Girl Scouts.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.