Post a Comment On: Adventures in Autism

These guys are unbelievable.

Newsflash for J&J:

In the hearts and minds of everyone on this planet, this logo:

[Image]

Means the Red Cross. Your piece of paper will never make it mean Johnson & Johnson.

This logo:

[Image]

Is the only one that means Johnson & Johnson. But you already know that. I know that you know that because it is the only one on your web site. I can't find the red cross anywhere on it.

I didn't even know you guys had a red cross as your logo until you filed this lawsuit. Great PR move though. I guess you picked the Red Cross to sue because Mother Theresa was dead?

Just change your damn logo and let the Red Cross go back to driving into war zones to save lives.

Selfish idiots.

I plan to purge my house of all J&J products today.

UPDATE:

HA!

"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."

UPDATE:

My cute husband's comment, "In other legal news, the Cavemen from the Geico ad file a law suit against Ford Motor company claiming that Ford has infringed upon their claim to the invention of "The Wheel®".

Pharmaceutical giant sues Red Cross over logo
By David Crary, Associated Press

Johnson & Johnson, the pharmaceutical giant that uses a red cross as its trademark, sued the American Red Cross on Wednesday, demanding that the charity halt the use of the red cross symbol on products that it sells to the public.

NEW YORK - Johnson & Johnson, the pharmaceutical giant that uses a red cross as its trademark, sued the American Red Cross on Wednesday, demanding that the charity halt the use of the red cross symbol on products that it sells to the public.

Johnson & Johnson said that it has had exclusive rights to use the trademark on certain commercial products -- including bandages and first-aid cream -- for more than 100 years.

It contends that the Red Cross is supposed to use the symbol only in connection with nonprofit relief services.

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in New York, marked the breakdown of months of behind-the-scenes negotiations and prompted an angry response from the Red Cross.

"For a multibillion-dollar drug company to claim that the Red Cross violated a criminal statute ... simply so that J&J can make more money, is obscene," Red Cross President Mark Everson said.

Johnson & Johnson began using the red cross design as a trademark in 1887 -- six years after the creation of the American Red Cross but before the organization received its congressional charter in 1900. The lawsuit contends that the charter did not empower the Red Cross to engage in commercial activities competing with a private business.

"After more than a century of strong cooperation in the use of the Red Cross trademark ... we were very disappointed to find that the American Red Cross started a campaign to license the trademark to several businesses for commercial purposes," Johnson & Johnson said in a prepared statement.

It said the products include baby mitts, nail clippers, combs, toothbrushes, hand sanitizers and humidifiers.

The Red Cross said that many of the products in question were part of health and safety kits, and that profits from the sales -- totaling less than $10 million -- went to boost Red Cross disaster-response efforts.

The suit asks the Red Cross to turn over the products in question to New Brunswick, N.J.-based Johnson & Johnson for destruction and also seeks unspecified punitive damages.

"The Red Cross products that J&J wants to take away from consumers ... are those that help Americans get prepared for life's emergencies," Everson said. "I hope that the courts and Congress will not allow Johnson & Johnson to bully the American Red Cross."