Who Owns the Red Cross? Don't Buy Johnson & Johnson!

There's a legal battle brewing between Johnson & Johnson and the American Red Cross over use of the red cross logo on first aid, preparedness and related products sold to the public. Seems that Johnson & Johnson registered the emblem in 1887, while the American Red Cross was not chartered until 1900.

Generally, the rule in Trademark Law is pretty clear - the first one to register wins. I haven't studied this particular lawsuit carefully, but, if I were a betting man, that's the way I'd lay my money down.

When I first heard about this lawsuit, my reaction was that the American Red Cross is wasting its resources in trying to fight it. Legally, that might still be correct, but, in further reflection, it occurs to me that Johnson & Johnson is trying to profit from the good work done by the Red Cross.

Why is that red cross emblem valuable? It's certainly not due to anything done by the corporate giant Johnson & Johnson. It's due to the work of thousands of nameless volunteers who formed the International Red Cross Movement back in the 1800s. It's due to Clara Barton and her post-Civil War advocacy. It's due to the millions of people who have sought relief from suffering because of war, famine and natural disasters, and found that relief in the form of a Red Cross.

Legally, Johnson and Johnson may have the upper hand. Morally, they are stealing from volunteers and Clara Barton.

If you share my disgust at this corporate power play, make a mental note to avoid these brands. There are other brands of each of these products, and you won't be supporting corporate theft. And then go here and tell them why. (Update - don't bother! Their form is designed to frustrate consumers with useless questions and demands for personal information.)