I guess I knew it subconsciously but it only floated to the surface of my consciousness when I saw that a federal judge in New York has struck down most of a lawsuit filed by Johnson & Johnson against the American Red Cross. What I realized is that Johnson & Johnson (a healthcare products company) shares the same red cross logo as the American Red Cross.
While Johnson & Johnson and the American Red Cross have shared this classic design element as logo for over a century, it is only recently that Johnson & Johnson has become more aggressive about asserting their right to use the red cross logo exclusively on health care products. Johnson & Johnson took their protection (control?) of the logo further by demanding that the Red Cross not allow their logo to be used on products that were made by third parties.
The judge sided with Red Cross saying that when Congress chartered the Red Cross in 1881 it gave them the exclusive rights to use the red cross symbol. The same judge must figure since Johnson & Johnson began in 1886, Red Cross got first dibs on the logo. It’s only fair, right? There does seem to be a trademark registration issue that has given Johnson & Johnson any leverage at all in using the red cross logo.
Many successful companies are protective of their logo and branding, and this is a vital part of good and consistent marketing. But for Johnson & Johnson to object to Red Cross selling licensing and the use of the Red Cross logo is silly.
Apparently there is some bad blood between these two companies as the judge found that The American Red Cross did purposefully interfere with the Johnson & Johnson business relationship with two health care suppliers. There is definitely more to this logo story than is detailed in these news reports, but let it stand as an example as to why a shared trademark is never a good idea.
Source: www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--redcross-trademar0515may15,0,210572.story
Origin of the lawsuit August 2007: www.nytimes.com/2007/08/09/business/09cross.HTML?partner=rssnyt&emc=RSS
While Johnson & Johnson and the American Red Cross have shared this classic design element as logo for over a century, it is only recently that Johnson & Johnson has become more aggressive about asserting their right to use the red cross logo exclusively on health care products. Johnson & Johnson took their protection (control?) of the logo further by demanding that the Red Cross not allow their logo to be used on products that were made by third parties.
The judge sided with Red Cross saying that when Congress chartered the Red Cross in 1881 it gave them the exclusive rights to use the red cross symbol. The same judge must figure since Johnson & Johnson began in 1886, Red Cross got first dibs on the logo. It’s only fair, right? There does seem to be a trademark registration issue that has given Johnson & Johnson any leverage at all in using the red cross logo.
Many successful companies are protective of their logo and branding, and this is a vital part of good and consistent marketing. But for Johnson & Johnson to object to Red Cross selling licensing and the use of the Red Cross logo is silly.
Apparently there is some bad blood between these two companies as the judge found that The American Red Cross did purposefully interfere with the Johnson & Johnson business relationship with two health care suppliers. There is definitely more to this logo story than is detailed in these news reports, but let it stand as an example as to why a shared trademark is never a good idea.
Source: www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--redcross-trademar0515may15,0,210572.story
Origin of the lawsuit August 2007: www.nytimes.com/2007/08/09/business/09cross.HTML?partner=rssnyt&emc=RSS
