CNN Money is reporting on a lawsuit that truly infuriates me: Johnson and Johnson is suing the American Red Cross because the charity is using the red cross symbol on certain emergency/first-aid products that it sells for fund-raising.
Now, apparently, Clara Barton herself signed some agreement with Johnson and Johnson in 1895 about the use of the symbol on medical supplies. But let me ask you this: what do you think of when you see that iconic red emblem? I tell you what I don't think of. I don't think of band-aids, or gauze, or other home medical supplies. I think of a humanitarian organization. You see a red cross with four even-length sides? What do you call it? A red cross? Yeah, I thought so.
Way to go, Johnson and Johnson. Sue the charity. You look great doing it. You look great fussing your way right into the Corporate Embarrassment Hall of Fame. You almost make the RIAA look noble. Well, not really, but this is downright shameful.
Now, apparently, Clara Barton herself signed some agreement with Johnson and Johnson in 1895 about the use of the symbol on medical supplies. But let me ask you this: what do you think of when you see that iconic red emblem? I tell you what I don't think of. I don't think of band-aids, or gauze, or other home medical supplies. I think of a humanitarian organization. You see a red cross with four even-length sides? What do you call it? A red cross? Yeah, I thought so.
Way to go, Johnson and Johnson. Sue the charity. You look great doing it. You look great fussing your way right into the Corporate Embarrassment Hall of Fame. You almost make the RIAA look noble. Well, not really, but this is downright shameful.