Gee, just wondering whether this is true... if this is true, then I think we should do something - write to ST Forum to highlight this case to J&J, asking for their side of their story...
And boycott their products if they're really doing the wrong thing. Even if they're on the "legally" right side, what about justice and mercy?
Of course, we have to trust that the American Red Cross is doing the morally right thing though... think some might ask, why is a Singaporean being bothered about an American thing? Because I think the values that the ARC stands for are not restricted to "national" boundaries, but they are universal, humanitarian values, given from the hand of God Himself. So whether we're in this country or that country, we need to remember John F. Kennedy's words:
"For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's futures. And we are all mortal."--------------
 American Red Cross says all sales are used to help fund campaigns |
J&J said a deal with the charity's founder in 1895 gave it the "exclusive use" of the symbol as a trademark for drug, chemical and surgical products.
It said American Red Cross had violated this agreement by licensing the symbol to other firms to sell certain goods.
The charity described the lawsuit as "obscene".
It said many of the products at issue were health and safety kits and that profits from their sale had been used to support disaster-relief campaigns.
Licence dispute
The lawsuit asks for sales of disputed products - also including medical gloves, nail clippers, combs and toothbrushes - to be stopped and unsold items to be handed over to J&J.
We were very disappointed to find that the American Red Cross started a campaign to license the trademark to several businesses for commercial purposes 
The firm is also seeking damages equivalent to the value of such goods sold in supermarkets such as Wal-Mart and Target.
"After more than a century of strong co-operation 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," the firm said in a statement.
J&J, best known for its Band-Aid bandages and baby products, first used the symbol as a trademark in 1887, the same year it was incorporated as a business.
American Red Cross was founded in 1881 but did not receive a charter from the US Congress until 1900.
The lawsuit argues that the firm reached an agreement with the charity's founder Clara Barton about the commercial use of the symbol for certain products.
It maintains that the charter did not give the charity the right to engage in commercial activities which would conflict with a private company.
The two sides have been trying to resolve the dispute in private for several months and the lawsuit will bring unwelcome publicity for both parties.
'Sound case'
American Red Cross said allegations that it broke criminal statutes were "obscene", adding that it believed the firm's actions were financially motivated.
"Our outside lawyers have looked at this and think we are on sound ground," said Mark Everson, the charity's chief executive.
"We are helping Americans."
The red cross symbol was adopted by the forerunners to the International Committee of the Red Cross in 1863.
The symbol was chosen to denote respect for army medical services, first aid volunteers and victims of wars and armed conflicts around the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment