When someone infriges on your branding, copyright, patent, or other intellectual property, your only legitimate recourse is taking action in the court system.

So yes, a judge will decide.

I don't see why this is a problem. Should J&J roll over after spending $$$$ to create, promote and build their branding?

The American Red Cross is now competing with J&J in a commercial venture. The ARC has to play by the rules like everyone else. If a judge decides the American Red Cross crossed the line, so be it. I doubt J&J would have taken on this PR nightmare if they weren't convinced that they have a good chance to prevail.

IMO, the emotional argument presented by the American Red Cross's CEO was telling.

If the law was on their side, they could just argue that position. I haven't seen anything presented by the ARC that would indicate that they don't see a problem with their use of the branding. The only thing I could find is how the profit hungry corporation is trying to damage a benevolent Not-for-Profit.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Thanks for the post.