zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. aetern+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-07-09 20:14:44
There needs to be some minimum complexity for a trademark. A cross is one of the most common human symbols. It's ridiculous to attempt to police the world for the use of it in a certain color.

I'd like to see how much they spend on this, and will reconsider donating to the red cross in the future if they continue this foolhardy errand.

replies(2): >>unansw+Ad >>M2Ys4U+jj
2. unansw+Ad[view] [source] 2021-07-09 21:43:06
>>aetern+(OP)
Donating to the red cross is downright evil already. This is the same organization which, in the US at least, will not take blood from gay cis men who sleep with men, even though it's happy to take blood from straight trans women who sleep with men — biologically identical acts, with the only difference being sexual orientation.
3. M2Ys4U+jj[view] [source] 2021-07-09 22:27:27
>>aetern+(OP)
> There needs to be some minimum complexity for a trademark. A cross is one of the most common human symbols.

The Red Cross symbol is sui generis, it is not a (normal) trademark.

Use of the symbols in peace time is prohibited under Article 44 of the First Geneva Convention (except as allowed under that article).

>It's ridiculous to attempt to police the world for the use of it in a certain color.

It's protected because it protects medics, the wounded and other vulnerable non-combatants in war. It's a vital humanitarian tool.

[go to top]