Slashdot Mirror
Red Cross Condemns Misuse of Emblem In Games
Heartless Gamer writes "The British Red Cross has told GamesIndustry.biz that it hopes to work with developers to prevent the 'illegal and detrimental' misuse of the red cross emblem in videogames. From the article: 'It is important for videogame manufacturers not to use the emblem in their games, including for matters related to its humanitarian purpose, such as first aid or general medical care,' said Michael Meyer, head of international law for the British Red Cross."
That'll be an interesting trademark to defend:
1. Its been used in games for two decades now with nary a lawsuit. You have to actually defend a trademark to keep it.
2. The developers used it in the first place because they routinely saw the symbol in military movies and TV shows emblazoned on the medical jeeps.
3. Its a symmetrical red plus-sign on a white background. I'm sure its possible to create a more generic symbol but I can't think of any off hand.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
In a related segment, a Red Cross spokesperson has told of plans to sue the Catholic church.
I Hate Allan
What next? Is Target, Inc. going to complain about the red target symbols for archers that you see in games like Dungeon Seige or WoW?
While I agree that they have used the red cross as their "trademark", it has become known worldwide that, if you see a red cross, it means medical care is nearby.
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
...you're next.
You say
It is important for videogame manufacturers not to use the emblem in their games, including for matters related to its humanitarian purpose, such as first aid or general medical care,'
Right because heaven forbid young people get the redcross emblem associated with help when you need it as that is just plain slanderous against the poor red cross.
W...T...F...???
Now you bastard campers won't be able to collect health packs while hiding in your little towers!
I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
In the article, in the upper right corner is a picture of a Red Cross truck. You know what my first thought was? Run into it and absorb it, full health!
Let's hope I never see one on the freeway.
<xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
The Red Cross emblem is one of the easiest ones to program. Hence it wide use. It is also why the Nazi symbol is used alot too. Not because of its meaning but because of how easy it is to program. Like using the Snake on the Pike is pretty tough to program, but a Red Cross. Thats easy.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
According to Wikipedia, "The Red Cross is an emblem which, under the Geneva Conventions, is to be placed on humanitarian and medical vehicles and buildings to protect them from military attack on the battlefield."
Seems to me the Red Cross organization doesn't have exclusive rights to the symbol.
So I suppose that's why BioWare suddenly removed the red cross from the healing kits in an early patch to Neverwinter Nights?
Here's one mod that restores them among other things.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
And it's not as ridiculous as I first thought. They're not just getting uptight about their "trademark" I think they may be genuinely concerned that the symbol is used in a context that undermines their mission. After all, in a lot of games, a red cross means extra life so you can go out there and kill some more guys. The Red Cross aren't field medics, after all.
Here. You win.
You say
In other words, all those red cross symbols on MASH and other TV shows, on first aid kits, and in its numerous ubiquitous appearances in modern society, are apparently violations of the Geneva Conventions and must be banned, regardless of whether they are used in a context offensive to the ICRC or not.
So, to the ICRC: Stop picking and choosing what you're going to speak out about, and start treating all violations equally instead of politically.
They can sue the British royal family while they're at it.
In all seriousness though, surely use of the red cross in computer games (as in movies, cartoons and TV) helps to spread the awareness of the purpose of the symbol.
It's a universal symbol for a medkit in gaming. The games are just reflecting its use in real life - hardly something you would prosecute over, is it?
the layman's guide to computer science
The fact that the Red Cross is also used in [real worlds] which contain strong language and violence is also of concern to me, in that these worlds directly conflict with the basic humanitarian principles espoused by the Red Cross movement.
If they don't want us to use a red cross in games, they should stop putting health in the med kits.
That symbol is at least as old as the Knights Templar. I don't think you can trademark a 900-year-old symbol, even in the post-Sonny Bono era.
Just another great argument in favor of finding a more effective beneficiary for your donations. Time and again, the Red Cross have proven to be assholes with a red capital 'A' on a white background.
Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
This is just some fancy pantsy liberal trying to wring money from successful businessmen because they are too lazy to do the hard work necessary to accumulate wealth.
It's ironic that you voice that opinion without considering that those "successful businessmen" are too lazy to do the hard work to establish a universally understood and respected ensignia for medical assistance.
That's exactly the kind of misuse that the Red Cross is asking people to prevent. The Red Cross is a symbol of protection, not healing.
It should be put on armor packs.
I'm not trying to comment on the article or poo-poo the Red Cross; I was just struck that there's a lot to learn here... as a general rule, you can be more effective in communicating with others if you choose positive approaches in preference to negative ones. Of course, it's often more costly to find those positive approaches... it can take creativity, patience, and self-denial.
-1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
In the U.S., the Red Cross doesn't depend on trademark law. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/us c_sec_18_00000706----000-.html is a special law just for them:
Whoever, whether a corporation, association or person, other than the American National Red Cross and its duly authorized employees and agents and the sanitary and hospital authorities of the armed forces of the United States, uses the emblem of the Greek red cross on a white ground, or any sign or insignia made or colored in imitation thereof or the words "Red Cross" or "Geneva Cross" or any combination of these words shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
Here's a direct link to the .pdf of the original letter from the Canadian Red Cross
gamelaw.org
I can't imagine that this is enforceable... The Army has been using the same symbol at least since Korea =)
google.com
"42"
Yours is the funniest comment yet! Thanks for the laugh!
The Boy Scouts of America is an organization that pretends to represent America but at the same time fosters the idea that it is not acceptable to be homosexual (like people have any choice about it) and refuse to let homosexuals be a part of the Scouts. If you are straight and Christian and wish everyone else was too, the Boy Scouts are for you. If they used my logo I would sue them too.
And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
Im staring at the neutrality symbols and I looked at the lion and wondered what it was holding in it's hand. My first thought was sword but then what is that doing there. Can someone please answer this question??
Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
>It should be put on armor packs.
;)
And on ammo we should put what, flowers?
Grundes!
The asprin trademark got so watered down, that it became a household name, and lost their trademark (Genericized trademark
Would this be a similar case? I can't even begin to count the number of games and television shows I've seen this mark used in, going back to Dandy Dungeon on the atari. Hell, I'm sure a number of boardgames have used it. The mark's been 'misused' for decades -- isn't it a little late in the game to try and enforce it?
Except for those parts of the world where it's the Red Crescent.
Like another group of people jumping on the litigation train to get some free publicity and maybe some free money for something that's become a mainstay symbol of health/healing in the gaming industry.
What next? Is Target, Inc. going to complain about the red target symbols for archers that you see in games like Dungeon Seige or WoW?
A couple of years ago, Ralph Lauren (the designer) sued the US Polo Association (est. 1890) over trademarked use of the word "Polo". Lauren, who launched the brand in 1967, won.
Slashdot - Mutual Assured Discussion
It is ridiculous how they latch onto things such as this for lack of a better publicity apparatus.
And what annoys me is that the ORIGINAL use WAS the plus on a white armband, the abovementioned "medical jeep in movies".
It has been in use for medical symbols BEFORE the damn organization came to be. When I was a child, I had not heard of "blue cross blue shield" and when it was presented as "its a medical thing honey, I'll tell you later, but for now I have to talk to the insurance man honey" while I thought to myself "since when did the red cross become a blue one for doctors???" I had grown up with a red cross for medical support in my own country as a child... strange eh? Now its a "trademark" ?? WTF?!
~D
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
Old news. Bioware had to take out the cross icon we used on healing kits in NWN back in 2002, after being contacted by their lawyers
While I agree that it seems like they are being a tad selective...they certainly do have a point. Seeing Red Cross stuff in the more military games, it does tend to be represented more in the light of what it is.
Seeing Red Cross stuff in the array of FPS games out there, it is getting a little diluted...grab medkit...go blast everything that moves. The Red Cross isn't about patching up people and sending em back to the field. The Red Cross is pretty much strictly patching up people, since their protection applies to both allied and enemy forces. The military decides whether or not to send someone back to the battle field, or to send an enemy to prison...not the Red Cross. Red Cross is about saving lives, not about continuing the battle.
Seeing Red Cross stuff in the more iffy games (probably anything done by RockStar) is WAY different. You get extra points for killing a bunch of people...waiting for the ambulance to show up, and then killing the medics and stealing the van. I fully support the Red Cross going after these games. I don't have a problem with the games themselves, but honestly these games only hurt the argument that games aren't inherently bad. That and I sorta have a vested interest in that symbol being respected on the battlefield.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
That Red Cross has a such a problem with misuse of it's emblem in video games while completely disregarding the use of it's equipment (labelled with cross too) as transportation for terrorists.
To quote Zapp Brannigan: "How very neutral of you!"
Holy crap people, RTFA, there's no mention of a lawsuit or anything like that, it just says that they're upset about the way the gaming industry has been using the symbol and they want to work with them to see it used differently. There's no mention of legal action. -Julius
In a related story, 500,000 members of the Red Cross Movement gathered in protest to demand the death of the game developers responsible for the misuse of the symbol and legislation to prevent the symbol from ever being misused again.
I have an emergency box that isn't a standard first aid kit. I use two feet of red duct tape, with smaller inlaid reflective tape like this stuff http://www.reflectivelyyours.com/generic123.html) in case the lights are out, to make a red-cross-like symbol on it so anyone who grabs it or needs to find it can do so in a hurry. Should I be turning myself in? I mean its no different that I use it for my own personal gain (insert evil laugh?) than blizzard using little dancing logos in WoW when you use bandages, is it? I'm sorry I thought the Red Cross has other shit to worry about than someone using what I would consider a universal symbol for "NEED FIRST AID LOOK HERE!"
To use the international symbol of the Red Cross on a first-aid kit is a violation of its use? It is marked as such because it is a symbol of aid and safety. It is deliberately marked as such to avoid direct attack. Now step back and think about that for a second. How could the virtualization of the real life object (a first-aid kit) be a violation of the trademark? It is a depiction of the actual real object in a virtual context, it is action is the same and it in no way harms or tarnishes the reputation of the owner. Granted the effects of a first-aid kit in game are magnnified dramatically, but so is the entire environment (tempo).
.02 on the situation... Seems like the a case of "crying fox in the chicken coop", but ignoring the wolf slaugherting the cows in the barn.
I fail to see how putting the symbol on a first-aid kit, jeep or truck or box does anything to diminish their message. Just as in the games, in real life as well, first aid supplies get bombed, blown up, destroyed, shot, or sabotaged. We watch footage of such acts on CNN daily. Deliberate or accidental it happens and I see no reason to prosecute the video game industry without first prosecuting EVERY single real violation of the same infringement.
Just my
It is a sad day in video games when health boosts are condemned.
Just switch to the red crescent symbol. I would appear that the Red Cross doesn't have any special rights to this symbol in the U.S.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
1.) Label all games in which the red cross is used as "Educational." Surely there's got to be an exclusion of some sort for that kind of use, right? Would a judge really bring the gavel down on an educational program? Honest, this game shows places where the red cross has historically or may in the future be used...
2.) Put a 1 pixel white border around all red crosses used in video games. It's a different logo. Is that really any worse than the red cross logo being made from the inverted colors of the Swiss flag?
Freezing the meaning of words and symbols to something specific isn't really useful. Meanings of things change trough time, newer generations see things differently. It's annoying when they force you to use old meanings of symbols and words, which don't reflect the current use by the people who use it, and ban all modern use of it.
Kaetemi
Now they just won't be able to recognize the health packs when they see them :D
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
Game developers should substitute a red pentagram instead and call upon the healing powers of Satan. Problem solved.
Two soldiers at an artillery emplacement in 2015.
Soldier 1: Should we shoot it? It looks like a medical truck.
Soldier 2: I've been playing video games my whole life and medical stuff ALWAYS uses GREEN crosses. That fucker's CLEARLY red - no way that's a medical truck. Blow it to hell!
It's the general medical symbol put on medical Army helicopters and other types of vehicles to let the opposing force know (if they follow the Geneva Convention anyway) that it the vehicle with the markings is for medical purposes only and by the Geneva Convention they are NOT ALLOWED TO CARRY WEAPONS OF ANY KIND, and so in turn, the opposing force is by law of the convention are NOT ALLOWED TO FIRE ON THE VEHICLE. On the other hand, it usually doesnt matter anymore since the countries that the UN and NATO members police dont follow the convention anyway.
In my training on the Geneva conventions, the whole marking medical buildings/vehicles were never specified as being solely for military. The military, at least on my level, has no concern about the markings of hospitals and ambulances with the cross/crescent. Matter of fact, they LIKE them marked. The only thing we'd hate more than hitting a military hospital would be to hit a civilian one.
It can always be argued that military members are at least occasionally or can be treated there, therefore it's elgible for the markings.
I don't read AC A human right
Turn the health powerup 45 degrees and claim to the suits "it's a red X!"
From the article:
We would be willing to work with a videogame manufacturer to produce a game which shows the emblem in its correct use, as a symbol of protection during armed conflict, and where the player is rewarded for using the emblem correctly.
It's not a matter of a trademark, it's a matter of having gamers understand what the Red Cross is and does.
i dont really see why this is such a big deal... it is a GAME! a GAME! as in not real.
Now they just won't be able to recognize the health packs when they see them :D
Of course they will. Last time a company banned red crosses in video games, it was Nintendo because at the time, Nintendo didn't want religious symbols in its video games. The most common substitute for a red cross at the time was a red heart.
We have been using the Red Cross as a medical/emergency symbol since World War I. Possibly slightly before then, but that is the earliest widespread usage that i know of. Just FYI :)
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
It's OK, we can just drop a few health packs on the dead game devs and revive them.
Good game.
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
Like using the Snake on the Pike is pretty tough to program
It's a vertical bar and a sinusoid. It's not that difficult to render unless you're running really low on texture RAM ;-)
We could put disemboweled torsos...because that's what bullets do.
And then on the cases for mortars and artillery, we could stencil on a soldier sleeping in his bunk because he's so used to the explosions that he just stays in bed rather than running for cover.
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
detrimental misuse of the red cross emblem... Detrimental: obviously harmful : damaging ex: the detrimental effects of pollution How is having the symbol of the Red Cross on health packs detrimental? Holy crap! This healh pack just healed me! I'm going to kill/maim/destroy the next person/animal/thing I see assosciated with that red cross! Please tell me that no one can actually thinks this during a round of Halo/F.E.A.R./CounterStrike (or any other game the symbol is used in)...
>We could put disemboweled torsos...because that's what bullets do.
Pfft. What if I always go for headshots?!
Grundes!
and I'm really pissed about the Red Cross using our symbol... the red cross. I mean we fought the Crusades for centuries, went underground for like a few decades and these people think they can just take the symbol of the Knights Templar? Take the fucking Hospitalers symbol it would make sense anyway!
This
The Red Cross has made a similar attempt in the past. Neopets used to have a hospital in it's game world depicting a red cross on the building. Due to pressures, they were forced to change the cross to a green color. The change didn't get a whole lot of publicity, and a quick google search didn't turn up anything on the change though.
One shot, one kill. It increases realism in games, I'm for it!
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! It's just a goddamned piece of paper!" -- George W. Bush
The font tag is deprecated. You should be using a span or div that refrences a Cascading Style Sheet stored in a seperate file and imported in the head.
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
A friend of mine that works at Nerve Software tells me that they just invert the colors to make it a white cross on a red background. It avoids the issue, not many people notice, and they havent been bothered by the Red Cross since.
The red cross on a white background has come to symbolize basically any emergency medical support. Like the term "Asprin," it is in broad use enough that it doesn't represent a company or group, but (in this case) a service.
It's not like it was a particularly original symbol to begin with.
The ______ Agenda
The Red Cross is a currupt organization that takes in billions of dollars and gives out only a few million.
It eats up the rest as "administrative costs"
Right....
So now they're interested in sueing games to protect their precious red cross logo?
Money money money. The red cross is a shitty organization.
You've got two basic choices for "health powerup" that have been ingrained into gamers. Heart shapes and the little red plus sign. The former doesn't mesh well with some game styles. So what is a game designer to do? Surely they could think up an original symbol, but then there'd be a large portion of gamers would just respond "WTF is that?"
It's just a red cross. You can draw it in a 3x3 pixel grid. That's 9 bits in monochrome. Every game that has health powerups has red crosses. And the use of the symbol is ancient. When I see a red cross, I don't always associate it with "The Red Cross". There's a sort of protect it or lose it standard for trademarks, and they haven't protected it. Now it's too late. Eveyone uses it. The cat's out of the bag.
...not getting up anyone's nose about it.
In Atheism, you are in essence your own highest authority (or so you believe). If Scouts can assign $DIETY to many different identities, I don't see a problem with adding one more ($DIETY = 'me'). I strongly suspect that getting up people's noses about one's faith and making a martyr of oneself over it without real cause is how some people try to add value to their lives, but it seems pretty self-defeating to me.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
I've cycled through them all, tried them out, and I've come to this conclusion:
...you insensitive clots...
I don't like any of the other UT custom crosshairs!
One man's constant is another man's variable.
explain how your creation myth frees you from the demon of religion.
Miltant Atheist: Use the First Amendment liberally to quash any hint of the practice of competing beliefs.
Just suggestions. (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
How will all these people who are learning behavior from video games now learn to recognize the meaning of the Red Cross symbol? The daily school shootings will now have ambulances full of bullet holes.
Mao, Stalin and Hitler killed many tens of millions apiece, and each of them were Atheists (or close enough: Hitler admired the Roman Catholic Church and particularly the Jesuits -- he wanted to model the Reich after them; his own personal faith was not unsullied Atheism and probably included various themes from the broad swathe of views referred to at the time as Occultism, but by and large there was no monotheism in it and probably not even enough deism of any sort to disqualify him as an Atheist).
Problem solved. That'll be twenty dollars and take the yak of your choice.
Meanwhile, you also have to distinguish between various kinds of Christian and Muslim, which the brains-of-a-carrot grandparent poster didn't. A Quaker or Amish is quite a different proposition to most kinds of Catholic, for example, and news footage notwithstanding the typical Muslim, like the typical Christian or Atheist or whatever, just wants to get on with life rather than go around pissing off their neighbours. Which [caution: topic change] is what's wrong with the infamous Danish cartoons.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Red Cross should just shut the hell up. What idiotic dumb ass trademarks something so freakishly generic and historically offensive (to many) as a sign of humanitarian effort?
Even moonshine drunkards like KKK have been using Red Cross as their signature for their idiotic cause even before there was "Red Cross." How about Crusaders? Is "Red Cross" trying to be funny and make some kind of satirish joke about hundreds of thousands of slaughtered men/women/children because of some religion?
"Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
the msjority of slashdotters are a bunch of shit-for-brains that couldn't pour piss out of a boot if instructions were on the heel.
Stupidity: it's a renewable resource, in excess supply at shitdot.
The Red Cross must have already gotten to the makers of Call of Duy. There isn't a DAMN MEDPACK IN THE ENTIRE GAME!
http://www.dumpalink.com/pictures/1130746665/Must_ Be_Lonely_in_Class
From Redcross.org "Who founded the American Red Cross? Clara Barton (1821-1912) dominates the early history of the American Red Cross, which was modeled after the International Red Cross. She did not originate the Red Cross idea, but she was the first person to establish a lasting Red Cross Society in America. She successfully organized the American Association of the Red Cross in Washington, D.C., on May 21, 1881. Created to serve America in peace and in war, during times of disaster and national calamity, Barton's organization took its service beyond that of the International Red Cross Movement by adding disaster relief to battlefield assistance. She served as the organization's volunteer president until 1904." That's right, the red cross was created in the US of A. "The Red Cross on white background was the original protection symbol declared at the 1864 Geneva Convention." Yes, that's 1864 in Geneva. The British have no claim on the trademark IMHO.
the flag of england
http://www.maplin.co.uk/images/Full/32731i0.jpg
Technology is most abused by the very people it was created to help
Most of today's trolls are really nigger lovers.
If you've played Half Life 2, at one point in the game there's a lot of player friendly AI characters running around, and you're basically leading squads of people around to shoot up the joint.
Well, some of these AI characters are specifically marked as medics. They are represented in your display as people with a red cross sign next to them. This indicates that if you get low on health, they'll be the guys that come up to you and say "here, take this medkit" and give you a health boost. They even do the same for other AI characters. Also, they usually have a big blatent red cross plastered on their backs. The idea is that you want to protect these guys a bit more than the other members of the squad.
Of course, none of that stops these characters from whipping out a shotgun and blowing away the dudes in the black fatigues when they have the opportunity.
I'll bet that it never really irked them too much as long as it was limited to medical packs on the sides of buildings and such, but somebody saw their kid playing HL2 and noticed one of these medics firing rounds at a helicopter or something, and there you go.
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Red cross on a white background? Oh, you mean the Staint George's Cross flag? Part of the British flag, and official English Anglican church flag too me thinks.
I don't think this should be an issue for them unless someone is using their logo to promote something generically bad (ie Nazi's or the like). Maybe it's _they_ that needs to change the logo, since it's _they_ who have a problem with their current one being used all over the place... you all realize the money spent on defending this BS could save lives, don't you? The boy scouts and all the others they've sued over this shit could have used the money they had to pump into lawyers improving the lives of people as well. It disgusts me, even the most charitable organizations such as this have to have a department of the company that works against the fundamentals of said company. Maybe someone should manage the common-sense department over there a little tighter.
The American Red Cross was given protected use of the red cross symbol in a federal charter in 1900. It was already in popular use at that time, but so be it. Therefore it isn't likely to be the trademark law that you'll have to deal with.
http://www.redcross.org/museum/charters.html
The charter granted full legal standing to the organization and protected its right to use the red cross emblem while setting fines and punishment for misuse of the emblem and for false representation of the organization.
Otherwise, you guys would be right.
Controlling complexity is the essence of computer programming. -Brian Kernigan
Just use a 'Caduceus' or a 'staff of Asclepius':
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caduceus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_of_Asclepius
But seriously, the geneva convention is a contract which was never signed by the terrorists or many of the nations they operate in. Geneva convention rights are not afforded by terrorists to their victims, which would seem to be a cut and dry abdication of geneva convention rights for themselvs. The geneva convention does not afford the same rights to non-uniformed combatants as it does to uniformed soldiers in a regular army anyway.
The idea that certain rights that are protected by the compact should be applied may be noble, but to classify failing to the geneva convention to situations far outside its original intended scope as rejection of the convention altogether is disingenuous rhetoric.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
The boy scouts looked at how much litigation has taken away from really good youth organizations and realized, sending kids camping with a gay guy as their chaparone is just as much a liability
No. The problem is not one of liability, but rather a few fat, old, white, assholes in Texas (BSA HQ) who like you equate queers with pedophiles. I have been in scouting for 20 years, and most of us are not homophobes.
It's an interesting observation done by many, and the truth is that they are similar is by no coincidence.
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
Wouldn't it be nice if we could just go shoot the bad guys, and have them not shoot back at us? WE are the good guys.. sure. The red cross is known to give plane tickets to GI's on tehir way back home... then mail them the bill. Of course they could fly military airlines for free. Don't let yourself be scammed by the red cross. They are not the holy righteous establishment they would have you believe.
Stalin's original purpose (and Hitler's too) was the destruction of the Russian Orthodox Church, pure and simple, of which the Tsars were the secular arm. The story of how that aim was thwarted is an interesting one, but far beyond the scope of one post.
Hitler started out being friendly with the Roman Catholic Church because of the help it constantly supplied him, up until the point where it was becoming obvious that he was going to lose (so the RCC threw him to the wolves, how sad). Up to that point, he'd come down hard on everyone who wasn't Atheist or Catholic; then he ruled a line through "Catholic" and it was on for young and old.
You may remember six million Jews? The real figure is almost certainly not that bad -- maybe two million, IRL, bad enough -- but he definitely regarded the Jews as a genetically inferior race, to be used as a labour force for as long as necessary and then disposed of (along with many others) once the Reich had absolute control. This view had a 100% Atheistic basis, and was in fact inspired by Charles Darwin, whose writings Hitler adored, and the entailed Eugenics movement.
Bizarre, you might think -- for a short, dark-haired man -- but he evidently didn't think that way.
Mao deliberately set out to destroy "all religion" (by which he meant "every religion bar Humanism AKA Atheism"). His deaths were mostly consequent on that, except for a large chunk due to policies once again based on the Darwinian (Atheistic) ethics which are once again becoming so popular.
The page has a long list of lesser dictators; those I recognise all have similar tales to tell.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
So that's why all the red crosses on the hospitals were removed for the US release of Earthbound. I always thought it was because of Nintendo's objection to "religious imagry"
1. Its been used in games for two decades now with nary a lawsuit. You have to actually defend a trademark to keep it.
Yes, but this is guaranteed by the First Geneva Convention (Article 44):
With the exception of the cases mentioned in the following paragraphs of the present Article, the emblem of the red cross on a white ground and the words " Red Cross" or " Geneva Cross " may not be employed, either in time of peace or in time of war, except to indicate or to protect the medical units and establishments, the personnel and material protected by the present Convention and other Conventions dealing with similar matters. The same shall apply to the emblems mentioned in Article 38, second paragraph, in respect of the countries which use them. The National Red Cross Societies and other societies designated in Article 26 shall have the right to use the distinctive emblem conferring the protection of the Convention only within the framework of the present paragraph.
Furthermore, National Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) Societies may, in time of peace, in accordance with their rational legislation, make use of the name and emblem of the Red Cross for their other activities which are in conformity with the principles laid down by the International Red Cross Conferences. When those activities are carried out in time of war, the conditions for the use of the emblem shall be such that it cannot be considered as conferring the protection of the Convention; the emblem shall be comparatively small in size and may not be placed on armlets or on the roofs of buildings.
The international Red Cross organizations and their duly authorized personnel shall be permitted to make use, at all times, of the emblem of the red cross on a white ground.
As an exceptional measure, in conformity with national legislation and with the express permission of one of the National Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) Societies, the emblem of the Convention may be employed in time of peace to identify vehicles used as ambulances and to mark the position of aid stations exclusively assigned to the purpose of giving free treatment to the wounded or sick.
And I'm pretty sure that the argument that "someone ignored the Geneva Convention in the past, so we get to ignore it too" doesn't hold water.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
It will be interesting to put red crescents on injured units in day of defeat (WWII).
And maybe the players, for trademark reasons, should speak in chinese and indian accents.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
Just replace the cross bitmap with a cartoon of Muhamed wearing a bomb turbin. That'll calm things down.
Table-ized A.I.
Homophobe would be someone who is actively scared of homosexuals. Not simply someone who doesn't approve.
This is a big problem in the gay right's movement that earns them more enemies than they deserve. A push for tolerance should not be overrun by a push for acceptance. These two things may sound the same, but they're worlds apart.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
This is typical IP law gone nuts
We also have aircraft manufacturers sueing people (or threatening to sue them) for using their designs and names in games. So people have to build fictional planes instead. Now there is a need to come up for a new simulated symbol for health/medical care in video games.
Pretty soon what you'll get is an extreme divergence between the real world and simulated worlds. Stuff gets less realistic, less educational and just plain less cool.
I say there should be some exemption for such law in simulation.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
usually people here are of average to above average intelligence, so some of you must have (in your younger days) gotten A+'s on your papers, eh? Did the teacher happen to use a red pen, and did your paper happen to be white?
It's about time we switched to the Red Crystal in games anyway.
Redd Kross.
From the flag of Switzerland... Since Switzerland was traditionally neutral, they created the red cross to be similiar to signify neutrality. They reversed the colors.
If the Red Cross is going to go after video game developers, I think that Switzerland should go after the Red Cross.
Game world != reality.
The sooner people "Get" this, the better.
smash.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Funniest. Post. EV-AR.
How is that a troll? It's a good point. It might not be a logical argument with evidence to back it up, and it might be against the general opinion of /.ers, but I think it at least deserves +1 Insightful.
Probably all that will happen is this will get modded -1 Troll also.
Same system here in India, my blood donation gives me a card which entitles me blood for myself or immediate family in case of need.
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
Emergency preparedness is a different one.
you can have my violent video games when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.
Prime UID Club
In a press release from hell, 'It is important for videogame manufacturers not to use the emblem in their games, including for matters related to its right-wing purpose, such as anti-Semitism or general genocide,' said the ghost of Josef Goebbels, head of afterlife propaganda for the Nazi Party.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Can't go wrong with plusses.
I think the Red Cross should allow for the red cross symbol to appear anywhere where it supports the Red Cross. It's free PR. It's putting the Red Cross in positive light. It is imprinting a symbol in the mids of youths that play videogames but don't have a clue on what the real Red Cross does or what they work for.
They should take the advantage of the fact that people are making the connection between the symbol and "Red Cross". They shouldn't defend their symbol like a brand. I can go that far that Red Cross would demand that game and movie producers ask for permission to use the symbol, but that they would allow producers to use the symbol free of charge as long as it's done in a way that's in line with the Red Cross. Heck, it's free advertising. Many companies would pay for that!
~rL
...until you used the word "jingoism."
I mean, I've not heard a more pretentious word since "ageism."
Enough with the isms. Just call it "foolish," or "hypocritical." We do the same things other nations do in times of war. It's called survival, and that's why wars are ugly things we (are supposed to) try to avoid.
In terms of the Red Cross... I don't know. I can think of a number of historical organizations that use a symmetrical perpendicular cross. Not to mention that when people see a red cross (lowercase), they don't immediately think of the organization. They think of health, healing, etc. The symbol in common usage denotes it as such. Whether it's because of how games have made it that way doesn't matter, anymore. Maybe it could've back in the early days of gaming, had the Red Cross done something about it then.
But don't clutter the argument up with verbage that tries as hard as possible to make you sound profound. In the end, it just makes it read like you're trying too hard to be clever.
FTFA: "We would be willing to work with a videogame manufacturer to produce a game which shows the emblem in its correct use, as a symbol of protection during armed conflict, and where the player is rewarded for using the emblem correctly. Such a game could reward the player for respecting the rules of war and thereby, help the Red Cross Movement with its work to promote such respect," Meyer continued.
I, for sure would be glad to see a game breaking the violent logic that is the current game logic. "Heck! Can't I negociate with them ? They have a knife, I am an arsenal." "How many more should I kill for them to understand that I am dangerous ?"
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
The very first thing we did during the siege of Fallujah was take out the hospitals (the military viewed them as being sympathetic to the insurgents because they'd release civilian casualty figures, in addition to the obvious fact that they were rescuing wounded insurgents for medical care). We siezed the main hospital, bombed a smaller one flat, and shot up half a dozen ambulances.
Nice selective editing. What did you miss... oh yeah, the hospitals were being used as FREAKING ARMORIES and fortified bases!!! Because they thought, were ina hospital, no-one will think to look here!
Gee, I wonder why we wouldn't leave giant heavily armored fortified buildings alone.
When we retook the town, we returned the hospitals to actually being hospitals.
So I say: give them some credit for all their work, and if they don't want their symbol used in a particular manner, respect their opinion.
Besides, what have you done to support their work recently?
Interestingly, there are motions to deprecate the Red Cross for the Red Crystal.
A red cross sign doesn't mean "the red cross corporation (tm)" to anybody, it means:
a)This guy patches people up
b)He doesn't carry a weapon
c)Don't shoot him.
Nope - a red cross on a white background means that the bearer is a Knight Templar in the Middle Ages (around 1200AD), a European Crusader warrior for the Christians involved in a Holy War against the Moors (Muslims of Turkey and the Middle East). The Templars also happened to have hospitals which were open for public use - as did pretty much any holy order of most religions - but you can be pretty damned sure they carried some very nasty weapons, and were known for meting out some very unpleasant retribution on Muslim civilians (the Moors were also guilty of some awful attrocities- it was a particularly bloody period of history on all sides, but that's religion for you).
Various bodies still associating themselves with the Knights Templar still exist today, most of which are fairly harmless religious sects (well, as harmless as monotheism can be), but a small minority are fronts for racist right-wing extremists.
The word "hospital" also comes from related Crusader cult, the Knights Hospitaller (aka the Knights of Malta) who were charged with protecting Christian pilgrims on their journies to the Middle East. "Hospitaller" was the word for the staff of a "Hospice" or "Hostel"- words meaning a hotel for pilgrims; primarily providing bed and food, but usually also some basic medical facilities (pilgrims would usually be old or ill anyway, and usually embarked on their pilgrimage in the hope of divine intervention against a terminal illness). However, the Knights Hospitaller's symbol was a white Maltese cross on a red background - the opposite of the Red Cross symbol.
Andrew Oakley - www.aoakley.com
being a humanitarian organisation doesn't exempt them from all wrongdoing, and to be quite honest i wouldn't give a dime to the red cross. they're incompetent and I don't trust them. The red cross as a symbol for health care has been in popular culture for a long long time and surfing the current "unrest" in the world of IP is a new low for the Red Cross
They wont keep bitching about the symbol if the developers agree to include a "donate to the red cross" menu to unblock the feature. At least you want some stupid generic magic healer level 3 to heal your WWII troops.
//WR
a slowly beating tasty heart filled with rich tasty courage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emblems_of_the_Red_Cr oss
"The Geneva Conventions obliged their signatories to prevent the unauthorized use of the name and emblem in wartime and peacetime in order to ensure universal respect for the emblem.
Nevertheless, the emblem is often used to indicate first aid, medical supplies, and the like, which are abuses of the emblem and shall be forbidden by all signatory powers to the Geneva Conventions. In order to avoid this conflict, a different-colored cross is often used."
And I'm pretty sure that the argument that "someone ignored the Geneva Convention in the past, so we get to ignore it too" doesn't hold water.
Hey, if it works for the POTUS, why not for me
It isn't a twating trademark, there is international law governing its use.
PA uses it for their charity. I say let is be used in games if it can be used in films.
Nuff said.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
told to me by a female friend whose boyfriend was a marine combat medic in fallujah... basically she talked to him on the phone when he was there, and the story goes: 'we went into this hospital ward, and something seemed suspicious--all the patients were moving around under their blankets. so, we shot them all ... and what do you know? they all had grenades!'
... that the first reaction was to shoot all these people who could just as easily have been totally unarmed patients ... anyway the war crimes that were committed in fallujah, and everywhere else in iraq by the yankees will never be fully known because 99% of the time, they can do whatever they like, without any journalists around to record it.
of course, that part about them all having grenades, i don't really believe at all. but even if it was true
The International Red Cross (IRC) is going to sue Internet Relay Chat servers and programmers and users for using the same acronym.
Having beer for blood - that explains a lot about Australians! :-)
It's not bigotry.
Now maybe I didn't phrase things elegantly, but the problem with labelling all people who don't actively embrace a particular group as group-phobes (homophobes in this case) is that you needlessly tar a particular person and increase the level of confrontation.
Your example actually shows where the current gay rights movement has gone wrong. The civil rights movement pushed for equality not for people having to state that this group of people is fine and I fully support their lifestyle choices.
If I don't do anything to discriminate against someone based on sexual orientation but refuse to specifically state that my anti-discrimination policy covers all the current protected groups then am I discriminating against a group and am a bigot? No.
The Boy Scouts are like any private group and have certain requirements for membership. First and foremost is that you are male. Second, is that you acknowledge a divine creator is some form or other. They also have a restriction against homosexuals. Does this make the BSA a bunch of homophobes? More so than a bunch of bible-thumping women haters? Or do they simply have restrictions on who can be a member of their group?
The BSA isn't trying to restrict the activities of homosexuals. They aren't working to remove rights from people they are just saying these are the people who we will associate with and not others. (I believe they also restrict people who have had criminal convictions from being scout leaders too.)
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Because of the fact that the Red Cross doesn't want others using its symbol, the Green Cross has now become symbolic for first aid kits and the like.
When I was first becomming a FF, then EMT, and finally an EMT-P (Paramedic), all of my CPR and other basic classes were "Green Cross Certified". Because the American Red Cross wasn't the offical provider of the books, etc. Almost none of the medical equipment we had on our ambulances had the Red Cross symbol on them, either. It is why you see the image of normal sinus rhythm from an EKG on ambulances, and the letters EMS.
Look at a box of Johnson's & Johnson's Band-Aid brand of bandages. I don't think the current ones have the Red Cross symbol on them anymore. They used to. I know the 3M bandages don't.
I still think it is strange that the US government has given the symbol such drastic trademark protection, since there is prior use. It *is* called the Greek Cross for a reason.
However, I am not sure how successful they will be going after game manufacturers. If the manufacturer gets too much pressure, they just move out of the US, and viola! No problems anymore. It doesn't matter what the Geneva Conventions say. The symbol isn't being used in a negative fashion.
Besides, did anyone notice that the healing symbol in Half-Life 2 is a green cross? Some companies have already switched.
Regarding the Red Cross past track record, just google for
theresienstadt red cross
While I understand that the Red Cross in no way condones fragging your fellow man into utter oblivion, it isn't like the boys at Valve slapped a Red Cross logo onto
a rocket launcher or there's a hidden level in Doom 3 where the player has to fight his way through a sea of ambulances and humanitarian workers. The Point is that the red cross (as a symbol) has been used in conjunction with medicine and first-aid for decades. It's a familiar icon - it helps developers to create intuitive game elements that are easily grasped by the end user. Forcing the game industry to change standard MedKit procedure is a little ridiculous. How then would I differentiate between a Combine auxilliary power unit and a single use, wall-installed medical station? Beats the hell out of me....
I would like to know immediately if Slashdot has any plans to threaten my use of the division operand.
American planes in warfare shooting to warn rather than harm is common. My father was a weapons officer on a "Wild Weasle" plane in the Vietnam war and told me about the time an American was downed in a lake, the enemy was swarming out to get him and he layed down a line of fire between the enemy and the downed American. They scambled out of the lake pronto, and in time a helicopter came and rescued the guy. American soldiers are trained not to indiscrimately kill.
At least in Australia they give us a beer for our blood :) :D
/.!
Gets you drunk much faster
So, what you're saying is that beer gets you drunk faster?
Man, I learn something new every day at
Defining Statistics and Social Research
Doug?
Is that you?
*Still* negative function...
I don't know that that system would work well in the US.
For one thing, not everyone can give blood, due to certain restrictions.
I, for example, cannot, where the Red Cross is concerned, since I lived in Western Europe for more than 6 months since 1980. The FDA bars anyone who has spent 6 months or more in the UK between 1980 and 1996(?) from giving blood, but the Red Cross' rules are slightly more stringent (3 mo in UK/6 mo Western Europe).
There may be other FDA regulations that I'm unaware of, but with the Red Cross' rules, that rules out quite a number of people who have foriegn service jobs. Given the fact that there may be other FDA rules for other areas of the world with potential infectious agents, this might not be feasible in the US. I've only ever been able to donate blood to myself for surgery.
Do you really have to go and slap the "homophobe" label on me? You're undermining any point you might make by having to sink down into personal insult while trying to impugn my morality while I'm merely trying to point out that the rush to label a person and/or group a homophobe (and even worse, a bigot) does nothing to promote a cause, instead it merely adds unnecessary polarization to a touchy issue.
Did any of my statements reveal anything about my own personal stance vis-a-vis homosexuality? No. So why are you attempting to ascribe motivations to me? Is this an attempt to assume moral superiority and try to undermine the point without actually addressing it?
I'm not going to argue with you about choice versus genetic programming as no one can resolve that. We might as well argue about why some people prefer red heads or fat people or whatever.
My whole original point, which you seem to have managed to reinforce with your further statements is that issues like this can be addressed without applying derogatory labels to people that you happen to disagree with. In fact, the use of those labels will only make it harder to find a common ground and possibly even dry moderates away from your position.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Nice punchline.
I actually just got involved in this because I find this tendency to label and deride those who don't agree 100% with the "PC view" merely needlessly polarizes an issue where a sensible common ground could be found.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
You're the one who's being bigoted. Adopting a moral holier than thou stance and refusing to even consider the fact that your moral absolutist stance may be incorrect.
The most amazing thing is that you first say that
As I said: it's how you're coming across in this discussion. Feel free to state your stance explictly, but the implication most readers are going to draw from your posts here is that you are, to some degree, a homophobe. I'm not saying you are; I'm commenting on how you're coming across.
My whole point, if you'd be willing to climb down from your high horse for one minute is that you can have a civil discussion about issues like this without descending to name calling and making something more confrontational than is necessary.
But no, instead of actually listening to my point you go off on a tantrum about not sufferring a witch to live and end by calling me a homophobic bigot without knowing ONE DAMN THING about my stance on the subject. Why should I have to "clarify my stance" on the subject when my whole point was that you should simply avoid being deliberately confrontational with your language when trying to discuss the issue? No, instead you've gone past labelling the BSA as homophobes (an interesting trick ascribing a personal trait to a legal entity, btw) to directly calling me a homophobic bigot.
Congratulations.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
TFC 2006 Team match: Red, Blue and the Red Cross
;-)
Now sure how you would set up any scoring though that made sense, and of course the medic could not wear a gun at all. Add some priests for faster respawning
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
I know in Battlefield 2 I always try to shoot the medics first. I don't need them reviving more people to come after me.
Unless I'm in a tank or something: then it's better to let the medic revive first and nail them both.
Your " truly relevant passage " is nowhere to be found, the crucial phrase "shall not be regarded as protected persons", is not there either, it does however contain the reference as I gave it. Your "point of fact" is false and politically motivated, when you stop pulling quotes out of your arse maybe we can talk further.
The real Geneva convention and a wiki article on unlawful_combatants for future references and "points of fact".
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
I respectfully bow to your superior research, I should have known better from your sig. I still think your interpretation is a bit shakey but IANAL.
I think nations as the concept exists today must either merge, dissapear or self-destruct. International humanitarian law can only work while the powerfull nations abide by them (eg: Actually respected by the UNSC not just selectively enforecd), the most obvious problem is that powerfull governments are unwilling to expose themselves to an international criminal code. When a nation refuses to be subjected to international law, war becomes the only option to enforce the law.
Aggression, greed, revenge, zenophobia are all essential parts of human nature and we cannot remove them from ourselves let alone from others. I belive the aim of civilization should be to minimise the damage to life and limb that it or anyone else can cause to the individual. I don't for a second think this will happen, I belive war, over-population or pollution will permenently erradicate civilization not the other way around.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.