Cathedral row over computer game
- Thread starter Buzza
- Start date
Just saw this article about this "news" story, link
http://www.britishgaming.co.uk/?p=2108#more-2108
This article is a personal opinion piece by Jonathan, and the comments made in this piece do not represent the opinions of BritishGaming.co.uk as a whole. Readers should also be aware it contains spoilers of a location used in a level of Resistance on Playstation 3.
A few months ago I wrote about a story which brought in to question some ethical issues involving games media, a piece called ‘On Journalism, Kotaku, and Blackballs’. Not everybody shared the same opinion, but I was hoping not to end up writing another article questioning journalism. However, a story has come out today which I feel is unjustified sensationalism. This time, it’s not the video game media, but it’s the media on video games.
The BBC reported this morning that the Church of England is considering suing Sony over the use of Manchester Cathedral in the Playstation 3 game, Resistance: Fall of Man. It started as a small story, but gradually picked up some steam and is currently top billing on the BBC News website, with very prominently placed reports on News 24 and in the Six O’Clock News. It’s also been picked up worldwide, with CNN and The Associated Press reporting on it.
This story, as a whole, is utterly ridiculous. From the subject itself with the Church of England wanting the game removed from stores to the reporting of it following the normal “games are bad” agenda.
The Church will be sending a letter to Sony on Monday (you’ve got to love the postal service) and if Sony don’t apologise and recall the games, they will commence legal action. Officials called the game “sick” and “sacrilegious”, and apart from the fact it’s taken them quite a while to notice, it’s just stupid.
The thoughts are that by setting the level there, it is encouraging gun crime. It’s been a key point from the Church, but there seems something a bit odd there. The game itself is encouraging gun crime specifically in Manchester? Heck, why not just attack games as a whole for that- oh wait, I forget: the Church probably is. I lose track of all the groups who hate on games… there’s so many of them.
One of the silliest things about this and also the way it has been reported is the lack of context. It’s a very important thing, shown very recently with offensive words being used on the current series of Big Brother. However, it is only in quotes from Sony which it is stated that the game is in no way modern day, but is fantasy. A statement said “Resistance: Fall of Man is a fantasy science fiction game and is not based on reality” and also likened it to Doctor Who in that respect. In fact, I have not been able to find any mainstream article where it states that the enemies are aliens. Isn’t it a very important point that this “virtual shoot-out” “in which hundreds of enemies are killed” is against aliens, and not humans?
Ah, but if they did, it makes the story less important. It no longer sounds as if there are hundreds of people fighting in a place which could easily be replicated in real life, so it’s not as big of a story. Sure, they do quote Sony and David Wilson saying it is all fantasy, but it’s deep down in the article. The initial reaction of “games = bad” is still there.
It’s hard to tell if the articles are that biased though. Games being bad isn’t the real bit of the story, and if you don’t agree with something, it automatically seems biased to you when it might actually be a pretty fair representation of the situation. Then there is the fact that news agencies are businesses: they want market share. Whether it is online, with newspapers of viewing figures for TV channels, most of them chose their slant to appeal to an audience in order to sell to them.
The real story itself is the lack of permission, and that’s something I can’t comment about much. My legal experience is playing Ace Attorney and watching Boston Legal. It doesn’t stop me from going on Google though, and finding the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988. Let’s take a little look:
(1) This section applies to—
(a) buildings, and
(b) sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.
(2) The copyright in such a work is not infringed by—
(a) making a graphic work representing it,
(b) making a photograph or film of it, or
(c) broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it.
That’s pretty basic stuff there. Sure, they can get their lawyers to find a loophole, because they are the Church of England, and it’s not as if a small thing like the law will get in their way. With that simple bit of legislation making the threats seemingly pointless, it’s a wonder why they even bothered.
One possibility is that they are using this unjustified legal threat for some justified anger. In the reports, quotes from Church members are not about the copying of the building, but rather, the use of it. A church is seen to be a house of God, and they believe it is distasteful that it is used in a violent scenario. It’s a valid point, but Resistance shouldn’t be singled out in this respect: and it seems as if they are just taking the weak point of the church building as a smokescreen for hopeful massive damage against Sony.
That makes it slightly more understandable that the media seems to have a negative view on it, but it’s been taken as such an easy story. None of them seemed to get a copy of the game and do side by side comparisons, just relying on footage which was low quality enough to come from YouTube. When something is the top story on ITV News and second on the BBC, you’d think they might bother looking in to the story, but no. In fairness, the long report in the Ten O’Clock news on BBC One did mention quite a bit from Sony’s side of things and the point about you fighting aliens.
Overall though, this is a pretty bad story, which has been reported badly. The Churches claims are stupid (though the real motive might not be that), and there has been some quite shoddy journalism about it. But hey, it’s not a big world event, so it’s not as if they need to sacrifice a portion of the audience not drawn in by a shock headline in favour of quality reporting…
Wonder if he ment the weakspot and massive damage quote in the story?
http://www.britishgaming.co.uk/?p=2108#more-2108
This article is a personal opinion piece by Jonathan, and the comments made in this piece do not represent the opinions of BritishGaming.co.uk as a whole. Readers should also be aware it contains spoilers of a location used in a level of Resistance on Playstation 3.
A few months ago I wrote about a story which brought in to question some ethical issues involving games media, a piece called ‘On Journalism, Kotaku, and Blackballs’. Not everybody shared the same opinion, but I was hoping not to end up writing another article questioning journalism. However, a story has come out today which I feel is unjustified sensationalism. This time, it’s not the video game media, but it’s the media on video games.
The BBC reported this morning that the Church of England is considering suing Sony over the use of Manchester Cathedral in the Playstation 3 game, Resistance: Fall of Man. It started as a small story, but gradually picked up some steam and is currently top billing on the BBC News website, with very prominently placed reports on News 24 and in the Six O’Clock News. It’s also been picked up worldwide, with CNN and The Associated Press reporting on it.
This story, as a whole, is utterly ridiculous. From the subject itself with the Church of England wanting the game removed from stores to the reporting of it following the normal “games are bad” agenda.
The Church will be sending a letter to Sony on Monday (you’ve got to love the postal service) and if Sony don’t apologise and recall the games, they will commence legal action. Officials called the game “sick” and “sacrilegious”, and apart from the fact it’s taken them quite a while to notice, it’s just stupid.
The thoughts are that by setting the level there, it is encouraging gun crime. It’s been a key point from the Church, but there seems something a bit odd there. The game itself is encouraging gun crime specifically in Manchester? Heck, why not just attack games as a whole for that- oh wait, I forget: the Church probably is. I lose track of all the groups who hate on games… there’s so many of them.
One of the silliest things about this and also the way it has been reported is the lack of context. It’s a very important thing, shown very recently with offensive words being used on the current series of Big Brother. However, it is only in quotes from Sony which it is stated that the game is in no way modern day, but is fantasy. A statement said “Resistance: Fall of Man is a fantasy science fiction game and is not based on reality” and also likened it to Doctor Who in that respect. In fact, I have not been able to find any mainstream article where it states that the enemies are aliens. Isn’t it a very important point that this “virtual shoot-out” “in which hundreds of enemies are killed” is against aliens, and not humans?
Ah, but if they did, it makes the story less important. It no longer sounds as if there are hundreds of people fighting in a place which could easily be replicated in real life, so it’s not as big of a story. Sure, they do quote Sony and David Wilson saying it is all fantasy, but it’s deep down in the article. The initial reaction of “games = bad” is still there.
It’s hard to tell if the articles are that biased though. Games being bad isn’t the real bit of the story, and if you don’t agree with something, it automatically seems biased to you when it might actually be a pretty fair representation of the situation. Then there is the fact that news agencies are businesses: they want market share. Whether it is online, with newspapers of viewing figures for TV channels, most of them chose their slant to appeal to an audience in order to sell to them.
The real story itself is the lack of permission, and that’s something I can’t comment about much. My legal experience is playing Ace Attorney and watching Boston Legal. It doesn’t stop me from going on Google though, and finding the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988. Let’s take a little look:
(1) This section applies to—
(a) buildings, and
(b) sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.
(2) The copyright in such a work is not infringed by—
(a) making a graphic work representing it,
(b) making a photograph or film of it, or
(c) broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it.
That’s pretty basic stuff there. Sure, they can get their lawyers to find a loophole, because they are the Church of England, and it’s not as if a small thing like the law will get in their way. With that simple bit of legislation making the threats seemingly pointless, it’s a wonder why they even bothered.
One possibility is that they are using this unjustified legal threat for some justified anger. In the reports, quotes from Church members are not about the copying of the building, but rather, the use of it. A church is seen to be a house of God, and they believe it is distasteful that it is used in a violent scenario. It’s a valid point, but Resistance shouldn’t be singled out in this respect: and it seems as if they are just taking the weak point of the church building as a smokescreen for hopeful massive damage against Sony.
That makes it slightly more understandable that the media seems to have a negative view on it, but it’s been taken as such an easy story. None of them seemed to get a copy of the game and do side by side comparisons, just relying on footage which was low quality enough to come from YouTube. When something is the top story on ITV News and second on the BBC, you’d think they might bother looking in to the story, but no. In fairness, the long report in the Ten O’Clock news on BBC One did mention quite a bit from Sony’s side of things and the point about you fighting aliens.
Overall though, this is a pretty bad story, which has been reported badly. The Churches claims are stupid (though the real motive might not be that), and there has been some quite shoddy journalism about it. But hey, it’s not a big world event, so it’s not as if they need to sacrifice a portion of the audience not drawn in by a shock headline in favour of quality reporting…
Wonder if he ment the weakspot and massive damage quote in the story?
Nzyme said:
If it was an exact replica maybe but its not, even if it was look at the copyright laws i included above Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.
(1) This section applies to—
(a) buildings, and
(b) sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.
(2) The copyright in such a work is not infringed by—
(a) making a graphic work representing it,
(b) making a photograph or film of it, or
(c) broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it.
So under section 2, Even if it is a graphical representation of the exact building (which its not) it does not breach the Copyright, Designs and Patent act. I think the problem with the Church is the morals of killing "hundreds of soldiers" inside the Cathedral as it has been reported. This is of course untrue as if i remember its just leapers (head crab type things), maybe the odd Chimera grunts and the big mutant hound type things, hardly hundreds of soldiers is it. If thats true then countless other games/films should be treated the same by the Church and all responsible should be taking to Court. I cant see how in the court of law how any of this could stick as it full of miss information and sensationalism by the Church and the Press.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 9,682
- Location
- On the pale blue dot
I can't believe the media portrayal of this story. They seem to be reporting off of each other and using a grainy clip from ut00b rather than actually looking at the game themselves. Oh wait, of course I can believe this, its the usual media portrayal of the video game industry.
Usually I enjoy people putting the boot into Sony, but I'm with them on this one regarding at least the reporting (IP is another thing, one for the lawyers).
Usually I enjoy people putting the boot into Sony, but I'm with them on this one regarding at least the reporting (IP is another thing, one for the lawyers).
Nzyme said:
that shoudlnt matter really though , i mean look at the new GTA ..... reckon it will be pulled because they copied new york and LOADS of its buildings without permission....
plus not only have they copied the buildings but theyve took the **** out of the brands based in them too
Quoting the church:
As opposed to a place that harbours and attempts to hide paedophiles and acts of paedophillia?
Did you hear about the paedophile that wanted to be a vicar, the church turned him down as they only had vacancies for vicars left.
As opposed to a place that harbours and attempts to hide paedophiles and acts of paedophillia?
Did you hear about the paedophile that wanted to be a vicar, the church turned him down as they only had vacancies for vicars left.
Slinwagh said:
Well done genius, this is a protestant Cathedral, not a Catholic one. The protestant church has a far cleaner history on that front. I only recall one story of late, and it was handled much more sensibly than the cases the Catholics have had.
Much of the Catholic problem comes down to procedures surrounding confession, but I'm not sure this is the thread for that.
The only way the Church will get anything is from a good will gesture from Sony, they dont think they have a legal leg to stand on. As far as i have read it is not illegal to use a digital representation of a public building without permission or we'd all have to ask permission to take photos of Big Ben and Saint Paul's. I guess the film industry is different as they have to pay as they are actually using the physical building so stopping it from doing what its supposed to do and affecting the local area. In the end i expect it to be settled out of a court and Sony to give a donation to the local area, maybe give a local youth project some PS3's with copies of Resistance 