BBC report video on Sony and the Church issue.

http://ps3.qj.net/Sony-responds-to-Church-of-England-through-BBC-news/pg/49/aid/94764

So apparently the Church thinks aliens are human beings. Fascinating.

Man, people are getting way too touchy these days.

I guess BOOKS are next, watch out RAY BRADBURY! George Orwell would find this funny too!

Man, people are getting way too touchy these days.

I guess BOOKS are next, watch out RAY BRADBURY! George Orwell would find this funny too!

SolidTy

Actually, I think it's more the other way around. Since video games are the newest medium, their the one up for criticism. Before that it was movies, before then it was books (Catcher in the Rye anyone).

And before that, it was cars, or as some used to call them, brothels on wheels.

Think we should tell the church about Timesplitters 2 using the cathedral at Notre Dame as a level...?

Or how about the novel 'Northern Lights' where God gets killed?

And WTF is up with the whole 'Saving the minds of our children' spin on the argument? I know that woman lost her son because of a gun-fight but fighting against one game in a sea of hundreds of violent games and saying 'ALL violent games are bad' just doesn't seem fair.

Right. As a Christian I say that sueing them for use of the church without prior permission is alright.

The rest was mish-mash. People really have no clue of other forms of media, let alone peronal responsibility, that effects gun crime.

I wonder if a Innsomniac made it with a church built from the ground up would get the same scrutiny. In reality it wouldn't have.

Right. As a Christian I say that sueing them for use of the church without prior permission is alright.

Teh_Stevz

Turn the other cheek?

In multiplayer you do shoot human beings inside the cathedral. If the game is entirely science fiction Insomniac shouldn't have made a level based on a real church. This is within theorganization's right to take legal action and Sony would be smart to settle the case gracefully instead of making a stance-off.

[QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"] Right. As a Christian I say that sueing them for use of the church without prior permission is alright.whoisryanmack

From what I remember Newgrounds.com were forced, by law, to remove a particular Bear and the Big blue House game because it depicted the character wronglyand a Russian Roulette game because it used music from 'Who wants to be a Millionaire?' Strange as it sounds those are legit reasons to pursue a lawsuit.

I mean, if someone depicted you as a serial rapist from down-south, you'd let it slide right?

Ralphikari explained my point better.

[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"][QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"] Right. As a Christian I say that sueing them for use of the church without prior permission is alright.Teh_Stevz

From what I remember Newgrounds.com were forced, by law, to remove a particular Bear and the Big blue House game because it depicted the character wronglyand a Russian Roulette game because it used music from 'Who wants to be a Millionaire?' Strange as it sounds those are legit reasons to pursue a lawsuit.

I mean, if someone depicted you as a serial rapist from down-south, you'd let it slide right?

Ralphikari explained my point better.

But this is not about me, or any other business entity. It is just somewhat strange that the Christian religion wouldchoose to sue when they feel they've been wronged. It goes against some of their supposedlyfundamental principles. I was half joking, but it does strike me odd when things like this happen. People are supposed to be imperfect, so their straying from said principles I understand, but this is the actual church.

Right. As a Christian I say that sueing them for use of the church without prior permission is alright.

The rest was mish-mash. People really have no clue of other forms of media, let alone peronal responsibility, that effects gun crime.

I wonder if a Innsomniac made it with a church built from the ground up would get the same scrutiny. In reality it wouldn't have.

Teh_Stevz

Are churches nowdays copyrighted or trademarked or any buildins of kind? I mean, I wonder if they sue people who photograph the church. Sueing because they modeled it for a game. It's not the church, it's their own creation which looks like the church. Never the less, there is no such law that would forbid this. If I paint a picture of the church do I need to go first there and ask for premission? This is complete nonsense.

EDIT: Music, and characters can be and are under copyright laws, for example Harry Potter is under copyright, but locations in the real world aren't. You may not be able to enter all the buildings the world has to offer, but you have a damn right to pain, photgraph or make models of them.

Right. As a Christian I say that sueing them for use of the church without prior permission is alright.Teh_Stevz

As a Roman Catholic, I say they're being unreasonably whiny.

You wouldn't catch the Norbortein Seminary/Priesthood right next to my house acting like this Church. Basically, because they'd know it's a stupid issue.

Sure you can take a photograph of that church but if you start selling your own line of photos using that image then you would have to pay the church for it. Don't you see the difference? To deny its modeled directly after the Manchester Cathedral is something even Sony hasn't attempted. They said "its an alternate reality" not that it wasn't that church. To make the church a battleground is pushing it even further. In America they would probably be able to get away with it but England has much different laws when it comes to things like defamation, libel. or whatever they would sue under.

But this is not about me, or any other business entity. It is just somewhat strange that the Christian religion wouldchoose to sue when they feel they've been wronged. It goes against some of their supposedlyfundamental principles. I was half joking, but it does strike me odd when things like this happen. People are supposed to be imperfect, so their straying from said principles I understand, but this is the actual church.whoisryanmack

Then again, the media have ways of spinning things into their favor. A debate about VGs influencing violence in real-life can last for ages. Including the church would make it a saga almost.

As Ralph said, maybe if the dev's built a church from scratch this might not have been called apon. I'm also sure there's been worse depiction scenes than to Resistance, not to mention it's Sci-Fi Fantasy,so Sony have every right to defend it.

[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]But this is not about me, or any other business entity. It is just somewhat strange that the Christian religion wouldchoose to sue when they feel they've been wronged. It goes against some of their supposedlyfundamental principles. I was half joking, but it does strike me odd when things like this happen. People are supposed to be imperfect, so their straying from said principles I understand, but this is the actual church.Teh_Stevz

Then again, the media have ways of spinning things into their favor. A debate about VGs influencing violence in real-life can last for ages. Including the church would make it a saga almost.

As Ralph said, maybe if the dev's built a church from scratch this might not have been called apon. I'm also sure there's been worse depiction scenes than to Resistance, not to mention it's Sci-Fi Fantasy,so Sony have every right to defend it.

It's the fact of that Church going on to say that the game is depicting the game as killing human beings in a church is pretty stupid. Even Sony came out and said that the game is fictional to where you are killing aliens. Don't listen to JiveT. He's just bent on hating Sony will take any shred of hate towards the company and spin it in his ways.

They should sue SCEA for Bubsy 3d. That's a lawsuit that everyone can agree on.cjdaweasel

The gamers of the planet vs. SCEA...better known as "the bubsy conflict".

Sure you can take a photograph of that church but if you start selling your own line of photos using that image then you would have to pay the church for it. Don't you see the difference? To deny its modeled directly after the Manchester Cathedral is something even Sony hasn't attempted. They said "its an alternate reality" not that it wasn't that church. To make the church a battleground is pushing it even further. In America they would probably be able to get away with it but England has much different laws when it comes to things like defamation, libel. or whatever they would sue under.

JiveT

Buildings/locations are public domain, you can sell whatever picture you want. For example I can take photos of the Eifel Tower and sell them, they are my creations, I don't have to ask France for premission, or England to sell photos of Big Ben. I can also take photos of a Audi, BMW, Dodge, Mercedes, Lamborgini and sell them, without asking premission.

Certainly "products" like cars are under copyright so you may not reproduce them, thus the racing games need a license from the car manufacturer, but there's no such law for buildings and if I want I can go model the Eifel Tower for Quake or Counter-Strike and I wouldn't break any laws, or my local Church for that matter.

Guess the next step will be to pay admission for breathing as people want to trademark or copyright everything they see.

Sure you can take a photograph of that church but if you start selling your own line of photos using that image then you would have to pay the church for it.JiveT

[QUOTE="JiveT"]

Sure you can take a photograph of that church but if you start selling your own line of photos using that image then you would have to pay the church for it. Don't you see the difference? To deny its modeled directly after the Manchester Cathedral is something even Sony hasn't attempted. They said "its an alternate reality" not that it wasn't that church. To make the church a battleground is pushing it even further. In America they would probably be able to get away with it but England has much different laws when it comes to things like defamation, libel. or whatever they would sue under.

F-Minus

Buildings/locations are public domain, you can sell whatever picture you want. For example I can take photos of the Eifel Tower and sell them, they are my creations, I don't have to ask France for premission, or England to sell photos of Big Ben. I can also take photos of a Audi, BMW, Dodge, Mercedes, Lamborgini and sell them, without asking premission.

Certainly "products" like cars are under copyright so you may not reproduce them, thus the racing games need a license from the car manufacturer, but there's no such law for buildings and if I want I can go model the Eifel Tower for Quake or Counter-Strike and I wouldn't break any laws, or my local Church for that matter.

Guess the next step will be to pay admission for breathing as people want to trademark or copyright everything they see.

sorry to inform you, but just yesterday I obtained the rights to the phrase "copyright everything they see". You will be hearing from my lawyers within 3 business days.

[QUOTE="JiveT"]

Sure you can take a photograph of that church but if you start selling your own line of photos using that image then you would have to pay the church for it. Don't you see the difference? To deny its modeled directly after the Manchester Cathedral is something even Sony hasn't attempted. They said "its an alternate reality" not that it wasn't that church. To make the church a battleground is pushing it even further. In America they would probably be able to get away with it but England has much different laws when it comes to things like defamation, libel. or whatever they would sue under.

F-Minus

Buildings/locations are public domain, you can sell whatever picture you want. For example I can take photos of the Eifel Tower and sell them, they are my creations, I don't have to ask France for premission, or England to sell photos of Big Ben. I can also take photos of a Audi, BMW, Dodge, Mercedes, Lamborgini and sell them, without asking premission.

Certainly "products" like cars are under copyright so you may not reproduce them, thus the racing games need a license from the car manufacturer, but there's no such law for buildings and if I want I can go model the Eifel Tower for Quake or Counter-Strike and I wouldn't break any laws, or my local Church for that matter.

Guess the next step will be to pay admission for breathing as people want to trademark or copyright everything they see.

You are American right? Different countries have different laws. I looked up the UK laws and it appears that buildings are in the public domain but I notice the church mentions it renders the nave or interior which I presume might have a separate legal ruling or they wouldn't have been so careful in their wording. I'm no expert on copyright law I just assumed that the church had some kind of copyright on its image or it wouldn't have any basis for a legal threat. They don't make it clear exactly what they would take them to court for but as I said before the UK has different laws than the US when it comes to these things.

Right. As a Christian I say that sueing them for use of the church without prior permission is alright.

The rest was mish-mash. People really have no clue of other forms of media, let alone peronal responsibility, that effects gun crime.

I wonder if a Innsomniac made it with a church built from the ground up would get the same scrutiny. In reality it wouldn't have.

Teh_Stevz

I read both articles and find it SICKENING.

So the church believe that an act of blasphomy or despoiling of a religious site can be made up for by a donation of a large sum of money. They don't change do they.

IMO Sony should do nothing. The mere mention of a cash donation takes away any credability the church may of had. They should have asked for it to be removed or nothing. Plus God is omnipresent and therefore in every building, Churches are just sactified buildings that we have constructed to congregate in and centralise a community for Christenings, marriages and funerals.

It's the fact of that Church going on to say that the game is depicting the game as killing human beings in a church is pretty stupid...hotdaisy18

... :P

Its really a dumb reason to take the game off store shelves. I mean its not like Insomniac did it on purpose to make it look like this church was evil or something but to put gamers in a more real environment and whoever has been to these places would remember it from the game and kind of be like wow, they added the church in there and it looks almost like it. It enhances the realism of areas in games just like grand theft auto does when u are playing the games. And they try an make it out like because of video games that ladies son was killed. I will tell u this, games are actually a good thing, my little brother rather come home and play with my ps3 and xbox 360 and ps2, then go out and hang out with some of his friends who are in gangs, and because of video games, he puts himself in a safer place which is home then be out with his friends, where they could be anywhere where trouble is, and could either get hurt or killed out there, so im thankful for video games.squallff8_fan

Think we should tell the church about Timesplitters 2 using the cathedral at Notre Dame as a level...?

Or how about the novel 'Northern Lights' where God gets killed?

And WTF is up with the whole 'Saving the minds of our children' spin on the argument? I know that woman lost her son because of a gun-fight but fighting against one game in a sea of hundreds of violent games and saying 'ALL violent games are bad' just doesn't seem fair.

TheLordHimself

Somebody should show these people the translated version of Shin Megami Tensei 2. In that game, God's portrayed as a villain and a tyrant, and you get to kill him should you choose that path. They even named him YHVH, which is supposedly his true name or something.Jagazaar

Retarded. Let's sue Infinity Ward for using real-life locations in Call of Duty!16bitkevin

As long as they sought permission, there is no problem. Think of it this way, if you're image was used in a game so openly, and it sells a million copies, and not only are you not asked for permission for it's use in the game, but they do something terribly against your convictions, and it makes you mad seeing your virtual self in a game, wouldn't you want an apology as well?

[QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"]

[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"][QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"] Right. As a Christian I say that sueing them for use of the church without prior permission is alright.whoisryanmack

From what I remember Newgrounds.com were forced, by law, to remove a particular Bear and the Big blue House game because it depicted the character wronglyand a Russian Roulette game because it used music from 'Who wants to be a Millionaire?' Strange as it sounds those are legit reasons to pursue a lawsuit.

I mean, if someone depicted you as a serial rapist from down-south, you'd let it slide right?

Ralphikari explained my point better.

But this is not about me, or any other business entity. It is just somewhat strange that the Christian religion wouldchoose to sue when they feel they've been wronged. It goes against some of their supposedlyfundamental principles. I was half joking, but it does strike me odd when things like this happen. People are supposed to be imperfect, so their straying from said principles I understand, but this is the actual church.

[QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"]

[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]But this is not about me, or any other business entity. It is just somewhat strange that the Christian religion wouldchoose to sue when they feel they've been wronged. It goes against some of their supposedlyfundamental principles. I was half joking, but it does strike me odd when things like this happen. People are supposed to be imperfect, so their straying from said principles I understand, but this is the actual church.hotdaisy18

Then again, the media have ways of spinning things into their favor. A debate about VGs influencing violence in real-life can last for ages. Including the church would make it a saga almost.

As Ralph said, maybe if the dev's built a church from scratch this might not have been called apon. I'm also sure there's been worse depiction scenes than to Resistance, not to mention it's Sci-Fi Fantasy,so Sony have every right to defend it.

It's the fact of that Church going on to say that the game is depicting the game as killing human beings in a church is pretty stupid. Even Sony came out and said that the game is fictional to where you are killing aliens. Don't listen to JiveT. He's just bent on hating Sony will take any shred of hate towards the company and spin it in his ways.

[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]But this is not about me, or any other business entity. It is just somewhat strange that the Christian religion wouldchoose to sue when they feel they've been wronged. It goes against some of their supposedlyfundamental principles. I was half joking, but it does strike me odd when things like this happen. People are supposed to be imperfect, so their straying from said principles I understand, but this is the actual church.Sagacious_Tien

I said it was the church...who should represent the religion. I still think demanding anything goes against "turning the other cheek" or many other christian principles. If they were to profit from it, it would only further the degree. The Church, and religion, supposedly teaches that others will do you wrong, but it should not be your reaction to retaliate. As I said again, I know this is the real world and I was mostly joking....but it doesn't change the fact that it is fundementally odd.

[QUOTE="F-Minus"][QUOTE="JiveT"]

Sure you can take a photograph of that church but if you start selling your own line of photos using that image then you would have to pay the church for it. Don't you see the difference? To deny its modeled directly after the Manchester Cathedral is something even Sony hasn't attempted. They said "its an alternate reality" not that it wasn't that church. To make the church a battleground is pushing it even further. In America they would probably be able to get away with it but England has much different laws when it comes to things like defamation, libel. or whatever they would sue under.

JiveT

Buildings/locations are public domain, you can sell whatever picture you want. For example I can take photos of the Eifel Tower and sell them, they are my creations, I don't have to ask France for premission, or England to sell photos of Big Ben. I can also take photos of a Audi, BMW, Dodge, Mercedes, Lamborgini and sell them, without asking premission.

Certainly "products" like cars are under copyright so you may not reproduce them, thus the racing games need a license from the car manufacturer, but there's no such law for buildings and if I want I can go model the Eifel Tower for Quake or Counter-Strike and I wouldn't break any laws, or my local Church for that matter.

Guess the next step will be to pay admission for breathing as people want to trademark or copyright everything they see.

You are American right? Different countries have different laws. I looked up the UK laws and it appears that buildings are in the public domain but I notice the church mentions it renders the nave or interior which I presume might have a separate legal ruling or they wouldn't have been so careful in their wording. I'm no expert on copyright law I just assumed that the church had some kind of copyright on its image or it wouldn't have any basis for a legal threat. They don't make it clear exactly what they would take them to court for but as I said before the UK has different laws than the US when it comes to these things.

I'm not American, I'm from Europe. There is no such law you speak of in the world. The Church would like to control lots of things, which goes against the law, thus why the Church is separated from the politics in almost all countries, if it wouldn't be we'd all be in big trouble as the church equals to fanatism in lots of views (note: Church not religion).

Soon enough you'll see that their claims about copyright on the church will fail, as I said above, the building is public domain and frankly the church modeled in the game is infact different as the real life one, doubt they have the size and architecture exactly correct, anyway, buildings cannot be under copyright.

I live in England.

Manchester the area where this cathedral is (and also home of that crappy football team Manchester united) has very high levels of gun crime.

The familes of victims often meet at the said religious building so obviously they don't want it to be know as the scenes of violent gun battles(it doesnt matter if its aliens, your human character could still get shot dead inside it)

Sony could have done a bit of research and realised that putting guns in to an exact replica of a building where people pray for the victims of gun crime wouldnt be too clever.

But Sony are retarded these days, after this and the goat thing its no wonder the church want it pulled and changed.

[QUOTE="squallff8_fan"]Its really a dumb reason to take the game off store shelves. I mean its not like Insomniac did it on purpose to make it look like this church was evil or something but to put gamers in a more real environment and whoever has been to these places would remember it from the game and kind of be like wow, they added the church in there and it looks almost like it. It enhances the realism of areas in games just like grand theft auto does when u are playing the games. And they try an make it out like because of video games that ladies son was killed. I will tell u this, games are actually a good thing, my little brother rather come home and play with my ps3 and xbox 360 and ps2, then go out and hang out with some of his friends who are in gangs, and because of video games, he puts himself in a safer place which is home then be out with his friends, where they could be anywhere where trouble is, and could either get hurt or killed out there, so im thankful for video games.Sagacious_Tien

Think we should tell the church about Timesplitters 2 using the cathedral at Notre Dame as a level...?

Or how about the novel 'Northern Lights' where God gets killed?

And WTF is up with the whole 'Saving the minds of our children' spin on the argument? I know that woman lost her son because of a gun-fight but fighting against one game in a sea of hundreds of violent games and saying 'ALL violent games are bad' just doesn't seem fair.

TheLordHimself

Somebody should show these people the translated version of Shin Megami Tensei 2. In that game, God's portrayed as a villain and a tyrant, and you get to kill him should you choose that path. They even named him YHVH, which is supposedly his true name or something.Jagazaar

Retarded. Let's sue Infinity Ward for using real-life locations in Call of Duty!16bitkevin

As long as they sought permission, there is no problem. Think of it this way, if you're image was used in a game so openly, and it sells a million copies, and not only are you not asked for permission for it's use in the game, but they do something terribly against your convictions, and it makes you mad seeing your virtual self in a game, wouldn't you want an apology as well?

[QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"]

[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"][QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"] Right. As a Christian I say that sueing them for use of the church without prior permission is alright.whoisryanmack

From what I remember Newgrounds.com were forced, by law, to remove a particular Bear and the Big blue House game because it depicted the character wronglyand a Russian Roulette game because it used music from 'Who wants to be a Millionaire?' Strange as it sounds those are legit reasons to pursue a lawsuit.

I mean, if someone depicted you as a serial rapist from down-south, you'd let it slide right?

Ralphikari explained my point better.

But this is not about me, or any other business entity. It is just somewhat strange that the Christian religion wouldchoose to sue when they feel they've been wronged. It goes against some of their supposedlyfundamental principles. I was half joking, but it does strike me odd when things like this happen. People are supposed to be imperfect, so their straying from said principles I understand, but this is the actual church.

[QUOTE="Teh_Stevz"]

[QUOTE="whoisryanmack"]But this is not about me, or any other business entity. It is just somewhat strange that the Christian religion wouldchoose to sue when they feel they've been wronged. It goes against some of their supposedlyfundamental principles. I was half joking, but it does strike me odd when things like this happen. People are supposed to be imperfect, so their straying from said principles I understand, but this is the actual church.hotdaisy18

Then again, the media have ways of spinning things into their favor. A debate about VGs influencing violence in real-life can last for ages. Including the church would make it a saga almost.

As Ralph said, maybe if the dev's built a church from scratch this might not have been called apon. I'm also sure there's been worse depiction scenes than to Resistance, not to mention it's Sci-Fi Fantasy,so Sony have every right to defend it.

It's the fact of that Church going on to say that the game is depicting the game as killing human beings in a church is pretty stupid. Even Sony came out and said that the game is fictional to where you are killing aliens. Don't listen to JiveT. He's just bent on hating Sony will take any shred of hate towards the company and spin it in his ways.

Yes but still quite obvious they are after money. Look they couldve easilly just asked to take the game off the store shelves or be taken to court, as any church would do but no they want a donation for the church and still want them to take it off store shelves. When can they get it out of there heads, its a damn video game, and not real life.