Sony Apologizes for Church Incident.

To put an end to the recent controversy about one of the scenarios used in R:FoM, an apologetic Sony has taken out an advert in the Manchester Evening News, stating:

"It is clear to us that the connection between the congregation and the cathedral is a deeply personal and spiritual one. As a result, it is also clear that we have offended some of the congregation by using the cathedral in our science fiction game. It was never our intention to offend anyone in the making of this game, and we would like to apologise unreservedly to them for causing that offence, and to all parts of the community who we might also have offended."

What did the Church say?

"We asked Sony to withdraw the game. They have refused to do this. We asked Sony to make a substantial donation to community groups nominated by the Cathedral. They have refused to do this. We also asked them to sign up to the Sacred Digital Guidelines. They have refused to do this. We fear that the next buildings to be cloned for virtual desecration could be a mosque, synagogue, temple or other churches."

Oh, but there's more.

Manchester Cathedral is calling for all video games manufacturers to sign up to a new set of "sacred digital guidelines" to prevent future "virtual desecration" of religious buildings.

Digital Guidelines code of conduct

1. Respect our sacred spaces as places of prayer, worship, peace, learning and heritage.

2. Do not assume that sacred space interiors are copyright free.

3. Get permission from the faith leaders who are responsible for the building interiors you want to clone.

4. Support the work of those engaged in resisting the culture of gun crime and those involved in promoting the work of conflict resolution.

I don't think the Church is wrong in complaining. You think Sony wouldn't be throwing lawsuits around if you made a shooter than took place at SCEA headquarters?

A movie or TV show couldn't get away with filming a scene like this at the cathederal. This is one of those little cases where gaming doesn't hold itself to the same standards of other forms of media, but then expects to have the same rights regarding censorship. I'm not saying it's right and it isn't overblown, but if gaming is going to receive full rights of protection for its freedom of speech, it's going to show a little more responsibily andbe a little more sensitive to things like this. Show some common sense. You portray violence in a real world church and expect nothing??

They shouldn't make such a big deal out of this, they should be glad that it is a pretty cool level!

Besides, it's a virtual world, it's not like it has actually happened.

And I strongly doubt that someone will walk into that church and start shooting because of that level.

A movie or TV show couldn't get away with filming a scene like this at the cathederal.

Robio_basic

Err, if it was a sci-fi movie that stated that it didn't have any connections to real life then it probably could get away with it. There really is a double standard with video-game violence against other forms of entertainment.

[QUOTE="Robio_basic"]

A movie or TV show couldn't get away with filming a scene like this at the cathederal.

Funkyhamster

Err, if it was a sci-fi movie that stated that it didn't have any connections to real life then it probably could get away with it. There really is a double standard with video-game violence against other forms of entertainment.

No it wouldn't. Not unless they had expressed consent from the catherderal itself. Everytime you've seen a real world church used in a film or show they had the permission from said church ahead of time, and explained exactly what was going to happen. And most times they had to pay a buttload of money to do it as well.

I don't think the Church is wrong in complaining. You think Sony wouldn't be throwing lawsuits around if you made a shooter than took place at SCEA headquarters?

Robio_basic

I think that depends on who you have to kill. If you have to kill Sony employees, you'll definitely get a lawsuit. But if you have to kill nazi's, aliens etc., you'll probably won't get a lawsuit.

No it wouldn't. Not unless they had expressed consent from the catherderal itself. Everytime you've seen a real world church used in a film or show they had the permission from said church ahead of time, and explained exactly what was going to happen. And most times they had to pay a buttload of money to do it as well.

Robio_basic

That's true. However, I'm guessing that the church probably wouldn't have given Sony consent. The question is if they would have given consent to a movie or TV show...

THis is one of the reasons I dislike religion. It always finds a way to screw with things.iMuffins

No kidding. Churches are trying to get too much power and influence. Sony shouldn't have apologized. "Sacred" is not a term contained in business language.

We fear that the next buildings to be cloned for virtual desecration could be a mosque, synagogue, temple or other churches.

SteelAttack

The mosque one has already been done in several games. Years before resistance. No one has complained about them. Someone is just looking for a paycheck. They will probably get it too since sony is already apologizing.

[QUOTE="Funkyhamster"][QUOTE="Robio_basic"]

A movie or TV show couldn't get away with filming a scene like this at the cathederal.

Robio_basic

Err, if it was a sci-fi movie that stated that it didn't have any connections to real life then it probably could get away with it. There really is a double standard with video-game violence against other forms of entertainment.

No it wouldn't. Not unless they had expressed consent from the catherderal itself. Everytime you've seen a real world church used in a film or show they had the permission from said church ahead of time, and explained exactly what was going to happen. And most times they had to pay a buttload of money to do it as well.

Yes... Christians are so peaceful....

Which is why they started The Crusade, a war that lasted 200 years.

Obviously, they don't really care about church being used in a game. They just want some money.

This is nothing more than the tyranny of the dogmatic who believe their 'holy' spaces are above the standards of law and equitablity. The Eiffel Tower and the Statue of Liberty has been destroyed countless times, as has the Empire State building.

Yet for some needless reason religious edifices must be held to a higher standard? They're nothing but stone and mortar, to be respected no more and no less than in any other form. This is clearly a case of a greedy institution that esteems itself higher than it should.

And most times they had to pay a buttload of money to do it as well.Robio_basic

And that's what this is all about - money. There are countless films that depict violence in cathedrals, churches, and chapels. The Da Vinci Code and Kill Bill are two that come to mind.

I don't think the Church is wrong in complaining. You think Sony wouldn't be throwing lawsuits around if you made a shooter than took place at SCEA headquarters?

A movie or TV show couldn't get away with filming a scene like this at the cathederal. This is one of those little cases where gaming doesn't hold itself to the same standards of other forms of media, but then expects to have the same rights regarding censorship. I'm not saying it's right and it isn't overblown, but if gaming is going to receive full rights of protection for its freedom of speech, it's going to show a little more responsibily andbe a little more sensitive to things like this. Show some common sense. You portray violence in a real world church and expect nothing??

Robio_basic

Thank you.You just saved me the ten minutes I was going to take to point this out as yet another example of gamers wanting to have their cake and eat it too. First they want games to be taken seriously, then when they are, gamers complain that people are taking them too seriously. Yes, it's pretty random of the church to incandidly ask for a donation, but that's another discussion. Let's look at how we, thegamers, can be more mature and understandingabout things first. Excellent, level-headed post, Robio.ShenlongBo

That's a non-sequitor. If I wrote a novel about the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre should I get permission to do so? Why should a historical building which happens to be a Church have to be treated differently from any other historical monument?

This is not about games taken seriously because the very allegation used by the Church is inconsequential and absurd. They are not taking it seriously in any way except to point out the inanity of arguing a representation of a building being invaded by aliens in an alternate historical timeline.

What next? A lawsuit against HG Wells for War of the Worlds? This is an infantile charge leveled by an institution that should have better things to do with it's time.

[QUOTE="ShenlongBo"]Thank you.You just saved me the ten minutes I was going to take to point this out as yet another example of gamers wanting to have their cake and eat it too. First they want games to be taken seriously, then when they are, gamers complain that people are taking them too seriously. Yes, it's pretty random of the church to incandidly ask for a donation, but that's another discussion. Let's look at how we, thegamers, can be more mature and understandingabout things first. Excellent, level-headed post, Robio.Atrus

That's a non-sequitor. If I wrote a novel about the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre should I get permission to do so? Why should a historical building which happens to be a Church have to be treated differently from any other historical monument?

This is not about games taken seriously because the very allegation used by the Church is inconsequential and absurd. They are not taking it seriously in any way except to point out the inanity of arguing a representation of a building being invaded by aliens in an alternate historical timeline.

What next? A lawsuit against HG Wells for War of the Worlds? This is an infantile charge leveled by an institution that should have better things to do with it's time.

What I'm driving at here is that, as has been stated before, the church isn't in the wrong for being offended by what they saw in Resistance. It's pretty snotty of them to shoot down Sony's apology, which Sony didn't necessarily owe, but again, that's their prerogative. I'm pointing the finger at the gamers who claim that video games are just as viable as film, literature, or any other form of art, then downgrade them to "just pretend" and "inconsequential" whenever it's convenient. Of course, games really are just pretend, but still, they can be impactful both personally and socially. We either want gaming to be taken seriously, or we don't, period.

Given the limited amount of information this thread provides, I think the church is being selfish and hypocritical. I feel the same about a lot of gamers on the issue too, though. Don't really know what to tell you if you don't like it; that's just kind of where I am right now.

I'm pointing the finger at the gamers who claim that video games are just as viable as film, literature, or any other form of art, then downgrade them to "just pretend" and "inconsequential" whenever it's convenient.ShenlongBo

Except that I'm allowed to do whatever I want when I write fiction without the express permission of the Church. Let me write the following:

"Without any expressed indignation the terrorist blew himself up, taking with hm the surrounding visitors and demolishing area within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. All that remained of the building were broken pieces of masonwork and the melted crucifixes of those that had brought with them metal crosses. Yet what was accomplished beyond this loss of life? Just the destruction of worthless stone for lack of any meaning other than any given to it. Now awash with blood it's significance given more value for the loss of stone than for the very lives ended this day."

Am I supposed to ask permission to blow up the Church of the Holy Sepulchre? Am I supposed to apologize for a work that is protected under artistic merit? Even if I were to create and animate this destruction, it's an edifice whose legal protection does not need me to liscence a copyright or trademark. In just the same way, the destruction of an old monument or edifice that is within the bounds of fair use, and does not even merit an apology by those using it in some measure of artistic merit, like a game.

Free speech allows people to do so, even if what is said or done is offensive. Religion is not above that standard, and even it is allowed the freedom for hate speech or verbal mistreatment against homosexuals. To single games out is expressly treating it differently from other forms of art.

I don't think the Church is wrong in complaining. You think Sony wouldn't be throwing lawsuits around if you made a shooter than took place at SCEA headquarters?

A movie or TV show couldn't get away with filming a scene like this at the cathederal. This is one of those little cases where gaming doesn't hold itself to the same standards of other forms of media, but then expects to have the same rights regarding censorship. I'm not saying it's right and it isn't overblown, but if gaming is going to receive full rights of protection for its freedom of speech, it's going to show a little more responsibily andbe a little more sensitive to things like this. Show some common sense. You portray violence in a real world church and expect nothing??

Robio_basic

I don't know all the details here, and I certainly don't know enough about British law to make a generalization, but from what I've gathered, whilea building open to the public can certainly prevent filming on the property or within it, there is nothing in that assumption barring someone from making a representation of the building in some other medium which is not from direct exposure. Photographs and filming equipment can be forbidden inside the cathedral, but if someone wanted to paint the cathedral from memory, there isn't muchthey can do to prevent that, nor does anyone have to obtain permission to do it. I think the same thing applies to a digital representation of the church building, inside and out. It would also apply if the digital representation were made from well-known photos in the public domain.

I think the example of the SCEA headquarters likely relies on a lot of legal factors that aren't clear -- for instance, it's likely that whomever designed the SCEA building has an intellectual property right on the architectural design, and that eitherthey retain rights to that, or Sony purchased the designs and own the rights to that. Then there's another unknown -- whether a digital depiction of that would be considered an infringment of those property rights. Regardless though, the cathedral isn't really in the same league as it is a historic building designed and created in the days of feudalism. It's still possible to make an ethical argument out of it (though I sort of doubt it would be much of one), but I sincerely doubt a legal challenge would be made on intellectual property rights alone. There might be one that could be made for some protectionist law in Britain which is intended to protect historic building specifically that I am not aware of though.

I am trying to be rational given what I know of the situation. I honestly don't think Sony needed to ask for permission to make a digital depiction of the Cathedral, either inside or out, and while I think the Church's desire for an apology is sincere (translated: not dishonest), that doesn't mean that I think their reasons are valid. I don't think Sony depicted their building, their history, or their church or beliefs in any particular way that would be rationally considered to reflect on their organization. It was a setting for an invasion that took place in a general fashion in more than one location. It said about as much about their Church, building, congregation, and beliefs as it said aboutManchester in generalor England as a whole. I think Sony likely apologized as a sign of goodwill rather than as a responsiblity they have, and thus I think the Church's rejection of that apology and subsequent demands are dubious at best.

Given the limited amount of information this thread provides, I think the church is being selfish and hypocritical.

ShenlongBo

My feelings are hurt. :P

The original church demand, straight from the BBC. (Found via GamesIndustry).

The Prime Minister's response to this issue.

Developer's stance on the matter.

The full transcription of both e-mails from David Reeves and the response from Manchester Cathedral.Taken straight from here.

The last update with the dismissal of Sony's apology by the Cathedral (Found at first post).

No, no, no, no, no, no. If I'd had more time when I posted before, I would have explained that I think the church is profiteering, that it's pathetic and, to some extent, hypocritical. Look down on the companies that make "unholy" games, but request donations of money earned from said games? Hmmm... WWJD?

What I'm driving at here is that, as has been stated before, the church isn't in the wrong for being offended by what they saw in Resistance. It's pretty snotty of them to shoot down Sony's apology, which Sony didn't necessarily owe, but again, that's their prerogative. I'm pointing the finger at the gamers who claim that video games are just as viable as film, literature, or any other form of art, then downgrade them to "just pretend" and "inconsequential" whenever it's convenient. Of course, games really are just pretend, but still, they can be impactful both personally and socially. We either want gaming to be taken seriously, or we don't, period.

Given the limited amount of information this thread provides, I think the church is being selfish and hypocritical. I feel the same about a lot of gamers on the issue too, though. Don't really know what to tell you if you don't like it; that's just kind of where I am right now.

ShenlongBo

Movie, book, and television industries do not have to ask permission or pay anyone just to have a depiction of public places in their work. The only time that type of special permission comes into play is if the movie or television studio wants to film "on location".

Lame, they should of never apologized. We have enough censorship issues in this industry with the government, like we need it from religion too.GodModeEnabled

Apologizing is good, but Sony really needs to bring the fight to the church.

They need to think of the Church of England as a business. When they told Sony "donate or we'll sue you", Sony should have called their lawyers. The church is engaging in extortion and Sony should call them out on it.

If I worked in the legal department of Sony I know what I'd be doing: preparing a lawsuit.

From me, earlier: "Yes, it's pretty random of the church to incandidly ask for a donation, but that's another discussion." And then in my next post: "If I'd had more time when I posted before, I would have explained that I think the church is profiteering, that it's pathetic and, to some extent, hypocritical."

I don't know how to make it more clear that I'm not siding with the church, here, so if you can't understand me, then I guess we'll just have to live with my inadequacy as a communicator. I'm alsonot arguing the legalities or ethics of what was done during the development of Resistance with regards to the cathedral. Here is my original argument again, for the clarity that is evidently needed:

"Let's look at how we, the gamers, can be more mature and understanding about things first (before automatically bellowing out accusations of unfair treatment towards games)."

As you can see, I don't really give a damn one way or the other if the church is right, or if Sony's right, or anything in between. I'm not having that fight. I'm talking about gamers - namely those who cry and scream that games are art, usually building their cases by stating how games are even more immersive, profound, and involving than movies, music, or literature, then deflty reduce them to mere toys when the need arises. Want to talk about double-standards, anyone?

To the topic creator: My bad, man, I was going by the material just in the thread not using the links. Wasn't trying to say your thread is whack :P

From me, earlier: "Yes, it's pretty random of the church to incandidly ask for a donation, but that's another discussion." And then in my next post: "If I'd had more time when I posted before, I would have explained that I think the church is profiteering, that it's pathetic and, to some extent, hypocritical."

I don't know how to make it more clear that I'm not siding with the church, here, so if you can't understand me, then I guess we'll just have to live with my inadequacy as a communicator. I'm alsonot arguing the legalities or ethics of what was done during the development of Resistance with regards to the cathedral. Here is my original argument again, for the clarity that is evidently needed:

"Let's look at how we, the gamers, can be more mature and understanding about things first (before automatically bellowing out accusations of unfair treatment towards games)."

As you can see, I don't really give a damn one way or the other if the church is right, or if Sony's right, or anything in between. I'm not having that fight. I'm talking about gamers - namely those who cry and scream that games are art, usually building their cases by stating how games are even more immersive, profound, and involving than movies, music, or literature, then deflty reduce them to mere toys when the need arises. Want to talk about double-standards, anyone?

To the topic creator: My bad, man, I was going by the material just in the thread not using the links. Wasn't trying to say your thread is whack :P

ShenlongBo

What makes you think that that people would think any different this were about a movie or a book? Have you never heard anyone remark "its just a movie"? Its not about stripping games down to the level of toys. Instead, the comment is a reminder that this is a work of fiction, and it shouldn't have any real life implications on the church.

What did the Church say?

"We asked Sony to withdraw the game. They have refused to do this. We asked Sony to make a substantial donation to community groups nominated by the Cathedral. They have refused to do this. We also asked them to sign up to the Sacred Digital Guidelines. They have refused to do this. We fear that the next buildings to be cloned for virtual desecration could be a mosque, synagogue, temple or other churches."

Oh, but there's more.

Manchester Cathedral is calling for all video games manufacturers to sign up to a new set of "sacred digital guidelines" to prevent future "virtual desecration" of religious buildings.

Digital Guidelines code of conduct

1. Respect our sacred spaces as places of prayer, worship, peace, learning and heritage.

2. Do not assume that sacred space interiors are copyright free.

3. Get permission from the faith leaders who are responsible for the building interiors you want to clone.

4. Support the work of those engaged in resisting the culture of gun crime and those involved in promoting the work of conflict resolution.

SteelAttack

:roll:, The more the church officials open their mouths on this, the more sympathy they lose with me... no scratch that, they lost all my sympathy for them pretty much on their first statement when they threatened legal action and demanded money. Now, they are just reconfirming they are a bunch of unreasonable jerks.

They refused to withdraw the game: well no *bleep* sherlock, it was ubsurd request.

They refused to make a donation: good for them, handing over money because of this is basically caving to empty threats.

They refused to sign up to your ubsurd guidelines: gee, I wonder why...

We fear...: get with the times man, I'm certain all of those have been done already, maybe not in a modern game, but somewhere out there.

UGH... This just makes me mad, and I haven't even played the stupid game. This is the height of arrogant garbage from this church trying to rewrite the law and claim rights they don't have. Of course, it's not like religions aren't prone to doing that sort of thing...

Anyway, that's my 10 cents. I will now shut my trap on the topic.

the church are lucky that it wasn't rockstar who put the it into one of their games

"we want an apolgie"

"no you are not getting one and you an't makeus you money grabbing arses