Behold 'Sacred Digital Guidelines' by the Church of England
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ Jul 6th 2007 at 7:00PM }
This morning we reported that Sony had "unreservedly" apologized for the whole Resistance: Fall of Man kerfuffle for the second time. Well, the Church of England has rejected the apology -- again. This morning in our post we glanced over the "sacred digital guidelines" the Church was proposing because we had no idea what that was all about, but The Times has the details. The "Sacred Digital Guidelines" the Church is proposing entail:- Respect our sacred spaces as places of prayer, worship, peace, learning and heritage.
- Do not assume that sacred space interiors are copyright free.
- Get permission from the faith leaders who are responsible for the building interiors you want to clone.
- Support the work of those engaged in resisting the culture of gun crime and those involved in promoting the work of conflict resolution.
[Via GamePolitics]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Tigerj @ Jul 6th 2007 7:09PM
Pffft, whatever..I demand Google Maps remove my house in the images too!
DckPump @ Jul 6th 2007 7:09PM
Aren't Pride and Greed 2 of the 7 deadly sins? Question, then why doesn't the church follow them?
Game Artist @ Jul 6th 2007 7:13PM
I just want to know what the actual copyright law has to say about this. Can sony tell them to GFO?
waves @ Jul 6th 2007 7:15PM
Don't do it Sony! It's time to put your cocky attitude to good use!
Matt B @ Jul 6th 2007 7:18PM
Forgive and forget at its finest.
What about all of the churches decimated in the Fallout 3 DC images?
GJM @ Jul 6th 2007 7:27PM
I played through this game and didn't even realize I had been in a church until the chruch brought it up. I can only imagine this is a pathetic attempt to extort money.
Jerry @ Jul 7th 2007 6:20AM
Oh my !#$#%&() GOD !
-Thou shall not connect an ps3 in the holy room
-Look with shame to any assassins creed owner that enters a church
-Thou shall not enter the church in vampire mode in the oblivion game.
Steve 3.2 @ Jul 6th 2007 7:32PM
This just smacks of censorship to the highest degree. Next they'll be demanding that all game characters abstain from pre-martial sex and have Sundays off to go to church.
kennethrios @ Jul 6th 2007 7:33PM
Ignoring the covetous and not altogether reasonable demand for donations, respecting the “sacred spaces” of the Church does not seem like task that would be too difficult. Being somewhat Jewish-y myself, I would be appalled to hear of a game where violence was taking place in the Beit Hamikdash. “Four thousand extra points for murdering your foe in the Holy of Holies!” No a hard picture to get. It is just bad taste.
So, uh, "Sacred" Digital Guidelines are a fine idea.
Squeedom @ Jul 6th 2007 7:33PM
No one seemed to care about the violent church scenes in Indigo Prophecy.
kennethrios @ Jul 6th 2007 7:43PM
Also, there is a difference between the spheres of private and public as well as politically correct and respectful. Sony released a game in a vastly public sphere (world-wide) and should have been more careful. Someone like me (and the rest of y’all) do not have to worry so much. I can, for example, say “I Ate a Jesus Ham Sandwich with a Side of Virgin Mary for Lunch”. However, there will NEVER be a game with that title released by a major com.
Mr Khan @ Jul 6th 2007 7:48PM
I think they should respect sacred sites, but that "respect" should be used in a different way than is implied here
I mean, they were just using the cathedral as a battleground in a very inconsequential way, now if they directly disrespected the cathedral when using it thus (might be a poor example, but lets say in GTAIV you could go in and shoot up sunday mass, that kind of disrespect) then we would have grounds for this sort of thing
Squall7 @ Jul 6th 2007 7:48PM
I know I'm going to be rather unpopular for saying this but,
I think an apology from Sony isn't enough. The game is already out there. If they were truely sorry, they would remove it from store shelves. Either that or remove/remake the level/story to prevent continued infringement. Heck, if a copyright for a film was infringed, they'd sure as hell make a fuss about that! Likewise, they have enough money to put into the pot of the Cathedral without breaking the bank.
Those guidelines seem fine to me.
I also feel that joystiq has an obvious, justifiable bias here.
Besides, Sony has already admitted they used it without permission...
Tom @ Jul 6th 2007 7:53PM
The Church of England doesn't have a leg to stand on. They've got their opinions and they've got their demands, but Sony hasn't done anything illegal.
onedaycafe @ Jul 6th 2007 7:54PM
Didn't know you could directly copyright interiors. Seems odd... how exact would a duplication have to be to infringe upon a copyright like that. I mean heck maybe 7-ll can sue circle k, demand they remove all their stores from the planet and give them a hefty donation to battle poor food and slurppy addiction.
Haha, maybe the church should be grateful as this could be the first time in a long time that many gamers have seen the inside of a church, free advertising even. Although maybe misleading as I've yet to see a church service as exciting as resistance.
By the way, how much "gun crime" happen in the UK, thought it was quite low?
Rubang B @ Jul 6th 2007 7:53PM
I'd like to see their paperwork regarding their alleged copyrights of the interiors of their buildings. I can understanding them being upset, but I don't think they have any legal grounds to claim said copyrights or DEMAND donations. I hope this battle spirals out of control until both Sony and the Church are no more! OH ZAP!
Rubang B @ Jul 6th 2007 7:55PM
Did RockStar need permission from Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Las Vegas to make San Andreas? I'm in L.A. and recognize many areas, and I was highly offended! I know New York's bitching and moaning about GTA4, but they're not asking for donations or claiming that they own copyrights to the STATUE OF LIBERTY.
2ez @ Jul 6th 2007 7:56PM
I think that its pretty fair, really. I mean, if you were filming a movie, you would need permission to film that area, wouldn't you?
matt @ Jul 6th 2007 7:58PM
personally i'm still waiting for the crusades RTS
CJ @ Jul 6th 2007 8:00PM
@2,5: Right on!
I hope Sony doesn't cave... Seems like the Church is just trying to find ways to get money quick, or they're desperately trying to gain more control (possibly trying to become as powerful as the churches were hundreds of years ago? :-P).
cc123 @ Jul 6th 2007 8:02PM
Sacred Digital Guideline 5
- If any of the above guidelines are broken please make "donation" check payable to:
Church of England
Manchester, UK
Zach @ Jul 6th 2007 8:08PM
Go peddle your ghost stories elsewhere, churchies!
Michael K. @ Jul 6th 2007 8:10PM
this just proves that religion is just a scam to rip money off of people
Tom @ Jul 6th 2007 8:11PM
"personally i'm still waiting for the crusades RTS"~matt
Age of Empires II, The "Saladin" campaign. Enjoy.
Ryan Smith @ Jul 6th 2007 8:16PM
The church is responsible for some of the most horrible and violent acts in history. What are they talking about? Killing aliens is nothing compared to what they have done themselves.
Will @ Jul 6th 2007 8:23PM
if I was sony I'd open my next game with someone jerking off while firing guns in the air in the church... but i'm a moderate like that :)
Cartman86 @ Jul 6th 2007 8:34PM
My god (or yours?) some of you actually agree with the church? Eewww. The game didn't exploit the church in any way that should warrant a removal of the game or extor... I mean "donation". If your playing a game where your running through a replica of the church of england and your shooting Jesus and innocent people with no justifiable context then ok Sony might want to apologize. Something like that just isn't needed and is maybe a little rude. But as Resistance is now it really is just "oh I'm killing aliens in a church." "Why wouldn't I be?" Even then giving a donation or pulling the game isn't right. Banning games is aloud in England so maybe people would think it's right, but people should be aloud to express themselves in media. If consumers don't like the things they see then they won't buy it. Besides does this have any legal weight behind it?
Negativecool @ Jul 6th 2007 8:35PM
PLEASE READ:
I may be of the unpopular opinion that these supposed "Sacred Digital Guidelines" are dangerous for artistic license and the right to one's creativity. What if I drew an exact replica of the church being burned and sold it on eBay? Would I then be forced into an apology? Forced to donate? Forced to agree to the "Sacred Drawing Guidelines?" I don’t care if it is in “bad taste” to some that the drawing would be offensive, it is my right to create and should be protected. (I hear opinions and arguments abound for that one, read on)
There are a thousand and one ways to argue both sides of this argument I understand-- But with every little rule and regulation like this being printed and followed, we as a society become that much more sheltered, that much more confined, that much more controlled.
Sony and the entire gaming community need to respectfully decline accepting these guidelines. I hope they see the huge long term significance in what it would mean to agree to these guidelines, rather than focus on the short term of patching up their tainted PR. The church in RFoM was contextual and necessary to convey and strongly symbolize the near destruction of humanity.
I guarantee you if the church imposes their will here, they will not stop. They have already shown it here. First they wanted an apology. Then they wanted money. Now they have drawn up rules and regulations to be followed by the entire gaming community. You think they will stop there when they think that what they are going is good? They will impose more regulations, blame other games for other violent crimes, and influence already ignorant politicians to regulate “violent” video games. They can always add more guidelines to be followed once these are put into motion. Eventually, they will probably put something in there about not creating any game which promotes gun violence.
I hope people are smart enough not to turn this news into another "everyone bash the church" story. We as gamers need to recognize how much this impacts us beyond just Sony's PR problem.
Matt B @ Jul 6th 2007 8:35PM
If I remember right, I rid your sacred church of the evil.
Oh that's right, you need the evil justify your existence.
kyle @ Jul 6th 2007 8:37PM
I'll just repost my reply to your earlier article concerning this issue.
In response to your question its more the fact that it is a specific landmark/property and organizations are legally allowed to designate how other organizations may use their property and despite it not being an exact copy (or perhaps it is haven't gotten to see it) it also falls into the area of Likeness rights for a property. While there is very little precedent set so far for digital rights usage (for landmark/public icons) I would imagine that since sony is backing down instead of pulling out their lawyers that they assume they would have some sort of rights infringement.
I do agree that if sony has infringed upon a property right then that issue should be handled accordingly in a court of law. Not by villianizing a company in the media in an attempt to strong arm them publicly. I am sternly against the actions that the church have taken in this matter and it simply reinforces that they are more interested in public opinion and controversy than civil or property rights/safety.
Mark @ Jul 6th 2007 8:40PM
Sony should just rename the whole city nanchester and the use the usual disclaimer that any similarities with actual towns or buildings are coinceadental. Then include a facility to change all the names ourselves like pro evo has been doing for years. This is why I hate the church it is repression at its worst. I wonder how many films have worse things happening in churches. And they are real images not rendered. Yet another double stanrd from religion. How to appeal to youngsters censor something they enjoy !! I wonder if the good book itself got permission to include all the places in it. Your right by the way it is petty, but so is this whole fiasco. I think the church has done more harm to itself than Sony ever could
Michael K. @ Jul 6th 2007 8:43PM
does anybody actually believe in god anymore? i thought that went out with the dark ages.
matt @ Jul 6th 2007 9:09PM
@ #23
touché
waves @ Jul 6th 2007 9:10PM
The church of England was created (split from the Catholic church) when Henry the Eighth wanted to divorce his wife Catherine. The pope refused his request, so Henry declared himself the "Supreme Head" of the church, split from the Catholic church, and allowed himself the divorce (how nice of him). All in all he had 6 wives. Two were beheaded, one died, two were divorced, one survived.
Hell of a way to start a church, huh?
Jonathan Abbey @ Jul 6th 2007 9:22PM
Copyright only lasts, what, 100 years after the death of the author?
Good luck claiming copyright on a 600 year old building's design.
Public domain FTW.
Amos @ Jul 6th 2007 9:26PM
The problem isn't the fact that they replicated A CHURCH, it's that they replicated the EXACT church in the EXACT setting. Believe it or not, a lot of religious institutions hold many their main places of prayer and worship as sacred. Imagine the muslim response if Mecca was used a bloody battleground w/o permission. Whatever the Church of England's motivations, I find it perfectly reasonable that there are people there offended by their holy site being used in such a way.
KiraXD @ Jul 6th 2007 9:28PM
whats also funny is sony apologized! i guess these people dont know what forgiveness is.
all that church cares about is money... and thats sad to see.
And the point is... you play a guy who goes in and SAVES the town... its a freaking building with aliens in it.. not like your blasting humans...
I was raised christian, but i see NOTHING wrong with what sony did.
Markusdragon @ Jul 6th 2007 9:49PM
The most amusing thing about this situation is people who claim that they know everything that this conflict is about and that it's so obviously Sony in the right, and then claim the game was set in the 'Church of England'.
TZ @ Jul 6th 2007 10:31PM
This a load of BullSh*t!
What does the anglican church think?(Yes I realize I used lowercase lettering, I'm against religion! Religion is a Lie!) They can impose these stupid rules and get away with it? There are not any copyright laws on the manchester cathedral. It was built over 400 years ago, there was no such thing as "copyright".
What do they think is going to happen? Resistance 2: Fall of Christianity. or maybe... Oh no! They're gonna make a video game where you have to defend the pope from hordes of alien!
Here's a quite hilarious comic about religions and video games http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20070623
bill @ Jul 6th 2007 10:47PM
This is why I hate church.
Spiza @ Jul 6th 2007 10:50PM
As a Christian, I'm ashamed of their acts. I would of thought the church would have been happy to even have God brought up in such a game. Would they rather games ignore Christianity?
Lucky @ Jul 6th 2007 11:16PM
Gun Crime = Gun Crime
War =/= Gun Crime
Sci-Fi lol fictional war =/= Gun Crime
Koopaknight29 @ Jul 6th 2007 11:36PM
Wow, so much hatred against an established religion...
Now I'll agree that the Church of England really had little grounds on this lawsuit and the the request for a donation is shameful, but it feels like the hatred on this blog for that sect of Christanity, and religion in general, runs much deeper than that...
Are you guys really that intolerant? You're just as bad, really. If you think your way of thinking is better than theirs then show that it is. Be the better man. Don't condemn the condemners. Tell them -why- what they are doing is wrong.
I don't agree with everything the Christian Church says, but I know enough to at least respect the morals they are suppose to be preaching.
Isn't atheism a type of religion (a system of beliefs in the lack of a god(s)), anyway?
Carmine @ Jul 6th 2007 11:42PM
Aren't Christians supposed to forgive someone seventy times seven times? And didn't Christ say to render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's?
Instead of demanding cash, they should forgive Sony. No amount of money will end gun violence, which has nothing to do with sci-fi video games. Why not pray to God for an end to gun violence?
Hart704 @ Jul 7th 2007 1:19AM
It'd be nice to discuss real world problems instead of worrying about some religious zealots in England when they get a little pissed off. I don't care.
Dave @ Jul 7th 2007 3:53AM
Years ago the BBC set the climax of a sci fi series in Westminster Cathedral I don't know what the curch thought of it then.
And yet. Eidos upset Sikhs when they set part of Hitman 2 in the Golden Temple of Amritsar. And now ths. Perhaps companies should at least be aware of what they are doing and how offensive some people might find it.
zwarrior @ Jul 7th 2007 5:03AM
Those people are not real Christians
swesoulc @ Jul 7th 2007 5:08AM
well... we are we talking about religion here anyway?
there are plenty of comments above for me to... bash, but being not-religious and being married to someone who is, I know it does no good. On the other hand my wife just laughed when she heard about his thing and see no reason for cash or apology.
a game's a game. they just happen to start looking more real. and the most people out there see games as worse then movies ( hence letting a scifi series shoot there but not a scifi game ). religious or not some people are just douchebags *caughs*JThompson*coughs*
Rubang B @ Jul 7th 2007 5:51AM
I concur, #34! Public domain FTW.
Mud @ Jul 7th 2007 9:18PM
@42. by Koopaknight29
"Are you guys really that intolerant? You're just as bad, really. If you think your way of thinking is better than theirs then show that it is. Be the better man. Don't condemn the condemners. Tell them -why- what they are doing is wrong."
I'm not sure what you're reading in these comments, but what I see is a lot of people pointing out the hypocrisy of the Anglican Church's behavior in this situation and then saying that this is the kind of thing that has turned them off of organized religions. How much louder do you want people to say -why- they feel this kind of behavior is wrong?
"Isn't atheism a type of religion (a system of beliefs in the lack of a god(s)), anyway?"
There is a lot of discussion about this misconception, but the short answer is no. Atheism, despite the confusing title, isn't a belief in something (i.e., a belief that there are no gods), it is the absence of belief (i.e., a lack of acceptance of claims that require belief in order to be accepted).
If you are in the U.K., you might have become confused on this topic by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority's [not really very] recent "national framework for religious education," which suggests that atheism, agnosticism and humanism should be taught alongside religious belief systems in religious studies. This shouldn't be taken as a proposition that atheism also be regarded as a belief system, but that non-belief based modes of inquiry into the types of questions that belief systems contemplate should be taught as part of religious studies in order to increase understanding of the subject. Indeed, the same organization suggested that the subject of "religious studies" should be redefined as "religious, philosophical and moral education."
I hope this helps clarify the situation for you.