Slashdot Log In
Church Threatens Legal Action Over Sony Game
Posted by
Zonk
on Sat Jun 09, 2007 06:37 PM
from the hot-under-the-collar dept.
from the hot-under-the-collar dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Church of England is threatening legal action against Sony over the game Resistance: Fall of Man. The game features a shootout in Manchester Cathedral, and the Church claims that Sony did not ask permission to use the interior of the Cathedral in the game. The Bishop of Manchester called the game 'highly irresponsible' due to the history of gun crime in the city. Sony denies the charge — a spokesman said 'We believe we have sought and received all permissions necessary for the creation of the game.'"
Related Stories
[+]
Defending Sony Against the Church Of England 78 comments
Ian Bogost writes at Gamasutra about the (now quiet) controversy between Sony and the Church of England. You may recall the religious organization's objection to the use of the Manchester cathedral in Insomniac's alternate history WWII shooter Resistance. The result of this objection was a weak-kneed apology from Sony, and an attempt to push the whole thing under a rug. Bogost notes that never once did the company try to defend itself on artistic merit, simply capitulating to the objections of the church. That, he has decided, leaves the job up to him: "For my part, I think the cathedral creates one of the only significant experiences in the whole game, one steeped in reverence for the cathedral and the church, rather than desecration. Resistance is not a game richly imbued with wisdom. It's a first-person shooter, and it is a pretty good one. It's beautifully rendered, taking apparent advantage of the advanced graphical capabilities of the PlayStation 3. The game is very linear, both in its plot and the paths through each level, but that linearity allows it to focus the player on a smaller, more tightly crafted environment. Resistance takes up a common theme in science fiction: an ultimate test of humankind against the Other."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
bang bang (Score:5, Insightful)
The game is art. There should be no legal repercussions for Sony choosing to tell a story a certain way. If you do not like it, do not buy it. Protest if you want, so others know you do not like it. But, every adult should be free to choose for themselves if shooting in a church is inappropriate in a game.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
First off, I am Christian and do not care for Sony.
The game is art. There should be no legal repercussions for Sony choosing to tell a story a certain way. If you do not like it, do not buy it. Protest if you want, so others know you do not like it. But, every adult should be free to choose for themselves if shooting in a church is inappropriate in a game.
I also am a Christian but I'm pretty Neutral on the matter of Sony. I agree with the following comment
The Bishop of Manchester called the game 'highly irresponsible' due to the history of gun crime in the city.
But feel that there is no harm in using a Church building in a game, for a start, it is just a Building and secondly, if the game isn't saying that Christianity promotes gun crime then I fail to see how it's a problem for the Church.
Re:bang bang (Score:5, Insightful)
I call the Church of England "highly irresponsible" due to the history of gun crime in the city. After all which entity has had a greater influence ove rthe citizens of Manchester, this video game which has been out of less than a year, or the Church of England which traces roots back to the 3rd century at least. Maybe the Bishop should tend to his violent flock instead of abdicating responsiblity to a video game.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No it wasn't titled "The Church of England" but they claim their roots go back that far. Maybe the Archbishop of Manchester would like to edit the Church of England website while he's
Re:bang bang (Score:5, Insightful)
Either way Sony really should have asked for permission, if only to be kind. You can be sure that, if any game included a model of, say, the White House, without permission it would be attacked venomously. Why should a church be denied that? I'm not saying that Sony should pull the game back or that churches should have special rights in cases like this, only that, if you're going to use a famous religious site in your violent FPS, you should at least ask for permission.
- Plays lots of FPSes and is religious, also doesn't care for Sony, has nothing against violent ones, recognizes that many people, and even more religious people, do have something against them.
Parent
Re:bang bang (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:bang bang (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:bang bang (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And also, no, you don't need permission from anyone to use a model of the White House. The best imaginable argument against it would be security concerns (which wouldn't apply for the church), but that argument falls flat: the interior organization of the White House isn't a secret. Hell, the thing's been there for over two hundred years. I suppose that you could argue that it is in bad tas
Re:bang bang (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's explore that a bit. Is a video game different from a movie? Did 20th Century Fox get permission to simulate the destruction of the White House for Independence Day? I think the White House was "destroyed" in Amerika too, but I don't remember any legal wrangling. One key difference is that the White House is government property, and government property is often not given intellectual property rights in the same way private enterprise might. Intellectual property of a centuries-old building basically doesn't exist that I'm aware.
I can see why people don't like it and might complain about it, but it sounds to me that the validity of a legal case is shaky. I think it's possible to derive the interior of a building from photographs without any sort of invasive acquisition methods, and as far as I know, in most cases, the photo belongs to the photographer.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know. Did they? I actually wouldn't be at all surprised if they did run the idea past the White House press office.
On the other hand though it doesn't really matter, as the White House is most definitely a public building. I suspect Manchester Cathedrel is actually owned by the church, and therefore private. (Remember that just because a building is open to the public, doesn't make it a public bui
Re:bang bang (Score:5, Insightful)
Wrong games *have modelled the whitehouse* and many other landmarks (or pieces of them) without reprocussions, even if only in parts or in 2D, take the old 2D game "Bad dudes" for instance, the whitehoue was featured there. I think people take the whole "private (and/or) intellectual property" law regarding monuments and such way too seriously.
Are we goingto start to sue for road modelling textures, some random pictures of someones house or cities downtown skyscrapers and trees? At some point the whole property thing is out of control, private property is there for convenience of solving complex problems, it's not there to abuse the public with silly crap like this.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You might usefully begin by asking why the Lancaster County Amish tore down the school where their children were murdered. If you want to use a church as a stage-set in your game then build a goddamn model.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:bang bang (Score:4, Insightful)
According to Wikipedia, the church was built in the Middle Ages. Given this, I find it highly unlikely that you had anything to do with it, and are simply trying to assert rights to other people's hard work - hardly a moral thing to do.
Besides, I find it highly likely that the original architecht has been dead for more than 70 years (or however long copyright has been extended at this point), and as such any and all copyrights to the church's design has long since ended, so would you please explain what legal monopoly of yours prevents anyone from making a model of the church for any reason ?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ok, this is possibly a hard concept for an American to grasp, but the British government is not secular. The Church of England is essentially a branch of the British Government. Bishops of the Church get seats in the House of Lords (see Lords Spiritual [wikipedia.org]. Here's more information, take special note of their finances (Church of England [wikipedia.org] and this article on State [wikipedia.org]
It's natural! (Score:2)
This story is going to destroy slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
It's just not a choice you can ask slashdot users to make, it's like one of those "If you had two kids and they were in a burning building and could only save one, which would you save?" kind of questions.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it isn't. It's about Sony showing pictures of the interior of a house, and the owner says Sony didn't have permission to do that.
It just so happens that the house in question is a church.
Re:This story is going to destroy slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
This is a major news story in the UK (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
(Of course I'm joking, but something tells me that they might consider it seriously).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just to get a word in... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not holding my breath, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong on so many counts... (Score:2, Insightful)
1. Why use a real church?
2. Why use a real church in a city with a high gun crime problem?
3
4. Why use a real church in a city with a high gun crime problem, in a FPS, without asking permission?
Obviously they just aren't thinking straight. I'm quite amazed that a big company like Sony just didn't think things through. What did they expect to happen? The church t
Re: (Score:2)
You are kidding me right? Please tell me you are joking.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No. The church has the right to make agreement not to take photographs a condition of entry to the cathedral, but as far as I know it doesn't, which means there's no restriction on taking such photographs. Even if it did, photographs could be taken from outside the private area.
No, and the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 is
Nobody expects the... (Score:2, Funny)
Private property? (Score:3, Insightful)
FTA:
Manchester Cathedral is private property, correct? It belongs to the Church of England? If so, and if you were going to show the interior of Manchester Cathedral (or any private property) in Doctor Who (or any television show or movie) I believe you have to seek permission of the property owner. Of course, if Sony were publishing a novel about it, I doubt the Church of England would care much -- but Sony has specifically aligned the game with video-based works rather than written fiction.
Re:Private property? (Score:4, Interesting)
> designer David Myerscough-Jones created his own highly convincing replica.
> Indeed a letter of complaint was apparently later received from London Underground
> alleging that filming had taken place on their property without permission
> - a true testament to the merits of Myerscough-Jones's work
Parent
I can understand the church on this one (Score:3, Funny)
I've played Resistance (Score:5, Interesting)
From the article, you would guess that Resistance is some kind of GTA game. You know, one of those where you sleep with a hooker then run her over (yes, yes, I know that this isn't how most people play GTA). If this were the case, I could possibly, just about, see where the Church was coming from here, even if I wouldn't agree with them. After all, Manchester does have a fairly serious guns and gangs problem, particularly around the Moss Side area (arguably even worse than London's from the guns point of view, although I understand things have improved somewhat in the last few years). Hell, the school I went to was about a mile from Moss Side, and while the school itself was pretty civilised, being private, you saw some pretty shocking things in the streets around it.
However, Resistance is nothing like GTA. The best description I could come up with would be a blend of a WW2 shooter and Halo. The setting is essentially alternate-world WW2, with many of the human weapons feeling relevant to the period, while the "alien" weapons are deeply Halo-inspired. Most of the game is spent playing through blasted and burned-out city-scapes. This includes the Manchester section, which pops up about 1/4 of the way through the game. For any Englishman with even an ounce of historical knowledge, the appropriate context for the game is obvious; the Blitz (yes, I know Manchester wasn't heavily hit, but I feel the point still stands). If the game is basing itself on any cultural reference points, they aren't the "cruisin' the hood, pimpin' my hoes, shootin' da pigs" cliches of modern gang life, but rather the fear of invasion and the shock of seeing familiar land-marks destroyed that characterised life in the UK's cities during WW2. So while there is still an outstanding question regarding taste, it is a question that could be levelled against every other WW2 shooter out there and a question which seems to have been conclusively answered by now with a resounding "meh".
It's disapppointing that nobody talking about this in the issue appears to have actually played the bloody game. Personally, I loved the UK setting (and very much enjoyed the game itself), particularly as some of the final missions in London see the player passing not a million miles from where I live now.
Sony used Times Square too... (Score:4, Informative)
The verdict...
From http://news.com.com/2100-1023-948441.html [com.com]
Compare... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You are mixing up your countries. This is not America, this is a Church of England Cathedral. The Church of England is very much in favour of gun control, indeed as an Anglican myself I think one of the few great things Tony Blair did was outlaw handguns entirely (even the Olympic shooting team have to train abroad). Those who live by the gun, die by the gun.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How many school shootings have you heard about in the US? And how many school shootings have you heard of in countries where handguns are banned?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
1. Thanks for doing the research, I hadn't actually looked into it, but I hadn't heard of any school shootings.
2. Only 2 of those are shootings, it would be unreasonable to ban knives, and the explosives were probably illegal anyway.
3. Are there more, or were there only 9 incidents in the last 7 years outside the US? I believe there have been more school shootings within the US during that time frame.
The article seems say that because violence exists where guns are banned, we shouldn't ban
Re:Better submission (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyway, since most gun injuries are inflicted by non-outlaws, only outlaws - and the police, obviously - having guns would probably be a good thing.
Parent
Re:Manchester Cathedral (Score:4, Funny)
I am not sure, the C of E could threaten to show off the Nintendo Wii in 27,000 churches next Sunday.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
In the real world you ask permission before you draw others into your own dark fantasies. If the Bishop doesn't want his church used as a stage-set in their game then Sony should respect that decision.
Mother Teresa (Score:4, Insightful)
I am all for real charities and people who actually want to help others, but Mother Teresa purposely expanded suffering and poverty while at the same time hoarding money in order to spend it in ways that glorified herself and her organization. I really wish people would try to find a real altruist to glorify rather than that frightening bitch of a woman.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
How many hospitals have been attacked by anti-abortionists? How many people died by praying instead of seeking help? How many people dying in Africa from AIDS because Christians tell them condoms don't prevent the spread of disease, God does? How many people killed in the various inquistitions and crusades?
More people have been fed by a single scientist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug) than the entire history of religious charity.
Mother Te
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, so you mean the ancient Romans and Greeks never did anything like that?
Actually, from my understanding one of the reasons for the Dark Ages was because of Christianity. Not until the Church lost its dominance did things such as higher education, scientific, and modern medicine emerge during the renaissance.
And to be fair, they had a great helping hand from the Roman and Greek texts that the Church had simply stashed away i
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope the church really sticks it to Sony on this one. Sony, along with all the other movie studios, has made such a huge fuss about "image rights" and the like, that they really deserve to have the book thrown at them when they decide they shouldn't be bound by the same rules.
The hypocrisy stinks.