Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

redcross.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 253 posts

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#181

Post by threatofrain »

bingidingi wrote: post #99
threatofrain wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's already associated with weed and pharmacies. The trademark is also already registered in some major countries. Where do you get this confidence that there's no confusion with the green cross?

>Where do you get this confidence that there's no confusion with the green cross? The continents of Europe, Africa, Australia... I've also seen it used in China but I'm not as familiar with Asia because I haven't lived there. I'm sorry, but if your only example is the US then you're likely to be wrong about a lot of things.

People have already replied to you to let you know that various major European countries use the green cross to refer to a generic pharmacy.

You already acknowledge this elsewhere, and you've also already acknowledged that there's special meaning to the red cross as opposed to merely referring to pharmacies.

I don't know what you're doing excluding Asia or the USA either, while saying

> A green cross would confuse no one.

And then following up with

> I'm sorry, but if your only example is the US then you're likely to be wrong about a lot of things.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#182

Post by pugworthy »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #77
Justsignedup wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IF you are in combat and you see a red cross vehicle, it is important for your first reaction being "that is not where the enemy is" vs firing at it. This saves lives, and protects those who run into danger zones to save people. If we slap red cross symbols on people with medical equipment that you see in video games, it'll just dilute the meaning and maybe next time someone sees a vehicle with the red cross symbol t…

Is there even a single documented case where this has happened?

I believe that's somewhat the point of the second sentence quoted earlier. They are saying they've got people dying while serving with the Red Cross - and perhaps an implication is that dilution of the symbol is one cause.

Irrespective they are asking to be taken seriously - it's not Kleenex™ asking to not to use kleenex generically.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#183

Post by Tomte »

crooked-v wrote: post #75
commandlinefan wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't see how that detracts from the symbol - if anything, it makes it clearer what it represents. If there was a game with Nazis carrying red crosses instead of swastikas or something, this post might make sense, but it just seems unreasonable to me.

The point is to strictly maintain the symbol as indicating members of the internationally neutral Red Cross and Red Crescent, not just "healing". If a war happens and a bunch of people on either side are using the red cross symbol to indicate medics, then members of the actual Red Cross are at risk of being accidentally targeted along with them.

> If a war happens and a bunch of people on either side are using the red cross symbol to indicate medics

They do, medical branches of the military are allowed to use the symbols.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#184

Post by throwaway894345 »

bingidingi wrote: post #177
throwaway894345 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I start putting the toilet symbol on doors without toilets behind them, eventually you're going to stop expecting toilets behind the door. You don't need an example to know that. Good grief. Can you think of a reason why your analogy about changing how a symbol is used in real life might not apply to a debate about how symbols are used in fiction ? Let me offer up an analogy that isn't completely and obviously b…

It's about the ubiquity in fiction. If every police box in fiction was a time machine, it stands to reason someone may be confused when encountering a real police box for the first time. The misuse of the red cross, especially in video games, is rampant to the point that the Red Cross is worried about confusion. There's additional issue with the fact that video games are very common, but warzones and disaster areas l…

> It's about the ubiquity in fiction. If every police box in fiction was a time machine, it stands to reason someone may be confused when encountering a real police box for the first time.

This is the silliest thing I've ever heard, and not every fictional red cross symbol is a threat anyway. This whole thing seems at least as ridiculous as the moral panic about violent video games in the early 2000s, except that I kind of expect ridiculous moral panics from conservative parents not so much from the official communications arm of one of the largest NGOs in the world. Absent any actual evidence I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#185

Post by pugworthy »

bingidingi wrote: post #99
threatofrain wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's already associated with weed and pharmacies. The trademark is also already registered in some major countries. Where do you get this confidence that there's no confusion with the green cross?

>Where do you get this confidence that there's no confusion with the green cross? The continents of Europe, Africa, Australia... I've also seen it used in China but I'm not as familiar with Asia because I haven't lived there. I'm sorry, but if your only example is the US then you're likely to be wrong about a lot of things.

> I'm sorry, but if your only example is the US then you're likely to be wrong about a lot of things.

That is uncalled for.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#186

Post by pugworthy »

rurounijones wrote: post #5

Is anyone aware of some event that kicked off this posting? Has a particular game misused the symbol badly? It all makes sense but I am not sure if it has been submitted in response to some recent egregious misuse.

This is not a new issue for them. I recall dealing with it when I was working on a WW2 combat game 15 years ago.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#187

Post by mcguire »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #158
MattRix wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they supposed to wait until videogames cause an issue, and not be proactive? And how would you ever prove such a thing?

> Are they supposed to wait until videogames cause an issue I'm asking "are they insinuating that appropriation of their trademark contributed to the deaths that they cited". > And how would you ever prove such a thing? Presumably *if* they are alleging a causal relationship between trademark appropriation and violence against personnel they have some reason to suspect that the causal relationship exists.

The logos of the Red Cross, among a few others, are specifically mentioned in international law, including the Geneva Conventions. Firing on vehicles or personnel displaying the logos is, unless they do some very specific bad things, a war crime.

There are a number of incidents mentioned in the post and in this thread where Red Cross workers were injured or killed by combatants. Do I have any reason to believe any of them involve "appropriation of their trademark contributed to the deaths"? No, although I would believe that the defense in most cases would be "a mistake was made". But the Red Cross (and a lot of other people) have good reason to defend those logos.

International Humanitarian Law (https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/home):

"Rule 25. Medical personnel exclusively assigned to medical duties must be respected and protected in all circumstances. They lose their protection if they commit, outside their humanitarian function, acts harmful to the enemy."

"Rule 28. Medical units exclusively assigned to medical purposes must be respected and protected in all circumstances. They lose their protection if they are being used, outside their humanitarian function, to commit acts harmful to the enemy."

"Rule 29. Medical transports assigned exclusively to medical transportation must be respected and protected in all circumstances. They lose their protection if they are being used, outside their humanitarian function, to commit acts harmful to the enemy."

"Rule 59. The improper use of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions is prohibited."

(The Red Cross logos are such distinctive emblems.)

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#188

Post by pugworthy »

ksaj wrote: post #60
rurounijones wrote: post #5

Is anyone aware of some event that kicked off this posting? Has a particular game misused the symbol badly? It all makes sense but I am not sure if it has been submitted in response to some recent egregious misuse.

I wondered exactly this, because to this day I've only ever seen the red cross used for its intended meaning. It is absolutely recognizable for this purpose, and in those use cases. There were cases of misuse, but they were some time ago and already have been dealt with. I used to have a toy ambulance that had the red cross logo on it. They probably should post a policy on what they consider to be acceptable play, an…

I think if used for intended meaning in a shooting game, any player wearing or showing the Red Cross would be a third team who's role is to heal everyone.

Which would actually be an interesting game idea...

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#189

Post by mcguire »

thrower123 wrote: post #83
Justsignedup wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IF you are in combat and you see a red cross vehicle, it is important for your first reaction being "that is not where the enemy is" vs firing at it. This saves lives, and protects those who run into danger zones to save people. If we slap red cross symbols on people with medical equipment that you see in video games, it'll just dilute the meaning and maybe next time someone sees a vehicle with the red cross symbol t…

This only works with people who follow your rules of warfare. Otherwise, the red cross symbol just becomes a huge target painted on you.

This is true. But not following the rules of war, particularly if you are the weaker side, is not a good idea.
Post reply on HN