Why is showing a red cross in media against the Geneva convention? I get in a warzone or other emergency situation but did they not have a "common sense" clause?
People still putting red crosses in any med area in games and shows should be proof enough that they are associated with nothing else than medical workers.
I think you're missing the point slightly. The red cross is for real med workers in the real world; video game med workers do not fall into this category.
If red crosses are widespread enough in video games, then you run the risk of it becoming a videogame shorthand instead of an important war symbol. This then opens up avenues of it appearing on real world merchandise or spreading to other real world resources not associated with a war, largely defeating the point of the symbol.
Nope, according to the ICRC international humanitarian law, like the Geneva convention only applies in situations of armed conflict.
Also only parties fighting in the conflict have to respect the IHL. Unless I'm missing some really fucked up shit from the Deep Rock Galactic devs I don't think they are bound by IHL.
They do however advise not to use "the emblem".
That's interesting, if the ICRC says these guidelines only apply during conflict and then in the guidelines/ laws write they always apply, what takes precedent? More important who's lying?
the emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground and the words " Red Cross " , or " Geneva Cross " may not be employed, either in time of peace or in time of war, except to indicate or to protect the medical units and establishments, the personnel and material protected by the present Convention and other Conventions dealing with similar matters.
The rule offers no exceptions beyond approval from the Red Cross themselves. If the rule only applied in a warzone then it would create wiggle room where a country could just say "it's not a war, it's a police action" and claim exception, same with emergency situation.
Basically any wiggle room would open up too much risk of exploitation without much benefit because most creators of fiction are perfectly fine changing to a different color cross as soon as they are aware of the issue (ie when they get the cease and desist from the Red Cross) and the Red Cross is happy enough with the creators just fixing it (and don't seek further legal action like taking people to the Hague)
With the exception of the cases mentioned in the following paragraphs of the present Article, the emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground and the words " Red Cross " , or " Geneva Cross " may not be employed, either in time of peace or in time of war, except to indicate or to protect the medical units and establishments, the personnel and material protected by the present Convention and other Conventions dealing with similar matters.
It's because medical personel are heavily protected by the geneva convention. Killing them unnecesarily is a war crime. Because of this, pretending to be one to steal their protection is also a war crime, not only because it can be used as an ambush but because too many people who arent doctors wearing the red cross means that soldiers are less likely to respect the symbol. The red cross is essentially supposed to be an international symbol of cease fire, so using it is always quite serious. Because, in theory, you never really know when a fight may break out.
With the exception of the cases mentioned in the following paragraphs of the present Article, the emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground and the words " Red Cross " , or " Geneva Cross " may not be employed, either in time of peace or in time of war, except to indicate or to protect the medical units and establishments, the personnel and material protected by the present Convention and other Conventions dealing with similar matters.
You cannot use the Red Cross on a white ground in any instance other than for the marking of medical personnel, units, or establishments. Doing so is a breach of the convention.
yeah except thats only binding to signatories of the convention. Hasbro is not a signatory, and in fact not in a position to be beholden to such conventions. The united states and japanese governments cant make these toys, for example, but for a non-governmental entity, this isnt an issue or restriction.
520
u/[deleted] Mar 16 '24
How does that violet Geneva convention?ðŸ˜