He played Among Us on Falcone's stream once (although it didn't run correctly on his phone, so he dropped out after one game). But there should still be plenty of Among Us quotes from Tom on that stream at least.
There's another fun fact about this: Arma 3 uses the Red Diamond in its Laws of War DLC, but this use is in fact legal. See, the Geneva Conventions specifically state that the illegal act is the *unauthorised* use of one of these protected symbols; in the case of Arma 3, the developers actively worked with the International Committee of the Red Cross when developing their Laws of War DLC (which aimed to be educational regarding the Geneva Conventions themselves), and so they were allowed to use the Red Diamond.
TF2 also still has the red cross. Unaware why they still do though because it's definitely not educational and definitely not used for non-combatants. Tbf that game has too many war crimes.
@@tilty7522 TF2 actually doesn't use the protected Red Cross. US law specifically calls out "the emblem of the Greek red cross on a white ground, or any sign or insignia made or colored in imitation thereof" so it specifically covers the plain red cross with equal arms on a white background. The Medic doesn't use a white background and the cross color changes with team. The various icons used on health pickups and lockers are all distinct from the Greek red cross.
The important "Part 2" of this rule in the Geneva Convention is that while you can't attack people wearing the red cross (or crescent), it is also a warcrime (i.e. a breach of the convention) if you wear the red cross in an effort to decieve the enemy or in any other way obscure your actual intent.
>videogame >geneva convention I literally dont even need to hear the question, this is about the red cross. This happens all the time lmao especially with indie games cuz they don't have a big enough legal team to help them catch things like this
Johnson & Johnson actually had a trademark on the Red Cross dating back to 1887. J&J actually tried to sue the American Red Cross for trademark infringement in 2007. Judges dismissed J&J claim due to the fact that the US Congress approved regulation granting official and exclusive rights to the Red Cross symbol to the Red Cross. And so it’s one of the rare cases where the United States has claimed sovereign immunity and dominion over a private trademark stating that it is officially not only against an international treaty that the United States was a founding signatory of, but it’s also against US federal law to utilize elsewhere.
to be fair, it's hard to see how a packet of bandages could be used AGAINST the spirit of "this symbol means you will find medical aid" it's almost the exact use the RCS wants.
@@empath69 J&J actually sued the American Red Cross for trademark infringement. They wanted to claim the right to use the Red Cross as being exclusive to J&J brand use and that the Red Cross could not place it on medical related supplies.
@@empath69 No, the RCS takes this dead seriously. It's not about what someone uses it for in the video game. Someone could make a video game where you literally play the red cross and they still couldn't use the symbol, because it's a game. The use the RCS wants is in real life, particularly in war zones, by those authorized to use it.
It is worth pointing out, the Red Cross represents/provides more than just medical aid, and part of the issue is all of the incorrect usage of the symbol in media causes a lot of people to fundamentally misunderstand the meaning of the symbol and what the organization does. As a game developer who has had to help remove references from a game, overall I'd say they were quite polite in the initial contact requesting the symbol's removal.
@@MegaLokopo I did a little research and I think I get what OP was on about even if they failed to elaborate. Red Cross is specifically humanitarian aid which means their goal is to minimise suffering which is a broader term that just providing immediate medical aid. They also work to maintain and repair infrastructure is a big example that most people wouldn't think of. The reason attacking the Red Cross is such a huge no-no in a Warzone is because their goal is to minimise suffering, so attacking them or even *impersonating* them can only be classified as an attempt to obstruct the goal of minimising suffering which is a major war crime.
@@exa_eilleIt's probably also to stop confusion, deliberate or otherwise. Just like how smoke bombs are illegal in war (since they're indistinguishable from gas weapons), they don't want to muddle the meaning, or even have people exploit the ambiguity.
@@exa_eille and if the Red Cross is bothering to go after games, perhaps they're not doing their jobs. Never once while playing a video game did I ever associate the Red Cross with anything other than helping people. Now though, I'll associate them with being whiny babies who can't handle anything.
@@MrMac6375 Exactly, this is ridiculous. If anything, using it in videogames helps to spread the meaning of it. By forcing people to use a different symbol, people may start associate the new symbol with health, protection and care, instead of the red cross. Meanwhile there are actual war crimes happening in the world right now and they do nothing about it, they are worried about a videogame using the red cross instead
@@SharienGaming pedantics? I was joking but I can be pedantic. Article 24 of the 1929 Geneva Convention: "The emblem of the red cross on a white ground and the words “Red Cross” or “Geneva Cross” shall not be used either in time of peace or in time of war, except to protect or to indicate the medical formations and establishments and the personnel and material protected by the Convention." So this leaves no room for the Red Cross to have a way, even if there was a will, to include the red cross in a video game, yes? Well, almost. If the Red Cross, for some reason, decided to create a interactive method of viewing an area that was able to qualify as a video game, and they where doing it for the purpose of indicating the locations of structures in an area, and used the red cross to indicate where some instillation of theirs was in real life then they very well could put it there. Also as a side note for maximum pendantics, being in violation of the Geneva Conventions would not stop them from making a video game with the red cross, nor do I specify that the Red Cross would put their symbol in the video game in the first place. Anyways I lose because I typed this whole thing out and did (minimal) research for it, have a good day.
Stardew Valley infamously included this in a patch note. There have been a few games that ran into this, the Mega Man Battle Network re-releases changed a graphic for this too.
It was just something like this, with no further explanation, right?: _"Bug fix: no longer violating the Geneva Convention"_ (If not Stardew Valley, then it was some other game that did that)
Laser sights usually have a warning along the lines that directing the laser at people's eyes is against the Geneva convention. Shooting people is fine, but blinding weapons are strictly forbidden.
The reason that it is not allowed is that binding lasers would new weapons system that has not been deployed or just deployed at a limited scale. It would be a weapons system that would not be that hard to make and it will be simple to blind enemy soldiers compare to shooting them. So it is not really a system where one country would get a huge advantage and you can get countries to agree not to develop it. Forbidding to shoot people in the war would not be something you get every country to accept. The rules that exist are the one that you can get country to agree to.
me knowing this because i knew it also happened with stardew valley, and stardew valley a cute little farming simulator being in violation of the Geneva Convention is just a bonkers thing to say
The list of games that violate this is kind of insane, halo 1 had a medkit with a red cross and you can tell they got in trouble for it because in future games (and I assume the remaster) its a red H
The rules on defensive symbols were tightened up in a newer treaty in 2005, which is when the International Red Cross started to really chase after video games/media. So the original Halo predated it, the remasters came after. (So the devs probably didn't get in trouble at the time.)
@@tomasxfranco the point of the red cross (symbol) is that it's simple to identify in hectic environments, like warzones. The symbolism comes from being used in that manner, not the other way around
@@tomasxfrancoIt makes sense from a war perspective. You're not legally allowed to shoot people wearing that symbol during war, so they would want to minimise the risk of confusion, deliberate or otherwise. You don't want a medical unit being massacred because someone thought they were just fans of a video game, or someone deliberately exploiting that ambiguity to attack unhindered.
Me, once I heard the question "Oh this is a thing with the red cross, isn't it?" I looked into that and fell down that rabbit hole when I played newer versions of Wolfenstein 3D and saw their health packs had changed.
Funny thing, I made a revamped version of the medkit in Half-Life 2 as a mod to download. It originally has a red cross on it, but i swapped it to a green one. I got multiple comments calling me an idiot for actually following the Geneva convention saying "it only applies to government bodies".
I often find myself goiong back to look up the exact phrasing of the question in the middle of the video and it would be so nice if you could put the question into the description so you don't have to skip back and forth for that.
Now I'm imagining the design department of some mathbook producer working on the book's cover and the boss walks by and is like. "hey, stop that. don't make that plus sign red or we'll be breaking the Geneva Convention"
Tom said "violation of the Geneva Conventions" in reference to a video game and I *IMMEDIATELY* got it. I'm talking the moment he said it. I should be on this game show.
Got it -- Red Cross! Guess I've almost been in violation too; I used it for a splash screen on a (personal) rescue disk full of utilities I put together.
I don't know the actual law, but I'd guess it's probably not illegal if it's just something for personal use, rather than something that's expected to be accessed by the general public.
The green cross Theme Hospital started with is a pretty common choice (and ICRC seems fine with it), so switching to an asterisk was probably unnecessary.
I now understand why they changed the color of the first aid kits in Subnautica to green. I thought it was such a flawed design choice. Looks like there was an actual reason for this. Amazing.
Earthbound has some funny examples. For starters, the Japanese version used the red cross in its game freely, but the American version took steps to remove them. There are three examples it missed: *On the cover of the box (It's a screenshot of the game set in Threed). *In Burglin Park in Twoson (There's a little label on it that partially obscures the cross). *Inside Dungeon Man (It's depicted at an angle).
this is one of the few ones that i knew instantly, which i am happy about :) Lateral with tom scott is becoming one of my favourite things to watch on RUclips. it is really interesting
I thought about Medic from TF2, as his class icon is a red cross. I read that it's specifically a red cross over a white background (no source on that), and if that were the case then he passes as it's red on orange. Also, apparently Johnson & Johnson sued American Red Cross for trademark infringement of the cross in 2007.
Another interesting fact: I have seen a red diamond used as indication for running tracks. They massively predate the addition to the Geneva convention though.
I knew this one instantly. Medkits in the classic 1993 and 1994 first person shooter game Doom bore the red cross and had to be changed for modern rereleases. It changed into a pill symbol.
0:58 Subtitles "backstep" should be "backstab". Btw, thank you editor for the consistently brilliant subtitling work. On topic, I first learnt about the Red Cross issue in games like TF2 and Doom way back, but it seems discussion in particular blew up with Among Us by sheer popularity.
What I learn from this: some people don't know what the Geneva Conventions are. I also don't know the details, but the basics as here explained I do know.
It's also just almost never acceptable by the logic of why it's reserved. Warzones start out as normal places, and you don't want random leftovers from peacetime to be incorrectly marked as protected areas.
When Tom said something about the design I suddenly heard this echo of a memory in the back of my, something about the red cross being illegal to use. Felt really satisfying to know that was correct
What about real life first aid kits? I know I had one as a "leftover" from my military training, and I saw one of those quite recently with a prominent red cross on it. I noticed though that "heart starters" (automatic defibrillators) don't use the symbol.
I'm guessing as it was a military one, it would be a permitted use. Civilian first aid kits I've come across have either had a green cross, or just the words 'first aid kit' on them.
You'll more often see the 'star of life' the six-pointed 'cross' with a snake wrapped around a staff (the Rod of Asclepius - an ancient symbol of medicine) - ambulance services pretty much always use this, because one of the big things that MADE the Geneva Conventions (plural, there's like 4 that were compiled and ratified over a few years) was the ABUSE of that 'red cross on a white background' as a battle ruse to hide military action - an ambulance used to carry munitions, etc. The symbol has to be clear and obvious so that anyone who might need aid in wartime - whether a civilian refugee fleeing chaos and strife, or an injured soldier delirious - would automatically know that if they saw the Red Cross, they would receive aid and succour, regardless.
Someone else was saying that it's only been in recent years that the American Red Cross has gotten more serious about enforcing this, so maybe the manufacturing of that first aid kit dates to before then? Or Wikipedia says members of the armed forces may use the Red Cross and other protected symbols, so maybe that usage allowance also extends to armed forces supplies.
One of the many examples of games violating this rule was MapleStory, a Korean MMO, in which a currency related to the Silent Crusade line of quests had to have its colors changed to avoid the red cross symbol
Off the top of my head Stardew Valley and Skullgirls also had to fix this exact violation, which now that I look at it are two of the least similar games I could have named. It does go to show that _nobody_ is safe from accidentally breaking the Geneva Convention though
All of the re-releases modify the graphics to turn the red cross into a pill (in the case of the BFG edition) or a green cross. They probably got a phone call or something from the Red Cross.
That was the first thing I thought of because Blink 182 had to change the cover art of their album "Enema of the State", on which the nurse had a red cross on her hat. Only the initial pressings have that cover, on the later ones it's just a white hat.
I was screaming at the TV that it was the Red Cross from the first few seconds. When tom gave a clue I backtracked and thought it might have been the disguise of civilians (as soldiers must be identifiable easily). But red cross is 100% it. Many games have done this before and broken the Geneva Conventions
That's the reason the James Bond film "The Living Daylights" has a notice at the beginning of the film pointing out the mis-use of the red cross later in the movie, when Soviet forces use equipment carrying the red cross logo as a disguise to enable them to kidnap a defector. The notice notes this is a violation of international law.
Well, this had me go down a research rabbit hole to figure out why I had this notion that it's perfectly fine to use the red cross for actual medical things and not just the official Red Cross organization. Because for a significant portion of my life, I had the red cross associated with anything medical and the Red Cross organization being just a subset of them. And there have been plenty of examples everywhere around me to enforce this understanding. Turns out the symbol has been protected for a long time, but in recent years, they started really cracking down on the abuse of their symbol. I'm not sure how I feel about this... I do recognize the need to distinguish their specific humanitarian organization (which is protected by international law) from other "random" uses like a phone repair shop. On the other hand, this seems to also mean that normal hospitals, ambulances, etc. are not allowed to use the symbol, meaning that they are not protected in any way in wartime? I had the understanding, that in wartime, it's strictly prohibited to attack ANY medical facility/vehicle/person, no matter whether they are a Red Cross member or just any other medical provider. And that using a medical facility/vehicle as a hiding/firing spot for soldiers would in turn be considered a serious warcrime as well. I'm not sure how this will affect future generations, who might not be able to make the simple association "red cross = medical = special protection" anymore because of declining visibility of the red cross symbol...
There's an exception which is that it's illegal to use the symbol "without authorisation", that means that if they consider it relevant for you to use the symbol you can. The example of this was in a DLC for the game ARMA that was centered around fighting a war while following the Geneva convention, they okayed it's use since it was used correctly in an accurate and educational depiction.
@@jon2922 I mean, Bohemia Interactive ACTIVELY worked with the ICRC to release a Rules of War DLC that explained things like this, so indeed in this case, they WANTED the game to be made and HELPED make it. But yes, I'm pretty confident that if you approached the Red Cross/Crescent Society in your nation, and asked for permission and advice on using the symbol specifically for healing and medical aid, they'd show you how it would be acceptable to use in a way that REINFORCES the central message of "if you see this symbol you will receive aid, no matter whose side you're on." First aid kits that anyone can use - probably okay. Medic NPCs that don't use weapons but treat the wounded of all sides in a battle (and even civilians that get caught up in it all) - probably okay. Ambulance that you can drive around and other people can shoot out through the windows doors - not likely. Et cetera.
Under Protocol III of the Geneva Conventions, the red diamond is also a protected symbol for medical personnel, so someone who is not part of a Red Cross or Red Crescent organization can wear that instead. Also, in terms of civilian hospitals, Wikipedia says that "Civilian institutions such as hospitals may use these markings (cross, crescent, or diamond) temporarily, within the context of an armed conflict."
A.) The symbol can, in fact, be used by warzone medical operations which follow the Geneva conventions - which have as their absolute core foundation neutrality. A medical team using the Red Cross protective symbol must treat _all_ the wounded, and prioritise based on medical requirements rather than uniform worn. B.) No, not all medical operations are protected. Specifically, as suggested by the above, if your medics only treat your side they are considered completely undifferentiated from your other soldiers. Moreover, these rules only apply in conventional inter-state warfare between conventional armies. So in Ukraine but not in Sudan.
I knew this and while reading comments it dawned on me that my all-time favorite game, Battlefield 1942, as well as BF: Vietnam and BF2, appear to have violated the Geneva Convention. It looks like they fixed it for the later games. Another fun fact: The flag of Tonga has a red cross in the corner and in 1862-1866 the flag was nearly identical with a red cross on an all white field and had to be changed because of the similarity. The First Geneva Convention was adopted in 1864.
I figured this out as soon as someone mentioned a symbol. I had read about this a few months ago. Well, read about the protected status of the Red Cross, not about Among Us.
Wow, didn't know it meant this much and how some of my fav games had to learn this, as well, but is interesting to clear up that subtle detail I subconsciously noticed without really thinking it through why and how.
It's weird that they blocked the green cross. It's been what developers used for medipacks and all because the red one is blocked... Though, I wonder if someone will ever use a red cross (or their equivalents in other regions) and use them accordingly - as a "no conflict zone" inside a war/battle game.
This is why LEGO ambulances have the Caduceus (wrong) or the rod of Asclepius (correct) in a blue star-shape. And indeed the USS Pasteur in Star Trek TNG
Not necessarily wrong, although many do argue that. The Caduceus has represented pharmacy and alchemy since the middle ages, which has always had a relationship to healthcare. There's also a general association since the old days from the caduceus with wisdom, which has also lended some credency to using it for healthcare related purposes. Later, like XX century, the US military adopted the caduceus for representing the medical staff of the Marine Hospital, as well as the Surgeon General, for most of the staff not being actual doctors, being a symbol of neutrality and relationships to merchant and sea trade (which is closer to the original Caduceus meaning - the symbol of trades under Hermes rule). For this reason, today you'll see that profit driven medical associations will use the caduceus, while non-profit use the rod of asclepius - which actually makes sense in context, given the relationship of the caduceus with commerce and trade. In my country, the symbol for medical emergency is the rod of asclepius on the star of life (blue cross), the symbol for pharmacies is the caduceus or, more commonly, the Bowl of Hygeia on a green cross, and the national symbol for first-aid is the red cross.
I'm at 02:21, now guessing, Red Cross? One of my local pubs can use a red cross, because Joule's Brewery's trademark predates the Geneva Conventions. Yup, got to the end to find out that I was right.
I actually used to be part of the Red Cross and this was in our training. But I played Among Us just twice, a couple years ago, and I totally forgot about every aspect of it, lol, so I didn't get it until the very end
I have a question, in 2 parts... The geneva convention is meant to prevent people from mistaking anything from being the actual real red cross, right? how can it be expected that intangible works of fiction, could ever be mistaken for the real red cross? how is that application justified? nobody thinks "Oh, if I have a real world injury in times of war, I can just, climb into a videogame and grab a healthpack", it's just not a thing that's possible. Also, this is a double-edged sword. lets say a movie takes place in a war, and the red cross exists in that movie about war. They should be able to use the real red cross in that circumstance, but because it's fiction and not real, they can't, so they use a green one. The result is that with every work of media displaying a green cross to represent doctors and medicine, in the event that the consumers of this media then actually need the red cross, They'll be looking for a green one. It's the cobra effect, also known as a perverse incentive. the intended outcome is to not have fake red-cross deceiving people, but the actual outcome is not being able to recognize the genuine article because of it's new obscurity. who/how would I bring a complaint to the wording of the geneva convention on the red cross???
@@therealquade The second one I'll deal with personally. Actually, you're allowed to use the red cross if you represent how it is used in real life correctly. Games have received authorization from the ICRC to use it under those circumstances. Quote: "To make it simple, one big foundation of international law (and you have no idea how huge it is, like really really crucial) is customary law: what everyone (ie every country) agrees is the law. It works surprisingly well, but what it means is that if there is a common practice that starts to go against a previous customary rule, that rule loses its customary status, and is replaced by the new practice. For the ICRC, who has as a rule that their emblems are protected, if they are lazy with it, it means in international law that they accept that their emblems are not that important, and that actually everyone can use them. Which means that this customary rule of protection would be replaced by a new one. And since the goal of the emblems is to shield people, and allow medical treatment, provide shelter, etc. in times of war, if that rule falls, a lot of people will suffer from it. So the ICRC (as the guardian of the international law of armed conflicts) just does not allow itself to be complacent with this rule."
As soon as I heard "among us violated the Geneva convention," I immediately knew it was the red cross, not because I knew the among us story, but the Blink 182 story. It is by far and away the most common violation basically the world over.
More interesting would be to talk about the dispute/ lawsuit of the red cross and Johnson & Johnson which sells first aid products with the symbol of the red cross on them.
Very funny that they used among us. My immediate thought was that it would be something to do with online, potentially data security, since thats the easiest way for a game to break the law
@@dryued6874 Newer releases and re-releases of Doom avoid it. The mistake was in the original, before the Red Cross started taking it seriously in video games.
That's so interesting, and it makes a lot of sense! Everyone knows the symbol of the red cross: it's the medical symbol. So in a way we can say that the symbol is "famous", but then the problem comes up when people want to use the symbol for medicine-adjacent things or other things, because then it loses it's power
the idea I feel, is so that if someone sees a red cross, they can immediately understand that it is health related and can seek health without speaking the same language. Using it on other things can confuse I guess.
oh great, now the meme makers have a sample of tom saying "among us"
He played Among Us on Falcone's stream once (although it didn't run correctly on his phone, so he dropped out after one game). But there should still be plenty of Among Us quotes from Tom on that stream at least.
@@ShapelessMonstrosity can you share the link?
he probably used that phrase multiple times before the game was released
There's another fun fact about this: Arma 3 uses the Red Diamond in its Laws of War DLC, but this use is in fact legal. See, the Geneva Conventions specifically state that the illegal act is the *unauthorised* use of one of these protected symbols; in the case of Arma 3, the developers actively worked with the International Committee of the Red Cross when developing their Laws of War DLC (which aimed to be educational regarding the Geneva Conventions themselves), and so they were allowed to use the Red Diamond.
Didn't the profits from laws of war go to the Red Cross? Or was that the other one that had the art gallery?
yo it's famous puzzle person sophie can i get an autograph
Laws of War was honestly an amazing DLC, a great addition to the story
TF2 also still has the red cross. Unaware why they still do though because it's definitely not educational and definitely not used for non-combatants.
Tbf that game has too many war crimes.
@@tilty7522 TF2 actually doesn't use the protected Red Cross. US law specifically calls out "the emblem of the Greek red cross on a white ground, or any sign or insignia made or colored in imitation thereof" so it specifically covers the plain red cross with equal arms on a white background. The Medic doesn't use a white background and the cross color changes with team. The various icons used on health pickups and lockers are all distinct from the Greek red cross.
I knew this immediately; my favourite game patch note is from Stardew Valley v1.3.32 whoch reads "Fixed a Geneva Convention violation"
*which
oh my god i never knew! of course it was harvey's clinic!
@@lrizzard It was actually your health bar that had the red cross. now it has a red H.
This might be a top 3 Tom Scott video title of all time
He really does have a way of writing topically accurate clickbait titles.
the best one is definitely "Stealing Our Friend's Brain Backup PRANK (GONE WRONG!!!) 🤯🤯🤯"
This is certainly one of the Tom Scott videos of all time
The important "Part 2" of this rule in the Geneva Convention is that while you can't attack people wearing the red cross (or crescent), it is also a warcrime (i.e. a breach of the convention) if you wear the red cross in an effort to decieve the enemy or in any other way obscure your actual intent.
>videogame
>geneva convention
I literally dont even need to hear the question, this is about the red cross. This happens all the time lmao especially with indie games cuz they don't have a big enough legal team to help them catch things like this
Johnson & Johnson actually had a trademark on the Red Cross dating back to 1887. J&J actually tried to sue the American Red Cross for trademark infringement in 2007. Judges dismissed J&J claim due to the fact that the US Congress approved regulation granting official and exclusive rights to the Red Cross symbol to the Red Cross. And so it’s one of the rare cases where the United States has claimed sovereign immunity and dominion over a private trademark stating that it is officially not only against an international treaty that the United States was a founding signatory of, but it’s also against US federal law to utilize elsewhere.
to be fair, it's hard to see how a packet of bandages could be used AGAINST the spirit of "this symbol means you will find medical aid" it's almost the exact use the RCS wants.
@@empath69 J&J actually sued the American Red Cross for trademark infringement. They wanted to claim the right to use the Red Cross as being exclusive to J&J brand use and that the Red Cross could not place it on medical related supplies.
@@empath69 No, the RCS takes this dead seriously. It's not about what someone uses it for in the video game. Someone could make a video game where you literally play the red cross and they still couldn't use the symbol, because it's a game.
The use the RCS wants is in real life, particularly in war zones, by those authorized to use it.
@@renerphocouldn't use it *unless authorised*. An arma DLC apparently contains some of those things under permission
It is worth pointing out, the Red Cross represents/provides more than just medical aid, and part of the issue is all of the incorrect usage of the symbol in media causes a lot of people to fundamentally misunderstand the meaning of the symbol and what the organization does.
As a game developer who has had to help remove references from a game, overall I'd say they were quite polite in the initial contact requesting the symbol's removal.
Would you like to elaborate on that or are you just going to make half a claim?
@@MegaLokopo I did a little research and I think I get what OP was on about even if they failed to elaborate. Red Cross is specifically humanitarian aid which means their goal is to minimise suffering which is a broader term that just providing immediate medical aid. They also work to maintain and repair infrastructure is a big example that most people wouldn't think of. The reason attacking the Red Cross is such a huge no-no in a Warzone is because their goal is to minimise suffering, so attacking them or even *impersonating* them can only be classified as an attempt to obstruct the goal of minimising suffering which is a major war crime.
@@exa_eilleIt's probably also to stop confusion, deliberate or otherwise. Just like how smoke bombs are illegal in war (since they're indistinguishable from gas weapons), they don't want to muddle the meaning, or even have people exploit the ambiguity.
@@exa_eille and if the Red Cross is bothering to go after games, perhaps they're not doing their jobs. Never once while playing a video game did I ever associate the Red Cross with anything other than helping people. Now though, I'll associate them with being whiny babies who can't handle anything.
@@MrMac6375 Exactly, this is ridiculous. If anything, using it in videogames helps to spread the meaning of it.
By forcing people to use a different symbol, people may start associate the new symbol with health, protection and care, instead of the red cross.
Meanwhile there are actual war crimes happening in the world right now and they do nothing about it, they are worried about a videogame using the red cross instead
I have never played Among Us but I knew the answer immediately because I heard of this happening to other video games.
The Red Cross should release a video game just to show dominance.
yeeeeeep :P
Halo 1 and Prison Architect are the two that immediately come to mind
@@Ganpan14O would still be a violation of the geneva convention, because a videogame is not a medic in wartime
@@sandwich2473 I knew this from Halo 1, still have the dvd.
@@SharienGaming pedantics? I was joking but I can be pedantic.
Article 24 of the 1929 Geneva Convention:
"The emblem of the red cross on a white ground and the words “Red Cross” or “Geneva Cross” shall not be used either in time of peace or in time of war, except to protect or to indicate the medical formations and establishments and the personnel and material protected by the Convention."
So this leaves no room for the Red Cross to have a way, even if there was a will, to include the red cross in a video game, yes? Well, almost. If the Red Cross, for some reason, decided to create a interactive method of viewing an area that was able to qualify as a video game, and they where doing it for the purpose of indicating the locations of structures in an area, and used the red cross to indicate where some instillation of theirs was in real life then they very well could put it there.
Also as a side note for maximum pendantics, being in violation of the Geneva Conventions would not stop them from making a video game with the red cross, nor do I specify that the Red Cross would put their symbol in the video game in the first place.
Anyways I lose because I typed this whole thing out and did (minimal) research for it, have a good day.
Tom could have chosen many other games, but he chose Among Us
Of course, he knows what he's doing, there's a reason he has a long-lived RUclips career
nah, it was just the latest game in the news that happened to change that asset
Stardew Valley infamously included this in a patch note. There have been a few games that ran into this, the Mega Man Battle Network re-releases changed a graphic for this too.
It was just something like this, with no further explanation, right?:
_"Bug fix: no longer violating the Geneva Convention"_
(If not Stardew Valley, then it was some other game that did that)
@@JanTuts you're right. Just randomly sandwiched in between bug fixes to the singing stone and the chat box
@@JanTuts that is amazing
Prison Architect.
Laser sights usually have a warning along the lines that directing the laser at people's eyes is against the Geneva convention. Shooting people is fine, but blinding weapons are strictly forbidden.
Idea is to keep things humane. Needless maiming is a no go.
The reason that it is not allowed is that binding lasers would new weapons system that has not been deployed or just deployed at a limited scale. It would be a weapons system that would not be that hard to make and it will be simple to blind enemy soldiers compare to shooting them. So it is not really a system where one country would get a huge advantage and you can get countries to agree not to develop it.
Forbidding to shoot people in the war would not be something you get every country to accept. The rules that exist are the one that you can get country to agree to.
...So what about a flashbang then?
me knowing this because i knew it also happened with stardew valley, and stardew valley a cute little farming simulator being in violation of the Geneva Convention is just a bonkers thing to say
The list of games that violate this is kind of insane, halo 1 had a medkit with a red cross and you can tell they got in trouble for it because in future games (and I assume the remaster) its a red H
It's crazy that you can "reserve" something as simple and simbolic as a red cross.
The rules on defensive symbols were tightened up in a newer treaty in 2005, which is when the International Red Cross started to really chase after video games/media. So the original Halo predated it, the remasters came after. (So the devs probably didn't get in trouble at the time.)
@@tomasxfranco the point of the red cross (symbol) is that it's simple to identify in hectic environments, like warzones. The symbolism comes from being used in that manner, not the other way around
@@tomasxfrancoIt makes sense from a war perspective. You're not legally allowed to shoot people wearing that symbol during war, so they would want to minimise the risk of confusion, deliberate or otherwise.
You don't want a medical unit being massacred because someone thought they were just fans of a video game, or someone deliberately exploiting that ambiguity to attack unhindered.
@@tomasxfrancothe premises are a little different when you're writing the rules for war.
You get to override more or less everything else.
the moment i saw the title i knew exactly what it was about. blink-182 violated the geneva conventions in the same way a while back
almost like he mentions that in the video...
My immediate reaction to the question was "Oh that's easy".
Me, once I heard the question "Oh this is a thing with the red cross, isn't it?"
I looked into that and fell down that rabbit hole when I played newer versions of Wolfenstein 3D and saw their health packs had changed.
Funny thing, I made a revamped version of the medkit in Half-Life 2 as a mod to download. It originally has a red cross on it, but i swapped it to a green one.
I got multiple comments calling me an idiot for actually following the Geneva convention saying "it only applies to government bodies".
“Only applies to government bodies”
But, the Red Cross: NO.!
I often find myself goiong back to look up the exact phrasing of the question in the middle of the video and it would be so nice if you could put the question into the description so you don't have to skip back and forth for that.
Now I'm imagining the design department of some mathbook producer working on the book's cover and the boss walks by and is like. "hey, stop that. don't make that plus sign red or we'll be breaking the Geneva Convention"
Tom said "violation of the Geneva Conventions" in reference to a video game and I *IMMEDIATELY* got it. I'm talking the moment he said it.
I should be on this game show.
its very common for videogames and other media to use a inverted cross to avoid this (white cross on redish background)
The Swiss might have something to say about that. 🙂
@@57thorns medicine and recovery isn't exactly a bad association, particularly for me, my father had to be flown to Switzerland to be treated
@@57thorns exactly
@@munjee2 kind of annoying for swiss people to have the mix up
More often is just use a different color such as blue or green cross.
Got it -- Red Cross! Guess I've almost been in violation too; I used it for a splash screen on a (personal) rescue disk full of utilities I put together.
I don't know the actual law, but I'd guess it's probably not illegal if it's just something for personal use, rather than something that's expected to be accessed by the general public.
@@thatmarchingarrow that’s why I said “almost” …
The green cross Theme Hospital started with is a pretty common choice (and ICRC seems fine with it), so switching to an asterisk was probably unnecessary.
I now understand why they changed the color of the first aid kits in Subnautica to green. I thought it was such a flawed design choice. Looks like there was an actual reason for this. Amazing.
Earthbound has some funny examples. For starters, the Japanese version used the red cross in its game freely, but the American version took steps to remove them. There are three examples it missed:
*On the cover of the box (It's a screenshot of the game set in Threed).
*In Burglin Park in Twoson (There's a little label on it that partially obscures the cross).
*Inside Dungeon Man (It's depicted at an angle).
this is one of the few ones that i knew instantly, which i am happy about :)
Lateral with tom scott is becoming one of my favourite things to watch on RUclips. it is really interesting
I thought about Medic from TF2, as his class icon is a red cross. I read that it's specifically a red cross over a white background (no source on that), and if that were the case then he passes as it's red on orange.
Also, apparently Johnson & Johnson sued American Red Cross for trademark infringement of the cross in 2007.
2:10 - Cat!
"Could you not" hits differently when you're British, I think.
Another interesting fact:
I have seen a red diamond used as indication for running tracks. They massively predate the addition to the Geneva convention though.
Minor correction: The Geneva conventions (mostly) predate WW2, with the oldest being 1864
1:00 Let me guess. Red cross on white background in med bay?
I knew this one instantly.
Medkits in the classic 1993 and 1994 first person shooter game Doom bore the red cross and had to be changed for modern rereleases. It changed into a pill symbol.
0:58 Subtitles "backstep" should be "backstab". Btw, thank you editor for the consistently brilliant subtitling work.
On topic, I first learnt about the Red Cross issue in games like TF2 and Doom way back, but it seems discussion in particular blew up with Among Us by sheer popularity.
Thanks, typo now fixed.
What I learn from this: some people don't know what the Geneva Conventions are. I also don't know the details, but the basics as here explained I do know.
1:34 "the Geneva convention is a big deal" underrated joke
I do get why instead of trying to have a vague line of what use is acceptable, they just apply the rule extremely strictly.
It's also just almost never acceptable by the logic of why it's reserved.
Warzones start out as normal places, and you don't want random leftovers from peacetime to be incorrectly marked as protected areas.
Man, I break the Geneva Convention every time I do my math homework in red ink.
No Problem. Prison for you !
This is just one of those laws that is just pure genius. Not killing medics is such a good idea.
When Tom said something about the design I suddenly heard this echo of a memory in the back of my, something about the red cross being illegal to use. Felt really satisfying to know that was correct
What about real life first aid kits? I know I had one as a "leftover" from my military training, and I saw one of those quite recently with a prominent red cross on it.
I noticed though that "heart starters" (automatic defibrillators) don't use the symbol.
I'm guessing as it was a military one, it would be a permitted use.
Civilian first aid kits I've come across have either had a green cross, or just the words 'first aid kit' on them.
You'll more often see the 'star of life' the six-pointed 'cross' with a snake wrapped around a staff (the Rod of Asclepius - an ancient symbol of medicine) - ambulance services pretty much always use this, because one of the big things that MADE the Geneva Conventions (plural, there's like 4 that were compiled and ratified over a few years) was the ABUSE of that 'red cross on a white background' as a battle ruse to hide military action - an ambulance used to carry munitions, etc.
The symbol has to be clear and obvious so that anyone who might need aid in wartime - whether a civilian refugee fleeing chaos and strife, or an injured soldier delirious - would automatically know that if they saw the Red Cross, they would receive aid and succour, regardless.
Someone else was saying that it's only been in recent years that the American Red Cross has gotten more serious about enforcing this, so maybe the manufacturing of that first aid kit dates to before then? Or Wikipedia says members of the armed forces may use the Red Cross and other protected symbols, so maybe that usage allowance also extends to armed forces supplies.
1:06 - the biggest and most subtle flex I've heard in a long time - thank you
*takes bow* I would claim that I am more subtle when it's not the middle of the night but that would probably be a lie.
One of the many examples of games violating this rule was MapleStory, a Korean MMO, in which a currency related to the Silent Crusade line of quests had to have its colors changed to avoid the red cross symbol
Gunbound too
great sus game. so perfectly infiltrated modern generations' consciousness, never to leave, ever again.
2:06 lol what's the cat doing? xD
What ever she damn well pleases!
Off the top of my head Stardew Valley and Skullgirls also had to fix this exact violation, which now that I look at it are two of the least similar games I could have named. It does go to show that _nobody_ is safe from accidentally breaking the Geneva Convention though
Probably the biggest profile video-game who violated this is the original 1993 Doom series, where the medkits have the red cross.
All of the re-releases modify the graphics to turn the red cross into a pill (in the case of the BFG edition) or a green cross. They probably got a phone call or something from the Red Cross.
That was the first thing I thought of because Blink 182 had to change the cover art of their album "Enema of the State", on which the nurse had a red cross on her hat. Only the initial pressings have that cover, on the later ones it's just a white hat.
Is this why our medicine cabinet at work has a green cross on it?
now we know why he always wears red
this title gave me whiplash
Now this was fascinating
Imagine working for red cross and your job is to go through every games, media etc. to find these. Idk if it exists, but it might 😆
No surprise that Americans don't know what the Geneva Convention is.
I was screaming at the TV that it was the Red Cross from the first few seconds. When tom gave a clue I backtracked and thought it might have been the disguise of civilians (as soldiers must be identifiable easily).
But red cross is 100% it. Many games have done this before and broken the Geneva Conventions
I am happy that I believe that I know this little bit of trivia.
Paused at 0:40 - It's the red cross ➕ symbol again, isn't it?
That's the reason the James Bond film "The Living Daylights" has a notice at the beginning of the film pointing out the mis-use of the red cross later in the movie, when Soviet forces use equipment carrying the red cross logo as a disguise to enable them to kidnap a defector. The notice notes this is a violation of international law.
Is this notice in rereleases only or was it always like that? I don't remember this being a thing, but it's been ages since I watched it.
the implication of this is that putting a red swastika on a med kit is fine
Well, this had me go down a research rabbit hole to figure out why I had this notion that it's perfectly fine to use the red cross for actual medical things and not just the official Red Cross organization.
Because for a significant portion of my life, I had the red cross associated with anything medical and the Red Cross organization being just a subset of them. And there have been plenty of examples everywhere around me to enforce this understanding.
Turns out the symbol has been protected for a long time, but in recent years, they started really cracking down on the abuse of their symbol.
I'm not sure how I feel about this...
I do recognize the need to distinguish their specific humanitarian organization (which is protected by international law) from other "random" uses like a phone repair shop.
On the other hand, this seems to also mean that normal hospitals, ambulances, etc. are not allowed to use the symbol, meaning that they are not protected in any way in wartime?
I had the understanding, that in wartime, it's strictly prohibited to attack ANY medical facility/vehicle/person, no matter whether they are a Red Cross member or just any other medical provider.
And that using a medical facility/vehicle as a hiding/firing spot for soldiers would in turn be considered a serious warcrime as well.
I'm not sure how this will affect future generations, who might not be able to make the simple association "red cross = medical = special protection" anymore because of declining visibility of the red cross symbol...
On the other hand, rarely seen = once you see it, you know it's a big deal.
There's an exception which is that it's illegal to use the symbol "without authorisation", that means that if they consider it relevant for you to use the symbol you can.
The example of this was in a DLC for the game ARMA that was centered around fighting a war while following the Geneva convention, they okayed it's use since it was used correctly in an accurate and educational depiction.
@@jon2922 I mean, Bohemia Interactive ACTIVELY worked with the ICRC to release a Rules of War DLC that explained things like this, so indeed in this case, they WANTED the game to be made and HELPED make it.
But yes, I'm pretty confident that if you approached the Red Cross/Crescent Society in your nation, and asked for permission and advice on using the symbol specifically for healing and medical aid, they'd show you how it would be acceptable to use in a way that REINFORCES the central message of "if you see this symbol you will receive aid, no matter whose side you're on." First aid kits that anyone can use - probably okay. Medic NPCs that don't use weapons but treat the wounded of all sides in a battle (and even civilians that get caught up in it all) - probably okay. Ambulance that you can drive around and other people can shoot out through the windows doors - not likely. Et cetera.
Under Protocol III of the Geneva Conventions, the red diamond is also a protected symbol for medical personnel, so someone who is not part of a Red Cross or Red Crescent organization can wear that instead. Also, in terms of civilian hospitals, Wikipedia says that "Civilian institutions such as hospitals may use these markings (cross, crescent, or diamond) temporarily, within the context of an armed conflict."
A.) The symbol can, in fact, be used by warzone medical operations which follow the Geneva conventions - which have as their absolute core foundation neutrality. A medical team using the Red Cross protective symbol must treat _all_ the wounded, and prioritise based on medical requirements rather than uniform worn.
B.) No, not all medical operations are protected. Specifically, as suggested by the above, if your medics only treat your side they are considered completely undifferentiated from your other soldiers. Moreover, these rules only apply in conventional inter-state warfare between conventional armies. So in Ukraine but not in Sudan.
I'm glad that this is a highlight
Tom @05:25: "We're looking for a specific symbol..." AH! The Red Cross!
I knew this and while reading comments it dawned on me that my all-time favorite game, Battlefield 1942, as well as BF: Vietnam and BF2, appear to have violated the Geneva Convention. It looks like they fixed it for the later games.
Another fun fact: The flag of Tonga has a red cross in the corner and in 1862-1866 the flag was nearly identical with a red cross on an all white field and had to be changed because of the similarity. The First Geneva Convention was adopted in 1864.
“I don’t know the questions, I certainly don’t know the answers… unless I just happen to know the answers”
Why is it I can see Gary Brannon being the one telling you you would be in breach of the GC......
I figured this out as soon as someone mentioned a symbol. I had read about this a few months ago. Well, read about the protected status of the Red Cross, not about Among Us.
Wow, didn't know it meant this much and how some of my fav games had to learn this, as well, but is interesting to clear up that subtle detail I subconsciously noticed without really thinking it through why and how.
off to a good start with "what is Among Us" and "what is the Geneva Convention"
You mean the Geneva Checklist, right?
Tom said he "had" a channel called Tom Scott Plus.... Does that mean Tom Scott Plus has ended?
wait wait wait.... "HAD"? 6:40
What happened to Tom Scott Plus?
I remember some vintage Lego sets that had red crosses on ambulances, etc.
I love this fact. Next pub quiz i write, this is taking pride of place!
It's weird that they blocked the green cross. It's been what developers used for medipacks and all because the red one is blocked...
Though, I wonder if someone will ever use a red cross (or their equivalents in other regions) and use them accordingly - as a "no conflict zone" inside a war/battle game.
Wow, I love this fact so much! I feel like as a society we are growing more and more out of touch with respect for such matters.
What do you mean you "had" a channel called Tom Scott Plus? Don't tell me it's permanently over?
No, no, it's still active. I suppose he misspoke.
Just not currently releasing new videos; I hope he gets back to it soon.
Omg is this why the Medikits in the Steam release of DOOM have green crosses??
100% the case.
First time I’ve ever watched Lateral and come up with the answer before the guests even got close.
This is why LEGO ambulances have the Caduceus (wrong) or the rod of Asclepius (correct) in a blue star-shape. And indeed the USS Pasteur in Star Trek TNG
the "Star of Life", yeah.
Not necessarily wrong, although many do argue that. The Caduceus has represented pharmacy and alchemy since the middle ages, which has always had a relationship to healthcare. There's also a general association since the old days from the caduceus with wisdom, which has also lended some credency to using it for healthcare related purposes.
Later, like XX century, the US military adopted the caduceus for representing the medical staff of the Marine Hospital, as well as the Surgeon General, for most of the staff not being actual doctors, being a symbol of neutrality and relationships to merchant and sea trade (which is closer to the original Caduceus meaning - the symbol of trades under Hermes rule).
For this reason, today you'll see that profit driven medical associations will use the caduceus, while non-profit use the rod of asclepius - which actually makes sense in context, given the relationship of the caduceus with commerce and trade.
In my country, the symbol for medical emergency is the rod of asclepius on the star of life (blue cross), the symbol for pharmacies is the caduceus or, more commonly, the Bowl of Hygeia on a green cross, and the national symbol for first-aid is the red cross.
When he said it was a forbidden design, I already knew.
I'm at 02:21, now guessing, Red Cross? One of my local pubs can use a red cross, because Joule's Brewery's trademark predates the Geneva Conventions.
Yup, got to the end to find out that I was right.
Oh man, there's a thrift store chain here in Copenhagen that really needs a cease and desist letter.
I knew this one right away, it's such a common mistake made in games that ends up having to be changed.
I actually used to be part of the Red Cross and this was in our training. But I played Among Us just twice, a couple years ago, and I totally forgot about every aspect of it, lol, so I didn't get it until the very end
I have a question, in 2 parts... The geneva convention is meant to prevent people from mistaking anything from being the actual real red cross, right? how can it be expected that intangible works of fiction, could ever be mistaken for the real red cross? how is that application justified? nobody thinks "Oh, if I have a real world injury in times of war, I can just, climb into a videogame and grab a healthpack", it's just not a thing that's possible. Also, this is a double-edged sword. lets say a movie takes place in a war, and the red cross exists in that movie about war. They should be able to use the real red cross in that circumstance, but because it's fiction and not real, they can't, so they use a green one. The result is that with every work of media displaying a green cross to represent doctors and medicine, in the event that the consumers of this media then actually need the red cross, They'll be looking for a green one. It's the cobra effect, also known as a perverse incentive. the intended outcome is to not have fake red-cross deceiving people, but the actual outcome is not being able to recognize the genuine article because of it's new obscurity. who/how would I bring a complaint to the wording of the geneva convention on the red cross???
@@therealquade
The second one I'll deal with personally. Actually, you're allowed to use the red cross if you represent how it is used in real life correctly. Games have received authorization from the ICRC to use it under those circumstances.
Quote:
"To make it simple, one big foundation of international law (and you have no idea how huge it is, like really really crucial) is customary law: what everyone (ie every country) agrees is the law. It works surprisingly well, but what it means is that if there is a common practice that starts to go against a previous customary rule, that rule loses its customary status, and is replaced by the new practice.
For the ICRC, who has as a rule that their emblems are protected, if they are lazy with it, it means in international law that they accept that their emblems are not that important, and that actually everyone can use them. Which means that this customary rule of protection would be replaced by a new one. And since the goal of the emblems is to shield people, and allow medical treatment, provide shelter, etc. in times of war, if that rule falls, a lot of people will suffer from it. So the ICRC (as the guardian of the international law of armed conflicts) just does not allow itself to be complacent with this rule."
This is the first question I literally immediately knew the answer to, despite not knowing this particular bit about Among Us.
Immediate thought: Among us probably used the red cross somewhere.
As soon as I heard "among us violated the Geneva convention," I immediately knew it was the red cross, not because I knew the among us story, but the Blink 182 story. It is by far and away the most common violation basically the world over.
thank you Rhythm Doctor for letting me know about this fact beforehand :D
Fun fact, in India the chemist shops and pharmacies used to have that symbol before the government asked them to change it to green
Oh yes, I knew it when Tom said it was a particular design, because I remember Mother 2/Earthbound was similarly in violation!
More interesting would be to talk about the dispute/ lawsuit of the red cross and Johnson & Johnson which sells first aid products with the symbol of the red cross on them.
How is the use in Films regulated? I think I saw that multiple times in Films
I knew this as soon as the question arose, I remember the same thing happening to the developers of "Prison Architect".
Had a channel? Is Tom Scott plus officially over?
Very funny that they used among us.
My immediate thought was that it would be something to do with online, potentially data security, since thats the easiest way for a game to break the law
Yeah I knew this one. Other video games have been caught out by this also.
_had_ a second channel… is it defunct?
I knew this immediately because a lot of games have violated it
Doom uses the red cross on medkits though, how come it never got the hammer?
@@dryued6874 Newer releases and re-releases of Doom avoid it. The mistake was in the original, before the Red Cross started taking it seriously in video games.
That's so interesting, and it makes a lot of sense!
Everyone knows the symbol of the red cross: it's the medical symbol. So in a way we can say that the symbol is "famous", but then the problem comes up when people want to use the symbol for medicine-adjacent things or other things, because then it loses it's power
the idea I feel, is so that if someone sees a red cross, they can immediately understand that it is health related and can seek health without speaking the same language. Using it on other things can confuse I guess.