Search and Rescue Themed Cosmetics for CMDRs

[LadyLucida]

As a Search and Rescue CMDR, I think it would be great if we could have some Search and Rescue-themed decals and nameplates, similar to the ones currently in the game for other activities, such as passengers, pirates, or even xeno peace. I'd be willing to pay ARX for them, but alternatively, they could be earned through becoming allied with the rescue mega-ships.
I use red and white "salvage" colors for my fleet carrier, but a carrier paint job that matches the rescue ships would be cool as well. They are a turquoise and grey color and I think the closest one to that is the fleet carrier imperator paint job, but it's not exact.

Ideas for Decals/Nameplates:

These are both present on the rescue mega-ships stationed around the bubble.

 

[Nidoboros]

Joke answer: just show up rocking your Aisling Duval SWAG, since she is the most rescue.

 

[Kwalidy]

Would love a simple red plus in a white circle with a red border decal. A ship/carrier name plate with similar would be great.
All the podders and station evac people would benefit from being able to better represent their ships. And yes, would pay arx at the same level as the current decals.

Thanks for your consideration.

 

[Nidoboros]

Red Plus may unironically get them in legal trouble/be against the Geneva Convention for... reasons. See: Among Us having to change their medical thing from Red to Green.

Would love a simple red plus in a white circle with a red border decal. A ship/carrier name plate with similar would be great.
All the podders and station evac people would benefit from being able to better represent their ships. And yes, would pay arx at the same level as the current decals.

Thanks for your consideration.

 

[St0rmFury]

Would love a simple red plus in a white circle with a red border decal. A ship/carrier name plate with similar would be great.
All the podders and station evac people would benefit from being able to better represent their ships. And yes, would pay arx at the same level as the current decals.

Thanks for your consideration.

Nah man, the red cross emblem is protected by international law.

 

[ProphetUK]

Agreed, would love to see Rescue cosmetics added. Happy to pay ARX for them but it would be a nice touch to unlock them for something like becoming allied with the Independent Rescue Coalition.

 

[LadyLucida]

Agreed, would love to see Rescue cosmetics added. Happy to pay ARX for them but it would be a nice touch to unlock them for something like becoming allied with the Independent Rescue Coalition.

Yea i think any of the rescue factions could work that would be great! The Feds will have to build a new megaship though...

 

[Jmanis]

Nah man, the red cross emblem is protected by international law.

100% this, and relevant now more than ever tbh.

Was looking around for ICRC articles that specifically addressed this, but it's hilarious to see a bunch of people thinking of this as "trademark/copyright infringement" or "you'll get sued" instead of them being protected symbols with strict prohibitions on their use under international law. Sure, I guess people don't think of these things in their day-to-day, but the dilution of their meaning has real consequence.

Eh... </rant>

Mockups by op look great!

 

[Frakk Zarah]

Yes please

 

[Kwalidy]

Sad to hear about the red plus, but yeah, that makes sense. Any derivative or spiritual successor would be great. And thanks to the above for the education. : )

 

[Vedmo]

100% this, and relevant now more than ever tbh.

Was looking around for ICRC articles that specifically addressed this, but it's hilarious to see a bunch of people thinking of this as "trademark/copyright infringement" or "you'll get sued" instead of them being protected symbols with strict prohibitions on their use under international law. Sure, I guess people don't think of these things in their day-to-day, but the dilution of their meaning has real consequence.

Eh... </rant>

Mockups by op look great!

Georgia just doesn’t care.

 

[Chrystoph]

100% this, and relevant now more than ever tbh.

Was looking around for ICRC articles that specifically addressed this, but it's hilarious to see a bunch of people thinking of this as "trademark/copyright infringement" or "you'll get sued" instead of them being protected symbols with strict prohibitions

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/national-practice/act-127-trademark-1959

 

[Jmanis]

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/national-practice/act-127-trademark-1959

So.... that's Japanese Trademark Law, not international law, which is mostly irrelevant[1].

Spoiler: getting ot

The ICJ doesn't have the resources to prosecute every transgression of customary law. Such is the way of every justice system.

Therefore, it relies on nation states to have their own justice system to enforce those rules.
Where a nation state either:

• disregards those rules; or
• doesn't adequately enforce the rules, such as not punishing significant transgressions; or
• might self-decide that they can't adequately enforce the rule appropriately

... the ICJ may pursue the matter further, potentially through enforcement action via member nations, whether the relevant nation state likes it or not.

The issue around this comes from the unfortunate venn diagram of misuse of protected symbols in video games being too minor for the ICJ to pursue, and also too minor (and likely unpopular) for a country to enforce; imagine if the US government went after Doom or Half Life for it's use of these symbols.

That's the bind the ICRC finds themselves in, because they're broadly unable to enforce this matter, and instead are focusing on advocacy and literacy about it, which seems to sadly fall on deaf ears at a time the world most needs it.

tl;dr surmising the issue of using the red cross as a breach of "national trademark law" dilutes the core issue, which is misuse of protected symbols under international law; a significantly more serious issue.

If "being sued" by their home government is the only concern people have here, their priorities are grossly out of whack... not that i expect these things are ever in the front of anyone's mind day to day.

[1] explicitly, Japan enforces it through it's trademark law. Other nations have explicit legislation covering enforcement of International Law.

 

[Chrystoph]

So.... that's Japanese Trademark Law, not international law, which is mostly irrelevant[1].

Spoiler: getting ot

The ICJ doesn't have the resources to prosecute every transgression of customary law. Such is the way of every justice system.

Therefore, it relies on nation states to have their own justice system to enforce those rules.
Where a nation state either:

• disregards those rules; or
• doesn't adequately enforce the rules, such as not punishing significant transgressions; or
• might self-decide that they can't adequately enforce the rule appropriately

... the ICJ may pursue the matter further, potentially through enforcement action via member nations, whether the relevant nation state likes it or not.

The issue around this comes from the unfortunate venn diagram of misuse of protected symbols in video games being too minor for the ICJ to pursue, and also too minor (and likely unpopular) for a country to enforce; imagine if the US government went after Doom or Half Life for it's use of these symbols.

That's the bind the ICRC finds themselves in, because they're broadly unable to enforce this matter, and instead are focusing on advocacy and literacy about it, which seems to sadly fall on deaf ears at a time the world most needs it.

tl;dr surmising the issue of using the red cross as a breach of "national trademark law" dilutes the core issue, which is misuse of protected symbols under international law; a significantly more serious issue.

If "being sued" by their home government is the only concern people have here, their priorities are grossly out of whack... not that i expect these things are ever in the front of anyone's mind day to day.

[1] explicitly, Japan enforces it through it's trademark law. Other nations have explicit legislation covering enforcement of International Law.

I do so love it when people don't do their due diligence when "refuting" the other party; the Japanese law is One example of the common law that you will find.

Since you insisted on stepping on the land mine to see if it is active...

Copyright and terms of use

www.icrc.org

Red cross and red crescent emblems

The red cross and red crescent emblems are protected symbols under international humanitarian law and national laws. Any use that is not expressly authorized by the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols constitutes a misuse of the emblem. Use of these emblems by unauthorized persons is strictly forbidden. Please contact the ICRC for more information.

 

[Jmanis]

I do so love it when people don't do their due diligence when "refuting" the other party; the Japanese law is One example of the common law that you will find.

Since you insisted on stepping on the land mine to see if it is active...

Copyright and terms of use

www.icrc.org

Not the one stepping on landmines here since I 100% did my due dilligence, and checked that exact reference.

The red cross and red crescent emblems are protected symbols under international humanitarian law and national laws. Any use that is not expressly authorized by the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols constitutes a misuse of the emblem. Use of these emblems by unauthorized persons is strictly forbidden. Please contact the ICRC for more information.

This is not copyright. This is not trademarks. This is strictly forbidden under international humanitarian law.

That it is also banned under national laws which is called out is up to those nations. How those nations do it is up to them, but the prohibition of use of those symbols under international law specifically has nothing to do with copyright or trademarks.

The fact that page is called "Copyright and Terms of Use" and not just "Copyright" is for this very reason. The first two sections talk about commercial, personal, academic use of (various things) on their page... 100% that's copyright stuff.

But there's a whole separate section for the Red Cross and protected symbols because those are not copyright issues.

Any use that is not expressly authorized by the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols constitutes a misuse of the emblem. Use of these emblems by unauthorized persons is strictly forbidden.

But, thanks for demonstrating the continued dilution of this understanding.

EDIT: And just to elaborate... https://www.redcross.org.au/about/the-red-cross-emblem/guide-to-emblem-use/

The Red Cross emblem is not a logo nor a trademark. Rather, as the universal emblem of protection in armed conflict, its use is restricted under international humanitarian law

...not "copyright" or "trademark" law.

 

[Florizel]

Yes please. I would pay for these my hard earned ARX.