• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

SONY banned someone based on his real name

I wonder if the problem they have is "i (do) Jihad" as opposed to if his name was simply just "Jihad" or "IAmJihad"

Anyways, the best hope for this guy is if threads like this get attention from someone high up enough to just refund him the cost of all his games and a little extra for the inconvenience.
 

Harl3

Member
I "can" understand why someone could find his name "offensive", but not allowing him to change it that's baffling.
 
I "can" understand why someone could find his name "offensive", but not allowing him to change it that's baffling.

This. Either let the guy change the id or dont let him pick that id in the first place...

You cant just ban him years later after he spent thousands on the account.
 

Mendax

Member
I'm considering starting a terrorist organisation called MENDAX just to get you banned. Then maybe you get how fucking ridiculous this is.

lol, the only ridiculous thing is this faux outrage. Sony is right for banning it and everyone knows it (they should compensate him for account spendings though)
 

Trup1aya

Member
I don't get this, if his name was " Kill All NON MUSLIMS " in Arabic or " KILL ALL ARABS " in whatever language, that is ok as well because that's his name ? his name has offended meaning. period.

While I don't agree with the permeant banning, the name Omar is actually used for many other religions outside islam so no they cant ban that. however. the name Jihad even in Arabic it implies to fight for the name of Allah ( as in go to war against not muslim ) that is the true meaning of the Jihad ( as far as I can tell ) which while might be acceptable for countries that does have the Islam religion as a main religion, its not for the rest of the world.

This alone will cause fear and disturbance around non muslim people when they go online and someone has a screen name of Jihad etc. who knows what these people might think.

if my parents named me Jihad and I want to move to a non muslim country. sure as hell I am going to change my name. for the sake of not offending other people from different culture and religion. and for the sake of not being treated with racism because of a stupid first name regardless what is that name.

IF you move to a country that is NOT your country, you should respect and follow their culture. not go against it in the name of freedom and human rights.

same goes for companies like Sony , Microsoft and Nintendo. I highly doubt they are muslim companies. if you want to be in their network, respect their policy and other people around the world. you don't live in your own little world.

oh and for the record I am a muslim ( well,, half ) but you get the idea

Sony should just force him to change his screen name and that's it.

So wrong, so ignorant... Even when Google is a thing
 

fernoca

Member
It should also be noted that if you search for PSN users with "jihad" on their name, there are over 9,000 results.

Which means that Sony has no problems with the name....until enough people report it as offensive. So this could be a result of a bunch of sore losers reporting the account rather than people offended by it.


If anything, they should lift the ban, add a note to the system to avoid any possible bans in the future for the same. Unless they decide to ban all 9k+ accounts. Which even if 25% are actuve is still over 2k accounts with trophies and purchases banned.
 
When I read 'jihad' it just makes me think of Eddie Izzard's standup from the 90's.

Because the Anglican faith had a lack of principles for a long time. You can't get really headstrong about it. You can't say, you know, like the Islamic jihads that we hear about. We get scared about those Islamic jihads. I think we do assume that everyone who is into the Islamic religion is having a jihad every other bloody day. There's a lot of very relaxed Islamic people, and we got to understand - remember, this is very important - and we do assume that jihads are just like, you know,everyday three jihads are issued by every individual. It just seems they're everywhere.

"The fruit shop shortchanged me! A fucking jihad on them!"

Bump into someone, say, "Hey! A fucking jihad on you!"

"How many jihads have you got going now, Dad?"

"Well, 24. God, it's difficult to keep up with them!"

I just don't think that's happening.
 

mnannola

Member
How can they just revoke access to digital games you have purchased? Can you imagine this in other industries?

Etrade 2006: "Thank you for signing up for an Etrade account SLUTMUFFIN, your $10,000 is ready to use for stock purchases!"

Etrade 2016: "I'm sorry, SLUTMUFFIN is not a valid username and is against our TOS. Please create a new ETRADE account. We will be closing your old account and using your money to party for the rest of the week."
 
This is exactly why I don't buy digital unless it's dirt cheap or it's not too expensive and the only way to get it. Or it's from GoG.

With digital stores (other than GoG) where your games are tied to an account, you are at the whim of the company if you keep the games you buy (sony seems worse than the others though about this as you hear most stories like this from them). I think it's ridiculous they can wipe his access to all the games he bought simply over his name (I can see banning him from using online services with that account and really since it's his real name, I think they should allow him to either rename it or if that is not possible, move all his stuff to a new account with a new name). But buying digital that has DRM tied to an account means you are at the whim of how nice the company wants to be to you or how competant they are. Or just random accidents where something happens and your account goes away (happened to me at steam. I only lost a game I got free as I hardly ever used the account and that's partly why I couldn't get it back cause i had no CC tied to it so when they couldn't find my account by my username or email they had nothing else to go by).

Personally I think if Sony can't bring his account back/rename it, they either owe him a refund of everything he bought or at least put all the access to those games on his new account (doesn't help for all the save games he lost though). Of course, he's totally at their whim to do that (or a lawyer and how well he can argue it in court). But really if Sony wants to make it right they will do something like that (and I think it's BS the people jumping to blame him or think that Sony shouldn't do anything because of his name).

If this was a physical game they could block his access to online but he wouldn't lose all the games he bought physically. Or if it was something like GoG.

I agree with everything in your post. Physical over digital always for me. Ownership of games is a sadly overlooked aspect when people weigh up the pros and cons of physical v digital.

Also people STOP accusing the user for being foolish / insensitive for choosing to use his real name - the word Jihad in Arabic means 'struggle', as in to better oneself. It's not his fault that the western media and the majority of citizens has decided the only meaning of the word carries negative connotations.
 
My apologies. I should have said we aren't talking about your friends... I guess I shouldn't jump to conclusions about who is playing Madden.

But wait how is the word crusade NOT comparable to the word jihad? Are they not both words adopted by religious extremists to use religion to justify armed conflict.

Crusade should really be MORE offensive, because it always meant religious military action. The word Jihad was around before Islam was a thing.

The meaning and reaction to words change over time, and Jihad has a strong popular connotation in both the East and West of religious zealotry and typically religious war. That doesn't mean it can't be used in another context and that when using it in the correct context it is not evocative of that same strong reaction, but since at least the 1980s, Jihad has come to denote something more extreme.

Other words have changed over time as well, the word "holocaust" has existed for centuries, but since the late 1940s, the word has come to refer to "the Holocaust." It can still be used in a different context ("a holocaust" or the provocative movie "Cannibal Holocaust") but used out of context, it still generally refers to Nazi atrocities against Jews, Poles, and other 'unworthies' during World War II. Words might have been used for centuries in a legitimate way, but they can come to mean something else quickly... THere has been the debate over the word "niggardly" when it's used, and plenty of people will bemoan "but it's a legitimate word that has nothing to do with the racial slur!" but that's a tough sell, and in the wrong context (or even the right context...) it's usually used to be provocative because of that strong immediate negative reaction.

Now, 'Crusades' generally refers to The Crusaders, a series of historical events that were terrible that happened 1,000 years ago. While the events were terrible, there has been a lengthy passage of time that has softened the visceral reaction that many people will have to them. Still, I wouldn't be against Sony banning the name if enough people are offended by it... I'd understand their perspective, but the recency of 'Jihad' -- which has a much more immediate reaction for people all over the world, not just the West (perhaps ESPECIALLY not the West) -- makes it more justifiable that the word bubble up as a banned word for Sony. Heck, I'd be curious to ask people who strongly identify with the restorative, closer-to-God connotation of the word Jihad whether they think it's an appropriate word to use in a videogame... I think I'd suspect that somebody who strongly identifies with the peaceful religious meaning of the word might find it inappropriate in that context.

Companies in this space have a precedent with not allowing names that have a social or religious connotation as well. Videogames are still a community where words and phrases are generally used in crass, provocative way and it's much easier to ban a word than to try to justify that the context it's being used in is right or okay.

(but, still, I don't think the user should lose his content... I think that's insane. I just get that the name could be inappropriate for a videogame network)
 

AAK

Member
If Sony wants to be bigoted and make problems with the name that's on them. They own the company & have the freedom to make their backwards policies and all I can do is ridicule it. But they better reimburse the money of the victim. This is straight up theft taking place.
 

MooMilk2929

Junior Member
I use part of my real name as part of my PSN username. If the guy gets an offer again to change his username he should take it, as long as they don't make him change his real name on the credit card info or anything like that. He now knows that you can't use Jihad as a username so he's all the smarter for it.
 

Horp

Member
lol, the only ridiculous thing is this faux outrage. Sony is right for banning it and everyone knows it (they should compensate him for account spendings though)

What? Have you ready any replies in this thread?
How can this racism even be allowed on here? "everyone knows it", yeah cause deep down everyone kind of hates the guy for having that name. Maybe even deep deep down... everyone kind of hates people from his culture? Get away with that attitude. It's obvious who's in the right here and, spoiler alert, it's not the big global corporation that are trying to rob a person based on where he's from.
 
I can't imagine having a ban remove access to all my online purchases. But I say this every time I read a bad ban story. I have no idea why people still make digital purchases with Sony.
 
They should just offer the guy the username change and leave it at that. Seriously, it's not that big of a deal. I'm sure the minor inconvenience in changing the name is preferable to all the bad press they'll be getting over the situation.
 
I use part of my real name as part of my PSN username. If the guy gets an offer again to change his username he should take it, as long as they don't make him change his real name on the credit card info or anything like that. He now knows that you can't use Jihad as a username so he's all the smarter for it.

There are thousands with that name on PSN, how many are active obviously we don't know. The concern is this could start a trend and who knows how many could lose thousands in game purchases.
 

Crayon

Member
If they don't want to let him use his name, I suppose I just barely understand that. But giving him no recourse to keep his stuff is indefensible.
 

Farewell

Member
How hard is it for sony to implement a name change service for money? Is it really that hard or do they still live in the stone age? Serious questions.
 

Trup1aya

Member
The meaning and reaction to words change over time, and Jihad has a strong popular connotation in both the East and West of religious zealotry and typically religious war. That doesn't mean it can't be used in another context and that when using it in the correct context it is not evocative of that same strong reaction, but since at least the 1980s, Jihad has come to denote something more extreme.

Other words have changed over time as well, the word "holocaust" has existed for centuries, but since the late 1940s, the word has come to refer to "the Holocaust." It can still be used in a different context ("a holocaust" or the provocative movie "Cannibal Holocaust") but used out of context, it still generally refers to Nazi atrocities against Jews, Poles, and other 'unworthies' during World War II. Words might have been used for centuries in a legitimate way, but they can come to mean something else quickly... THere has been the debate over the word "niggardly" when it's used, and plenty of people will bemoan "but it's a legitimate word that has nothing to do with the racial slur!" but that's a tough sell, and in the wrong context (or even the right context...) it's usually used to be provocative because of that strong immediate negative reaction.

Now, 'Crusades' generally refers to The Crusaders, a series of historical events that were terrible that happened 1,000 years ago. While the events were terrible, there has been a lengthy passage of time that has softened the visceral reaction that many people will have to them. Still, I wouldn't be against Sony banning the name if enough people are offended by it... I'd understand their perspective, but the recency of 'Jihad' -- which has a much more immediate reaction for people all over the world, not just the West (perhaps ESPECIALLY not the West) -- makes it more justifiable that the word bubble up as a banned word for Sony. Heck, I'd be curious to ask people who strongly identify with the restorative, closer-to-God connotation of the word Jihad whether they think it's an appropriate word to use in a videogame... I think I'd suspect that somebody who strongly identifies with the peaceful religious meaning of the word might find it inappropriate in that context.

Companies in this space have a precedent with not allowing names that have a social or religious connotation as well. Videogames are still a community where words and phrases are generally used in crass, provocative way and it's much easier to ban a word than to try to justify that the context it's being used in is right or okay.

(but, still, I don't think the user should lose his content... I think that's insane. I just get that the name could be inappropriate for a videogame network)

Like I said, previously for many people in the Middle East, the idea of Crusades and crusaders is still a very real and offensive threat today.

Gotta stop looking at things from this western point of view.
 

Fatal Error

Neo Member
Jihad comes from jahd or juhud which means effort/exert/overstrain, and thus jihad mean fight back whither it's your desires for lust, violence, ignorance, etc..., in fighting it means fight back those who took your land and those who are fighting you, so, if a group says no that's not what it means and start killing all people in the name of jihad, is it then my fault for having this name?

also, is Crusade bannable?
 

GAMEPROFF

Banned
Jihad comes from jahd or juhud which means effort/exert/overstrain, and thus jihad mean fight back whither it's your desires for lust, violence, ignorance, etc..., in fighting it means fight back those who took your land and those who are fighting you, so, if a group says no that's not what it means and start killing all people in the name of jihad, is it then my fault for having this name?

also, is Crusade bannable?
No, but Holocaust would be for example
 

Mendax

Member
What? Have you ready any replies in this thread?
How can this racism even be allowed on here? "everyone knows it", yeah cause deep down everyone kind of hates the guy for having that name. Maybe even deep deep down... everyone kind of hates people from his culture? Get away with that attitude. It's obvious who's in the right here and, spoiler alert, it's not the big global corporation that are trying to rob a person based on where he's from.

it's a word that should not be used in an online context after all that has happened in relation to it in the recent years. this has nothing to do with race or racism. or culture.
would it also be racist if someone was called adolf h. johnson and was denied from using that as a display name? - no it would not. because it is a common sense issue like this one

No, but Holocaust would be for example

as it should be
 

Shaanyboi

Banned
it's a word that should not be used in an online context after all that has happened in relation to it in the recent years. this has nothing to do with race or racism. or culture.
would it also be racist if someone was called adolf h. johnson and was denied from using that as a display name? - no it would not. because it is a common sense issue like this one

Actually it has everything to do with that.
 

dukeoflegs

Member
Since I saw this over the weekend I was hoping that maybe the right person wasn't in the office during the weekend to address this issue and would help remedy the situation today (Monday).
I have no idea how much money I've spent on PSN, XBOX, or Steam over the last 10 years but if I couldn't have access to what I purchased I would be extremely pissed off. I don't think I would be only talking to them via email. I'd be on the phone trying to talk to someone voice to voice (has he done that?). I'm hoping the best for the dude.
 

Horp

Member
it's a word that should not be used in an online context after all that has happened in relation to it in the recent years. this has nothing to do with race or racism. or culture.
would it also be racist if someone was called adolf h. johnson and was denied from using that as a display name? - no it would not. because it is a common sense issue like this one



as it should be
Common sense is nothing to go by when you act on a global scale. Common sense varies greatly between cultures. And Sony is a global company.

If someone was named Adolf Hitler and had the nick A.hitler I would assume sony would ask him to change his name. If that wouldnt be possible I would transfer all his goods to a new account. If thats not possible I would refund him.
 

Jumeira

Banned
Jihad comes from jahd or juhud which means effort/exert/overstrain, and thus jihad mean fight back whither it's your desires for lust, violence, ignorance, etc..., in fighting it means fight back those who took your land and those who are fighting you, so, if a group says no that's not what it means and start killing all people in the name of jihad, is it then my fault for having this name?

also, is Crusade bannable?

Warmachine, Warcraft, Nigel Farage, should all be banned.
 
This is why there are exceptions to rules. They should allow/request him to change his name rather than taking away his access and purchases. I wish him luck dealing with customer service reps and getting this resolved.
 

jesu

Member
A jihad isn't even necessarily a bad thing.
In Iraq, Ali al-Sistani called for a jihad to fight against ISIS in that region.
 

JP

Member
These rings were sold for charity to help raise funds for war veterans in Finland. It was even talked about in German media, I don't know in which tone though.

Ilmapuolustussormus-2.jpg
I'm not directly responding to you with some of this stuff but your quote gifts me this space.

What you're saying is similar for an inverted cross also, St. Peter chose to be crucified on an inverted cross and although we'll never know the facts, it's often suggested that he did it to show humilty in relation to being unworthy to die the same way as Jesus.

Because the standard Latin cross represents many things to many people, people can also use it to represent the opposite of those meanings by flipping it over, if that's what they want.

Symbols are abstract and only have meanings because we choose give them the meanings that we want them to have. I could decide that the Latin cross symbolises...broken tomatoes. That would be the meaning I give to it and it would be no more or less valuable than any other meaning, apart from the fact that I'd probably be the only person who interpreted it in that way. ;)

Words are the same as symbols, they're completely abstract and only carry the meanings that we give them. Admittedly, many words in a language will have an accepted meaning but that doesn't mean it's a universal meaning. It changes due to where you are, when you are and who you are.

I was going to start talking about ownership of meaning but this really isn't the place. It's probably better to recommend Barthes' "Image, Music, Text" to people who have any real interest in this stuff.

EDIT:
I don't know the person involved and he may or may not be a good or bad person but I do wonder if maybe he wasn't just banned for his name as other people are permitted to use it, maybe there's something else happening there that we don't know about.
 

KmA

Member
Whew the blatant racism in this thread.

People would probably be defending Sony if his name was Osama or Saddam too.
 

Blitzhex

Member
The whole situation is pathetic and Sony is completely in the wrong.
I've had something similar happen to me in Starcraft 2. Blizzard forced me to change my nickname 'Blitzkrieg' because it was offensive. I loved doing early rushes.
I had no idea people playing Blizzard games were still sore about WWII.
 

hemo memo

Gold Member
If Sony wants to be bigoted and make problems with the name that's on them. They own the company & have the freedom to make their backwards policies and all I can do is ridicule it. But they better reimburse the money of the victim. This is straight up theft taking place.

Sadly he can't do anything about it. Also the 9000+ named Jihad could also get banned for the same reason if they got reported. I'm baffled why Sony ME/SA didn't interfere on the issue.
 

Shaanyboi

Banned
The whole situation is pathetic and Sony is completely in the wrong.
I've had something similar happen to me in Starcraft 2. Blizzard forced me to change my nickname 'Blitzkrieg' because it was offensive. I loved doing early rushes.
I had no idea people playing Blizzard games were still sore about WWII.

They clearly ain't Ramones fans, that's for sure.
 
If they forced him to change his name, then fine, that's acceptable. But they banned his account?! Now he can't get access to everything he downloaded right? Nah, that's bullshit right there. Absolute bullshit.

He should cause as big a fuss as he possibly can about this. Get Watchdog on the phone!
 
I see both sides here, but don't think the user should be banned... I think he should just have to change his display name. It's a difficult issue and this is his legitimate name and Jihad can be a legitimate religious name, but it also has a strong, visceral negative connotation for the overwhelming number of people who will see it on the network.

I don't think he should be banned, but I don't fault sony for having this word be a banned word for a username. I think even a majority of Muslim people who see a username "iJihad" in an online videogane would assume that it is somebody using the word provocatively.

I came here to say almost exactly what you did! Looks like you beat me to the punch. Something I feel needs to be added here is that the Playstation Network does not offer name changes for anyone right now, paid or unpaid. It isn't something they just choose not to do, their infrastructure doesn't support it. This has been a sore spot for many PSN account-holders and both Greg and Colin of IGN and now Kinda Funny fame call them out on it all the time.

I don't blame Sony for having banned words, but I do blame them for not finding a way to compensate this young man. I also blame them for not catching onto this for so long, it's not like he made his account a few days ago. It's completely unreasonable to take away software he purchased just because they decided to not allow that name anymore. Best-case scenario, Sony should allow him to make a new account and grant him back the licenses for everything he previously bought.
 

low-G

Member
It is scary that ANY COMPANY can even legally take away all your purchases for anything other than fraud, breaking services (hacking / cheating), and other such severe acts.
 
As for "crusader" or "template knight," there's about 1000 years of difference between the Crusades and the modern era and it's not relevant.

Really?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TRVcnX8Vsw

George W. Bush's immediate response to 9/11 was *literally* proposing a crusade against terror, tearing open old middle-eastern wounds and playing right into the Al Qaeda narrative of western crusaders coming to take their land and destroy Islam. All the pain and suffering unleashed by the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq can be laid at the feet of a self-proclaimed crusade, so I think there is every reason to expect Arabs and Muslims to react to the use of that word.

An equivalent analogy could be somebody named "iHitler" where their actual name very well could be Hitler (although, as we know, Hitler has become a very uncommon name as it was already a fairly uncommon spelling in Europe at the time, and many people with the name Hitler changed their names), but for the majority of people who see it world wide, they're going to immediately assume someone is making a crass statement... Not that it is their legitimate name. I'd imagine that Sony would probably ban the name "Hitler" from appearing, and probably other names like it.
I remember Trevor Martin, I think on one of his initial appearances on the Daily Show as contributor, talked about his friend Hitler. It seemed in that part of Africa this Hitler lived, Adolf was just another European leader who had made his mark upon history. Sure, he was responsible a bunch of gruesome atrocities, but then Africa's history is littered with European leaders responsible for gruesome atrocities, so in their eyes the name Hitler was a non-issue.
 

JAYinHD

Member
This is why I refuse to buy digital. They shouldn't be able to just take away content a customer purchased. This is sickening and they rightly deserve to be called out on this.
 

TheYanger

Member
I don't get how people are still hung up on whether the word is acceptable because it's his name: Just because you're named Fucker (and no, I doubt anyone is named this legally) doesn't mean you should be able to keep your PSN name of it.

Like, name or not, you can understand why jihad would be something psn wouldn't want on there.

The problem is:
-They let him use it for ten years first
-They offered a name change despite the problems with their system handling that
-They then decided fuck it lol banned regardless.

None of this would be an issue if they just spent the time and money fixing their shit to allow name changes. Instead it leaves them the option of breaking the poor guy's account (a shitty solution) OR just banning him. Given that, they are fucked either way and jihad isn't the end of the world as far as names go, they should just let him keep it. Yeah it's probably a bit tasteless but it's not OFFENSIVE, there's a difference (and I don't buy for a second that he didnt' know what he was doing in 2006, let's be clear), but it's your own fuck up Sony. You designed your system in a way that prevents you from properly handling situations like this and you didn't stop this at the gates when it mattered. you didn't stop it a year in. you didn't stop it 5 years in. you wait a DECADE to ban someone? Fuck that. Literally unacceptable unless he takes new actions that makes his account bannable, period.
 
Top Bottom