PayPal's public response to censoring erotica, and my comment to them.
UPDATE: On 13th March, PayPal revised their terms and conditions (and the comments that were not showing up, as stated below, are now on their blog). You can see the revisions here: https://www.thepaypalblog.com/2012/03/update-paypal’s-acceptable-use-policy/
PayPal has just made their first public statement here, on the banning of certain erotica titles: https://www.thepaypalblog.com/2012/03/paypals-acceptable-use-policy-on-sale-of-certain-erotica/
I have tried to leave a comment, but at this time the comments section appears to be passworded and for staff use only, so I cannot comment. For the moment, I am posting my public response below:
EDITED to include this link (4:48pm) - this is a response from the National Coalition Against Censorship - http://ncacblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/response-to-paypal-blog-post/
---------------
PayPal has just made their first public statement here, on the banning of certain erotica titles: https://www.thepaypalblog.com/2012/03/paypals-acceptable-use-policy-on-sale-of-certain-erotica/
I have tried to leave a comment, but at this time the comments section appears to be passworded and for staff use only, so I cannot comment. For the moment, I am posting my public response below:
Thank you very much for publicly clarifying your position on this issue. I would like further clarification, if possible, on a couple of points you have made:
Third paragraph down, you wrote: An important factor in our decision not to allow our payments service to be used to purchase material focused on rape, incest or bestiality is that this category of eBooks often includes images.
My questions is, where are these images? As a reader of erotica and someone who has written erotica in the past, I have never come across images in erotica fiction. All of the authors I know who have had their works pulled because of your policy, do not have any images in their books at all. I may be wrong, as I haven't scoured every single book published by Bookstrand, All Romance eBooks, eXcessica and Smashwords (the four companies that I'm aware of, that you've contacted to remove said books), but I don't believe any of these publishers publish books with the images you are suggesting.
Fourth paragraph down, you wrote: This type of content also sometimes intentionally blurs the line between fiction and non-fiction. Both these factors are problematic from a legal and risk perspective.
This is so subjective I'm not entirely sure how to respond. Every work of fiction has a disclaimer in the book stating that it is a work of fiction. Every work of fiction published by the companies I've named above, is categorised under FICTION, so as not to confuse readers. How is the line blurred? Unless the author stands up and says, 'Yes, I have intentionally written this so that readers will understand it's non-fiction' (i.e. a memoir of a rape ordeal, in which case it will most probably not be categorised as erotica), I can't see your argument. It is the reader that decides how to receive a work of fiction, and however a reader decides to receive it, doesn't change the fact that it is fiction. (I am also led to believe that on Ebay there are many items selling, tagged as rape, incest and bestiality - http://publishingfrontiers.blogspot.com/2012/03/paypals-censorship-debacle.html - AND categorised and non-fiction. Is this being addressed by PayPal?)
In short, your two points that I've highlighted above - your main reasons for this policy - do not hold true for me. I would be grateful for further clarification.
Thank you.
Dianna Hardy
EDITED to include this link (4:48pm) - this is a response from the National Coalition Against Censorship - http://ncacblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/response-to-paypal-blog-post/
I said almost the same things, verbatim, to my husband tonight. That blog post of theirs was just... what? Are we on the same planet? It's too ridiculous for words. At best, they're grasping at straws. Maybe somebody was on painkillers when they wrote it. It sounds THAT stupid. And to not allow comments? Surely somebody over there knows this sounds bad. Epic fail. It's the equivalent of being asked, "So, how was work today?" and you respond with, "Shiver me timbers!" and prance around like a pirate. It's absurd.
ReplyDeleteGreat response,Dianna.
ROFL!
ReplyDelete"It's the equivalent of being asked, "So, how was work today?" and you respond with, "Shiver me timbers!" and prance around like a pirate."
YES! Thank you for my first laugh of the day :)
Good points, and we need to challenge them, though they don't want to listen! I posted this on Paypal's blog https://www.thepaypalblog.com/2012/03/paypals-acceptable-use-policy-on-sale-of-certain-erotica/ but although they pretend to be interested in what their customers think ("Connect with us", "Other ways to connect", "Leave a comment") they have been blocking all comments as you say, which undermines their whole "This is not censorship" argument.
ReplyDelete--
"What bothers me is that if it is illegal to write about something, then it doesn't need to be enforced by Paypal. That is what the authorities and legal system are there for. And if it is not illegal then, despite the spin Paypal is trying to place on this, it IS an attempt to enforce a form of moral censorship.
It further bothers me that there are no clear criteria on this. If someone were to write a story like Oedipus Rex now, then according to this Paypal would stop working with the e-book publisher due to the story being "focused on incest". Paypal seem to be saying that if a book focusses on any of these subjects then it must automatically be some form of glorification of it; in reality it may well be the opposite. Will Paypal be refusing to work with the publishers of some of Maya Angelou's early works? Again, the lack of objective criteria is sloppy and worrying, because it is so obviously something that can be arbitrarily applied by Paypal.
I also sense severe hypocrisy here. Why is it that Paypal is annoyed at books which include something heinous like rape, perhaps attempting to show the devastating effect it can have on lives, yet Paypal is happy to work with a publisher whose books are full of murder? Why is incest in a book worse that scenes of torture, which Paypal seems to have no qualms with?
I am sorry, but the post here is not a reassurance, it is a reaffirmation of the fears of many in the literary community that Paypal is using its power to threaten publishers, writers and freedom of speech. The law looks after what is illegal, and Paypal acting like this only gives the impression of an impatient wannabe dictator enforcing their own perspectives in an arbitrary and prejudiced way."
Excellent comment/post Karl. And I'm sorry you couldn't get it through to them. Thanks for sharing it here; you make some fantastic points, not least that there are many mainstream / other genre works that focus on said topics... But no, they are only interested in banning erotica books (imagine the larger outcry if they decided to ban said topics in other genres?). One of my romance books have two shapeshifters getting it on in human form, although teeth do start to elongate and eyes go a little weird ... oh, and then there's the blood drinking... is this bestiality under their new policy of 'shapeshifters must only do it in their human form'? (And yes, readers, this is actually a term now that Smashwords is enforcing - https://www.smashwords.com/press/release/27)
DeleteAnd there is nothing to say that any reader cannot find a mainstream book that focuses on incest or rape 'titillating'.
In any case, none of these things are illegal in terms of fiction. All together now: fiction is not illegal. Fiction is not illegal. Fiction is not illegal. BECAUSE IT IS FICTION.
Just because I loved Superman, doesn't mean I'm going to jump off a building thinking I can fly; just because I might read about incest where the siblings are in love, doesn't mean I'm suddenly going to develop feelings for my siblings after years of not having such feelings.
Thanks again for sharing your comment on here, Karl (sorry I got a little ranty!). x
No need to apologise for getting ranty in a good cause, I've just done the same thing on my blog: http://karldrinkwater.blogspot.com/2012/03/paypals-censorship.html
DeleteI realise things have moved on a bit now but I think it is still fair to challenge them. :-)
PS Also scorpio, love nature and animals, not a hermit though.
This has just come in from the National Coalition Against Censorship - http://ncacblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/response-to-paypal-blog-post/ I'll also link it directly into the post above, at the bottom.
ReplyDeleteWonderful response, Dianna! Thank you for your eloquent voice.
ReplyDeleteThank you for referencing my research, Dianna, and for this great thread!
ReplyDeleteJust a moment ago, I posted a comment to PayPal's blog (https://www.thepaypalblog.com/2012/03/paypals-acceptable-use-policy-on-sale-of-certain-erotica/comment-page-1/#comment-14984 ) and it was accepted.
Did you know that Amazon carries over 17,000 titles that might violate PayPal's content rule? Similarly, eBay (PayPal's parent) lists over 1,600 questionable titles. What's PayPal doing to police its parent? Although it seems to be enjoying rattling its sabre, I'm guessing PayPal will turn a blind eye to Amazon, as they need Amazon more than Amazon needs PayPal. Write me at l.c_cooper@hotmail.com if you want a copy of my research data.
What if PayPal had the appetite to take on Disney? See my analysis at: http://publishingfrontiers.blogspot.com.au/2012/03/is-paypal-willing-to-take-on-disney.html
Thanks again.
Take care,
LC Cooper