I kind of thought as you did... fanfic can provide context and commentary and show the fucked-up-edness of underage characters in sexual situations. Even fanart that illustrates and links to a specific story can maybe make the same claim to not endorsing the depicted activity. But a stand-alone pic of bondage with underage characters? Sorry, I'm not seeing how there is any merit or moral message there other than "this looks hot". That only two people can be confirmed as banned reinforces for me the idea that in practice, this is not something that will tear apart fandom (unless fandom decides to pick up and go somewhere else as a preventive measure).
Their business practices are terrible, of course. Since Brad's sale of the company, I think it's fairly clear that the businessmen running things are not natives of the Internet and have no clue how to interact with us.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2007-08-08 03:16 pm (UTC)Their business practices are terrible, of course. Since Brad's sale of the company, I think it's fairly clear that the businessmen running things are not natives of the Internet and have no clue how to interact with us.
In case you and Amanda haven't seen it, here is someone who's written about California consumer law as it relates to 6A, and how ANY paid user, no matter where they're from, can go online and file a complaint with California's Attorney General.