/fur/ - Furry★

>We have zero tolerance when it comes to the glorification of sexual violence which includes bestiality, rape, and child exploitation (i.e., sexualized depiction of minors).

ITS THE PATREONPOCALYPSE AND I CAN ONLY BATHE IN THE FIRE WHILE THE REFUSE SMOULDERS AROUND ME

This has always been the case, and the guidelines are selectively enforced. Do you really think Patreon is going to cut into their own cash flow without outside pressure?

Hell no.

Are you stupid?

That only apiles to irl porn, not drawings of porn

They still allow lolies

>>50969

Sorry m80, Patreon is converged and they're not about to go nixxing their profits unless they've got legal trouble or SJW pressure.

>That means end to paywalls

Not yet it doesn't. It means that they'll keep doing it til they get busted. This rule is meaningless unless it's enforced.

>>50971

It's worded to say "pornographic material". Not "photographs of pornographic material"

>>50981

They've previously stated that it does only apply to IRL pornography in previous attempts to get things like this banned. In addition, "empowering" pornography (aka nasty BBW shit) is considered "nude art".

>>50983

>They've previously stated that it does only apply to IRL pornography in previous attempts to get things like this banned

>In addition, "empowering" pornography (aka nasty BBW shit) is considered "nude art".

BBW stuff usually almost universally doesn't feature penetration. It sounds like the rule doesn't apply to just nude photographs but does apply to explicit works.

They never enforced the "no making money off the copyrighted characters owned by major major companies" rule and will probably not do shit with this. Why even have such rules if they don't enforce them?

The youtube shithead sre worse, "donate to my Patreon so I can buy fucking action figures and video games, after which I will 'review' them as if my forced filmed opinion on these products mattered to you, and you can watch the videos 3 days before everyone else!"

>>51057

>Why even have such rules if they don't enforce them?

PR/legal reasons. If someone tries to sue them they can claim it was against their TOS and that it wasn't their problem.

Patreon has also banned lolicon and rape art

INB4

>waaah baaaw muh freedom of speech, it's just a fantasy fetish

From idiots who think Patreon is in the wrong, not them. Go see a shrink, you miserable fuck.

>Failing to realize that this is explicitly directed at call-girls and camwhores/people from ManyVids and such [yes in ToS' you have to explicitly label things legally in order to exclude or include specificity]

>Failing to realize mass reporting only casts the eye upon you

>Being this mad that you're unwilling to pay for a veblen good [art] where theres a demand for said good

man you guys really are a bunch of faggots in a corral huh?

>>51060

a case can be made in court that as it was completely unenforced and ignored that it doesn't matter.

there are no magic words you can write down that turn an illegal act into a legal one.

>>51367

>there are no magic words you can write down that turn an illegal act into a legal one.

It's not so much that it's more so that it makes it much harder to prosecute and the potential settlement reached much lower than if they just went "Sure do what you want"

>>51367

It has nothing to do with turning an illegal act legal; it's just plausible deniability on their part. A file-hosting site has no ability to prevent illegal material from being uploaded, and the courts know this. So the way they can prevent getting in trouble is by pointing out that they discourage it (through the TOS), and take steps to remove it.

Daily reminder to use hatreon instead.

>>51317

Nice arguments and reddit spacing, good job anon.

>>50967

This guy is right. Back during GG, when SJWs were crying endlessly for tech corps to regulate muh speech for me, they applied this anti-porn rule, and for a second it looked as if SJWs fucked up hard. But many of Patreon's big earners, not to mention their staff, are SJWs too, so they enforce this rule very selectively.

Now instead of paywalling porn, they'll just paywall links to porn hosted off-site or some shit.

>>51485

>they'll just paywall links to porn hosted off-site or some shit.

This is unlikely

One thing to be aware of furries is that furry artists are EXTREMELY lazy. The main reason they paywalled using Patreon is it's extremely easy to control who views what content based on paying.

To do something like that it involves tracking donators and setting up a website which costs money on its own. It's the main reason paywalling wasn't much of a thing in the furry community til Patreon. It was only really seen on irl porn sites.

>>51367

If it could, every company that makes you sign an EULA would be out of business.

>>51497

Well, the ones who cared enough had paysites before Patreon became a thing. I doubt we'll go back to that though, people would sooner set up a Patreon clone now that it has entered the public consciousness and they've realized that it fucking prints money.

OPs post combined with Youtube's new strict monetizing system makes me extremely happy.

Holy shit do people actually..... have to WORK now like everyone else? DUN DUN DUNN!

>>51507

Legally speaking, the signer of a contract has the right to modify it, with it becoming binding upon the agreement of the original drafter of the contract. I recall a case where some guy rewrote the wording of like his phone contract in pdf, so it said he got unlimited everything for life, and sent it back to the company, and they didn't re-read it and accepted it automatically. It went to court and he won.

>>51512

Well let me pop your cum bubble,

patreon only enforces this on IRL porn, all of furry artist are safe

>>52496

It's really unfortunate for the sex workers.

The ones responsible for this are probably the government or credit card companies. US is really backwards...

>>51512

>Holy shit do people actually..... have to WORK now like everyone else?

I'm curious, do you think anything related to porn is not work? Or is there something else? Explain yourself.

>>51317

>Patreon banned rape art

Why

>>51420

Do you think that Richard Spencer would leave the site if his hatreon was close to furry porn? The site probably earns income because of an anti-pornagraphy stance though.

>patreon banned selling porn

so why are artists still selling porn and paywalling it?

when does this change in policy take effect?

>>58900

welp, nevermind >>52496