Quote:
|
Originally Posted by socalkev
It seems that everyone is missing a major issue here. What, exactly, is the content CCBill is objecting to - which link(s), or banner(s); does bondagedirectory.com have to remove so that CCBill would drop their objections? Is it, for example, just meninpain.com (example purposes only), or is it multiple sites? Is it CCBill's position that ANY sexual conduct while a person is in bondage is "rape?" What, exactly, is this "rape" content that we should be avoiding?
Does anyone else think its strange that CCBill is only objecting to links to bondagedirectory.com - a site owned by Cybernet Entertainment, a company that does huge processing volumes through a pair of CCBill competitors, Jettis and Paycom? Why is no other link list or directorybeing singled out for this treatment, when there are literally hundreds of fetish and BDSM directories that probably link to the same "offensive" content?
|
No one knows for sure just how many link sites CCBill is attacking this way. I mentioned the latest issue concerning BondageDirectory.com because its both the latest concern and one of the most prominent sites of its kind.
But your point about Cybernet Entertainment using CCBill's competitors is definitely food for thought. It wouldn't surprise me if this attack was aimed directly at them.