Damn! More adult news today! CCBILL stops processing "overly violent" sites. WOW
 

damn, how do they define "overly violent scenes"? i've got my opinion of what it is. i won't mention for obvious reasons, but fuck, sounds like this has to do something with the press release about the regs getting signed. both articles are within an hour and a half of each other. isn't one persons opinion on what is "overly violent" differ from the next's opinion?

developing story though.

http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary...tent_ID=227053

TEMPE, Ariz. - Payment processor CCBill will update its acceptable use policy (AUP), excluding sites that feature watersports and violent content.

A company representative said that sites within said niches that have already been approved will be able to process ?for the time being.?

Official word is that ?CCBill is no longer accepting new sites which contain or market person-to-person exchanges of bodily fluids. This mainly pertains to urine/urination, blood, or overall violent scenes or depictions.?

Several employees of the company refused to comment on the matter; however, the new AUP is said to be available this week.

While CCBill is being tight-lipped about their reasoning behind the move, it comes on the heels of the May 5 announcement by the U.S. Department of Justice of the formation of its Obscenity Prosecution Task Force. Also of questionable consequence is a March 23 subpoena obtained by AVNOnline.com filed by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Missouri, which reveals that the government is looking for similar content, which includes fisting, urination and torture.

?In the current political environment, they probably see a high risk in this type of content and they probably see that as a risk they?re not willing to bear,? says Chicago-based First Amendment attorney Joe Obenberger of J.D. Obenberger and Associates.

Meanwhile, the landscape for the other large payment processors hasn?t changed.

?Paycom has carefully considered its polices. Paycom, at its option, may choose not to accept payment processing for content that could cause an adverse effect on their portfolio. The formation of the task force has not led us to change our policies,? Paycom communications director Rand Pate tells AVNOnline.com.

Netbilling president Mitch Farber concurrs.

?Our only written policy is against sites that are against Visa regulations. We often make moral judgments on sites internally,? he tells AVNOnline.com. ?If we don?t like what someone is doing on a site, we?ll turn it down. It doesn?t happen very often, but if someone is doing a rape site?it?s stuff we morally feel we don?t want to do business with.?

I can tell you that those "gag on my dick", "choke on my cock", "Gagged stupid sluts" etc sites will probally fall under "violent"

dayum...this is kind of expected though.

person-to-person exchanges of bodily fluids

That is the definition of a cumshot.

that was my thought too. that type of material is doing very well in the market these days. thats big bucks to processors. theres alot of it too, i bet most of them are processing through epoch or ccbill too. crazy shit man.

shit is hitting the fan already. it definitely has to do with what happened today.

guess they plan on staying in business for a while :)

Basic definition of sex if you ask me.

You win. :)

yep, what good porn is full condom contact and has no money shot on the face?

LOL

answer: no GOOD porn.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I can think of quite a few here at GFY that could fall under that category.

those are the first sites that the US Government will prosecute. CCBill know what they are doing.
Not that I approve of discrimination within porn. There should be no difference, and all porn should be legal (except CP, and animal stuff), but that is not what Bush thinks.
Who the fuck voted for this guy??????

violent sex is an easy target and for those that defend, when they win it will come at a great expense and be more like losing :2 cents:

It comes down to where the banks behind the mercs and IPSP's are located.
US banks are batting down hatches whereas some EU banks don't have the same laws/moral issues to contend with.

Another consideration for the merchants themselves are what jurisdiction they incorporate in.

For longevity in any high-risk environment being mindful of such things is always prudent.

Do they?

What happens if every time IPSPs hear that the DOJ may target their clients with the new/current 'most extreme' content and the IPSPs force their clients to shut the sites down before it is ever challenged?

IIRC, Extreme Associates won their case, no?

however they want

So I guess I'll have to scrap my plans for "herfirstpissfacial.com" and "pissbukkake.com"

damn