# Paypal moves against Smashwords, Mark Coker Responds (MERGED THREAD)



## Anjasa (Feb 4, 2012)

Just got the following from Smashwords:

Just got the following from Smashwords:

Dear Smashwords Authors, Publishers and Literary Agents,

This email is being sent to all authors, publishers and agents who have published erotica at Smashwords. We will also post this message to Site Updates and the Press Room.

Today we are modifying our Terms of Service to clarify our policies regarding erotic fiction that contains bestiality, rape and incest. If you write in any of these categories, please carefully read the instructions below and remove such content from Smashwords. If you don't write in these categories, you can disregard this message.

PayPal is requiring Smashwords to immediately begin removing the above-mentioned categories of books. Please review your title(s) and proactively remove and archive such works if you are affected.

I apologize for the short notice, and I'm especially sorry for any financial or emotional hardship this may cause the authors and publishers affected by this change.

As you may have heard, in the last couple weeks PayPal began aggressively enforcing a prohibition against online retailers selling certain types of "obscene" content. For good background on the issue, see this Selena Kitt post here - http://selenakitt.com/blog/index.php/2012/02/19/slippery-slope-erotica-censorship/ or here - http://theselfpublishingrevolution.blogspot.com/2012/02/slippery-slope-erotica-censorship.html#comment-form or this Kindleboards thread here - http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,104604.0.html

On Saturday, February 18, PayPal's enforcement division contacted Smashwords with an ultimatum. As with the other ebook retailers affected by this enforcement, PayPal gave us only a few days to achieve compliance otherwise they threatened to deactivate our PayPal services. I've had multiple conversations with PayPal over the last several days to better understand their requirements. Their team has been helpful, forthcoming and supportive of the Smashwords mission. I appreciate their willingness to engage in dialogue. Although they have tried their best to delineate their policies, gray areas remain.

Their hot buttons are bestiality, rape-for-titillation, incest and underage erotica.

The underage erotica is not a problem for us. We already have some of the industry's strictest policies prohibiting underage characters (we don't even allow non-participating minors to appear in erotica), and our vetting team is always on the lookout for "barely legal" content where supposed adults are placed in underage situations.

The other three areas of bestiality, rape and incest were less well-defined in our Terms of Service (https://www.smashwords.com/about/tos) before today. I'll tackle these one-by-one below, and I'll provide you a summary of the changes that will go into effect immediately.

*Incest:* Until now, we didn't have a policy prohibiting incest between consenting adults, or its non-biological variation commonly known as "Pseudo-incest." Neither did our retailer partners. We've noticed a surge of PI books over the last few months, and many of them have "Daddy" in the title. I wouldn't be surprised if the surge in "Daddy" titles prompted PayPal to pursue this purge (I don't know). PI usually explores sexual relations between consenting adult stepchildren with their step parents, or between step-siblings. Effectively immediately, we no longer allow incest of any variety in erotica.

Like many writers, censorship of any form greatly concerns me. It is with some reluctance that I have made the decision to prohibit incest-themed erotica at Smashwords. Regardless of your opinion on incest, it's a slippery slope when we allow others to control what we think and write. Fiction is fantasy. It's not real. It unfolds in our imagination. I've always believed fiction writers and readers should have the freedom to explore diverse topics and situations in the privacy of their own mind. From an imagination perspective, erotica is little different from a literary novel that puts us inside the mind of farm animals (1984), or a thriller novel that puts us inside the mind of a terrorist, or a horror novel that puts us inside the mind of an axe-murderer or their victim. All fiction takes us somewhere. We read fiction to be moved, and to feel. Sometimes we want to feel touched, moved, or disturbed. A reader should have the right to feel moved however they desire to be moved.

Incest, however, carries thorny baggage. The legality of incest is murky. It creates a potential legal liability for Smashwords as our business and our books become more present in more jurisdictions around the world. Anything that threatens Smashwords directly threatens our ability to serve the greater interests of all Smashwords authors, publishers, retailers and customers who rely upon us as the world's leading distributor of indie ebooks. The business considerations compel me to not fall on the sword for incest. I realize this is an imperfect decision. The slippery slope is dangerous, but I believe this imperfect decision is in the best interest of the community we serve.

*Bestiality:* Until now, we didn't have a stated policy regarding bestiality. I like animals. Call me old fashioned or hypocritical (I'm not a vegetarian), but I don't want to be a party to anyone enjoying animals for sexual gratification, for the same reason we've never allowed pedophilia books. I don't want to publish it, sell it, or distribute it. The TOS is now modified to reflect this. Note this does not apply to shape-shifters common in paranormal romance provided the were-creature characters are getting it on in their human form. Sorry I need to clarify it that way, but we don't want to see bestiality erotica masquerading as paranormal romance.

*Rape:* Although our Terms of Service prohibits books that advocate violence against others, we did not specifically identify rape. This was an oversight on our part. Now we have clarified the policy. We do not want books that contain rape for the purpose of titillation. At Smashwords, rape has no longer has a place in erotica. It has no place anywhere else if the purpose is to titillate. Non-consensual BDSM - or any other form of non-consensual violence against another person - is prohibited.

*NEXT STEPS:* If you have titles at Smashwords that are now expressly forbidden, by the end of day Monday (Feb 27), please click to your Dashboard at https://www.smashwords.com/dashboard and click UNPUBLISH then click ARCHIVE. This will also cause our automated systems to remove the titles from retail distribution.

DO NOT try to hide or obfuscate violating content by changing book titles, book descriptions and tags. If we discover such shenanigans, said authors/publishers will risk account deletion and forfeiture of any accrued earnings, per our Terms of Service.

We take violations of the TOS seriously, because such violations jeopardize the opportunities for your fellow authors.

We do not want to see PayPal clamp down further against erotica. We think our authors should be allowed to publish erotica. Erotica, despite the attacks it faces from moralists, is a category worthy of protection. Erotica allows readers to safely explore aspects of sexuality that they might never want to explore in the real world.

The moralists forget that we humans are all sexual creatures, and the biggest sex organ is the brain. If it were not the case, none of us would be here. Erotica authors are facing discrimination, plain and simple. Topics that are perfectly acceptable in mainstream fiction are verboten in erotica. That's not fair. Our decisions today are imperfect. Please, act responsibly, don't try to game the system or publish content that pushes the limits of legality. Help us continue to help indie authors around the world to continue to publish and distribute with freedom.

*THINGS TO AVOID:* Avoid using words such as 'bestiality,' 'rape,' 'incest,' 'underage,' or 'barely legal' in book titles, book descriptions or keyword tags, otherwise Smashwords may conclude you're violating the Terms of Service, or trying to push the limits. If you're writing non-erotic works, and any of these words are necessary, then you're okay.

On Tuesday (Feb 2 we will begin removing content that we deem in violation. When we remove a title, you will receive an email notifying you of such, and that email will append this letter along with instructions on how to notify us if we made an error. I promise you, we will make mistakes, so please work with us, take a deep breath and honor us with your patience.

If you believe we removed something in error, please click "Comments/questions," mention the title we removed, provide the hyperlink to said title, and provide your *calm* reasoning for why we should reconsider.

Our support team is backlogged, so it may take several days for them to respond. As we mention in the Terms of Service, we reserve the right to remove anything for any reason. That said, we will also try to make our decisions with care and prudence.

You might wonder if Smashwords should simply switch to a different payment provider. It's not so easy. PayPal is designed into the wiring of the Smashwords platform. They run the credit card processing for our retail store, and they're how we pay our authors and publishers. PayPal is also an extremely popular, trusted payment option for our customers. It is not feasible for us to simply switch to another provider, should such a suitable provider even exist, especially with so few days notice.

Please note our Terms of Service is subject to additional modifications as we work to bring Smashwords into compliance with PayPal requirements. Let's hope today's actions mark the limit of the slippery slope.

Significant gray area remain. Erotica is still permitted, though if authors try to push the limits of what's permitted, we risk further clamping down. Please be responsible. Don't go there. If you're going to push the limits, push the limits of great writing, not the limits of legality.

Thank you for assisting our compliance efforts on such short notice. We know these decisions will be upsetting to some of our authors and publishers, and for that we apologize. We do believe, however, that these decisions will place us on a stronger footing to represent the best interests all indie authors and publishers from here forward.

Best wishes,

Mark Coker Founder Smashwords

P.S. Please contact our support team for inquiries regarding this change in our Terms of Service by clicking the "comments/questions" link at the top of any page at Smashwords. If your inquiry regards a specific title, please include the hyperlink to the book page of that specific title.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

In all of this, keep asking, who benefits? Because the traditional publishers are still selling all the stuff that's being banned. Even Paypal's parent company Ebay sells bdsm books that Paypal says are the equivalent of rape. How is it that it's just the indies suffering?

In case you don't want to wade through all of Mark's email below, here's the most important bit:

We do not want to see PayPal clamp down further against erotica. We think our
authors should be allowed to publish erotica. Erotica, despite the attacks it
faces from moralists, is a category worthy of protection. Erotica allows readers
to safely explore aspects of sexuality that they might never want to explore
in the real world.

The moralists forget that we humans are all sexual creatures, and the biggest
sex organ is the brain. If it were not the case, none of us would be here.
Erotica authors are facing discrimination, plain and simple. Topics that are
perfectly acceptable in mainstream fiction are verboten in erotica. That's not
fair.

M

"Dear Smashwords Authors, Publishers and Literary Agents,

This email is being sent to all authors, publishers and agents who have published
erotica at Smashwords. We will also post this message to Site Updates and the
Press Room.

According to our records, you pubish X erotica-categorized title(s) out of X
title(s) now live in the Smashwords system. This message may or may not pertain
to you.

Today we are modifying our Terms of Service to clarify our policies regarding
erotic fiction that contains bestiality, rape and incest. If you write in any
of these categories, please carefully read the instructions below and remove
such content from Smashwords. If you don't write in these categories, you can
disregard this message.

PayPal is requiring Smashwords to immediately begin removing the above-mentioned
categories of books. Please review your title(s) and proactively remove and
archive such works if you are affected.

I apologize for the short notice, and I'm especially sorry for any financial
or emotional hardship this may cause the authors and publishers affected by this
change.

As you may have heard, in the last couple weeks PayPal began aggressively enforcing
a prohibition against online retailers selling certain types of "obscene" content.
For good background on the issue, see this Selena Kitt post here - http://selenakitt.com/blog/index.php/2012/02/19/slippery-slope-erotica-censorship/
or here - http://theselfpublishingrevolution.blogspot.com/2012/02/slippery-slope-erotica-censorship.html#comment-form
or this Kindleboards thread here - http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,104604.0.html

On Saturday, February 18, PayPal's enforcement division contacted Smashwords
with an ultimatum. As with the other ebook retailers affected by this enforcement,
PayPal gave us only a few days to achieve compliance otherwise they threatened
to deactivate our PayPal services. I've had multiple conversations with PayPal
over the last several days to better understand their requirements. Their team
has been helpful, forthcoming and supportive of the Smashwords mission. I appreciate
their willingness to engage in dialogue. Although they have tried their best
to delineate their policies, gray areas remain.

Their hot buttons are bestiality, rape-for-titillation, incest and underage erotica.

The underage erotica is not a problem for us. We already have some of the industry's
strictest policies prohibiting underage characters (we don't even allow non-participating
minors to appear in erotica), and our vetting team is always on the lookout for
"barely legal" content where supposed adults are placed in underage situations.

The other three areas of bestiality, rape and incest were less well-defined in
our Terms of Service (https://www.smashwords.com/about/tos) before today. I'll
tackle these one-by-one below, and I'll provide you a summary of the changes
that will go into effect immediately.

*Incest:* Until now, we didn't have a policy prohibiting incest between consenting
adults, or its non-biological variation commonly known as "Pseudo-incest." Neither
did our retailer partners. We've noticed a surge of PI books over the last few
months, and many of them have "Daddy" in the title. I wouldn't be surprised
if the surge in "Daddy" titles prompted PayPal to pursue this purge (I don't
know). PI usually explores sexual relations between consenting adult stepchildren
with their step parents, or between step-siblings. Effectively immediately,
we no longer allow incest of any variety in erotica.

Like many writers, censorship of any form greatly concerns me. It is with some
reluctance that I have made the decision to prohibit incest-themed erotica at
Smashwords. Regardless of your opinion on incest, it's a slippery slope when
we allow others to control what we think and write. Fiction is fantasy. It's
not real. It unfolds in our imagination. I've always believed fiction writers
and readers should have the freedom to explore diverse topics and situations
in the privacy of their own mind. From an imagination perspective, erotica is
little different from a literary novel that puts us inside the mind of farm animals
(1984), or a thriller novel that puts us inside the mind of a terrorist, or a
horror novel that puts us inside the mind of an axe-murderer or their victim.
All fiction takes us somewhere. We read fiction to be moved, and to feel.
Sometimes we want to feel touched, moved, or disturbed. A reader should have
the right to feel moved however they desire to be moved.

Incest, however, carries thorny baggage. The legality of incest is murky. It
creates a potential legal liability for Smashwords as our business and our books
become more present in more jurisdictions around the world. Anything that threatens
Smashwords directly threatens our ability to serve the greater interests of all
Smashwords authors, publishers, retailers and customers who rely upon us as the
world's leading distributor of indie ebooks. The business considerations compel
me to not fall on the sword for incest. I realize this is an imperfect decision.
The slippery slope is dangerous, but I believe this imperfect decision is in
the best interest of the community we serve.

*Bestiality:* Until now, we didn't have a stated policy regarding bestiality.
I like animals. Call me old fashioned or hypocritical (I'm not a vegetarian),
but I don't want to be a party to anyone enjoying animals for sexual gratification,
for the same reason we've never allowed pedophilia books. I don't want to publish
it, sell it, or distribute it. The TOS is now modified to reflect this. Note
this does not apply to shape-shifters common in paranormal romance provided the
were-creature characters are getting it on in their human form. Sorry I need
to clarify it that way, but we don't want to see bestiality erotica masquerading
as paranormal romance.

*Rape:* Although our Terms of Service prohibits books that advocate violence
against others, we did not specifically identify rape. This was an oversight
on our part. Now we have clarified the policy. We do not want books that contain
rape for the purpose of titillation. At Smashwords, rape has no longer has a
place in erotica. It has no place anywhere else if the purpose is to titillate.
Non-consensual BDSM - or any other form of non-consensual violence against another
person - is prohibited.

*NEXT STEPS:* If you have titles at Smashwords that are now expressly forbidden,
by the end of day Monday (Feb 27), please click to your Dashboard at https://www.smashwords.com/dashboard
and click UNPUBLISH then click ARCHIVE. This will also cause our automated systems
to remove the titles from retail distribution.

DO NOT try to hide or obfuscate violating content by changing book titles, book
descriptions and tags. If we discover such shenanigans, said authors/publishers
will risk account deletion and forfeiture of any accrued earnings, per our Terms
of Service.

We take violations of the TOS seriously, because such violations jeopardize the
opportunities for your fellow authors.
*
We do not want to see PayPal clamp down further against erotica. We think our
authors should be allowed to publish erotica. Erotica, despite the attacks it
faces from moralists, is a category worthy of protection. Erotica allows readers
to safely explore aspects of sexuality that they might never want to explore
in the real world.

The moralists forget that we humans are all sexual creatures, and the biggest
sex organ is the brain. If it were not the case, none of us would be here.
Erotica authors are facing discrimination, plain and simple. Topics that are
perfectly acceptable in mainstream fiction are verboten in erotica. That's not
fair. Our decisions today are imperfect. Please, act responsibly, don't try
to game the system or publish content that pushes the limits of legality. Help
us continue to help indie authors around the world to continue to publish and
distribute with freedom.*

*THINGS TO AVOID:* Avoid using words such as 'bestiality,' 'rape,' 'incest,'
'underage,' or 'barely legal' in book titles, book descriptions or keyword tags,
otherwise Smashwords may conclude you're violating the Terms of Service, or trying
to push the limits. If you're writing non-erotic works, and any of these words
are necessary, then you're okay.

On Tuesday (Feb 2 we will begin removing content that we deem in violation.
When we remove a title, you will receive an email notifying you of such, and
that email will append this letter along with instructions on how to notify us
if we made an error. I promise you, we will make mistakes, so please work with
us, take a deep breath and honor us with your patience.

If you believe we removed something in error, please click "Comments/questions,"
mention the title we removed, provide the hyperlink to said title, and provide
your *calm* reasoning for why we should reconsider.

Our support team is backlogged, so it may take several days for them to respond.
As we mention in the Terms of Service, we reserve the right to remove anything
for any reason. That said, we will also try to make our decisions with care
and prudence.

You might wonder if Smashwords should simply switch to a different payment provider.
It's not so easy. PayPal is designed into the wiring of the Smashwords platform.
They run the credit card processing for our retail store, and they're how we
pay our authors and publishers. PayPal is also an extremely popular, trusted
payment option for our customers. It is not feasible for us to simply switch
to another provider, should such a suitable provider even exist, especially with
so few days notice.

Please note our Terms of Service is subject to additional modifications as we
work to bring Smashwords into compliance with PayPal requirements. Let's hope
today's actions mark the limit of the slippery slope.

Significant gray area remain. Erotica is still permitted, though if authors
try to push the limits of what's permitted, we risk further clamping down. Please
be responsible. Don't go there. If you're going to push the limits, push the
limits of great writing, not the limits of legality.

Thank you for assisting our compliance efforts on such short notice. We know
these decisions will be upsetting to some of our authors and publishers, and
for that we apologize. We do believe, however, that these decisions will place
us on a stronger footing to represent the best interests all indie authors and
publishers from here forward.

Best wishes,

Mark Coker
Founder
Smashwords

P.S. Please contact our support team for inquiries regarding this change in
our Terms of Service by clicking the "comments/questions" link at the top of
any page at Smashwords. If your inquiry regards a specific title, please include
the hyperlink to the book page of that specific title."


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

The thing that kills me is Ebay sells some of the authors who've been banned by Paypal. Sites who've banned indies are carrying publisher titles with twincest and dubious consent etc... They say it's about sex when it just seems to be about killing off the indies. (And for those of you who don't write erotica, keep in mind, one retailer axed the entire indie catalog, all genres, this is a multi genre issue--don't make the mistake that it doesn't matter to you.)

I'm grateful there's a competitor who might have an interest in holding the line but I don't want to add to the potential for Amazon to become so big, it kills all competition--that's not good for authors either.

M


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I've seen others mention that PayPal is restricting consensual BDSM and that they consider it rape, but the body of this email and others I've read do not mention anything about that. Where is that info coming from?


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Monique said:


> I've seen others mention that PayPal is restricting consensual BDSM and that they consider it rape, but the body of this email and others I've read do not mention anything about that. Where is that info coming from?


Actual phone conversations that author Selena Kitt has had with paypal. I don't know if paypal softened their stance on that or if the new TOS just aren't clear.

M


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

mrv01d said:


> PayPal is requiring Smashwords to immediately begin removing the above-mentioned
> categories of books.


PayPal can't "require" Smashwords to do anything.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> PayPal can't "require" Smashwords to do anything.


Yes they can, they have the money.

M


----------



## JamieDeBree (Oct 1, 2010)

Both All Romance and Smashwords are only restricting *non-consensual* BDSM. I'm pretty certain that with as much contact as Mark says he's had with Paypal, they would not be vague if *all* BDSM was being banned...


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

Monique said:


> I've seen others mention that PayPal is restricting consensual BDSM and that they consider it rape, but the body of this email and others I've read do not mention anything about that. Where is that info coming from?


It's here...



> http://theselfpublishingrevolution.blogspot.com/2012/02/slippery-slope-erotica-censorship.html
> When I asked if "pseudo-incest" was included (since that was mostly all we had on the site) the representative confirmed that yes, that would have to be removed. "What about BDSM?" I asked--a category full of dubious consent. "That would have to be removed as well."
> 
> That's right--they weren't just targeting illegal acts between non-consenting adults. Now they were targeting legal sex between consenting adults.
> ...


Also the stuff that was being categorized as "incest, bestiality, necrophilia, and pedophilia" is laughable. There were mostly "step or daddy" fantasy stories, were-creature stories, and Barely legal (18-21) erotic stories.

Heck, I can see all of that in an episode of *True Blood *on a Sunday night!


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Perhaps there was some miscommunication/misinformation? From Mark's letter (and other edicts) it seems clear that consensual BDSM isn't part of this deal.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> PayPal can't "require" Smashwords to do anything.


They can freeze their account if they don't comply! And they have been know to do exactly that.

Smashwords is paid through and pays authors through Paypal. This would be a disaster. In effect, the CAN require Smashwords to do what they want and Smashwords is pretty much forced to comply.

Edit: I am NOT happy with eBay and Paypal deciding what we can and cannot read, buy or sell. Even if it's something I personally wouldn't touch, it isn't up to Paypal to decide as long as it is legal. When did they become our moral guardian??!


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Monique said:


> Perhaps there was some miscommunication/misinformation? From Mark's letter (and other edicts) it seems clear that consensual BDSM isn't part of this deal.


Just so long as _they_ deem it consensual, right? Who is going to police this? Paypal? Clearly they have no concept of how much fun a little slap and tickle is.

This is a dark day for writers.


----------



## George Berger (Aug 7, 2011)

Vicky Foxx said:


> Also the stuff that was being categorized as "incest, bestiality, necrophilia, and pedophilia" is laughable. There were mostly "step or daddy" fantasy stories, were-creature stories, and Barely legal (18-21) erotic stories.


*Mostly* being the key word there. I think we all know there were a few, if only a very few, _much_ more questionable titles amongst the rest, and it's rather a case of a few bad apples spoiling the lot. So to speak.

PayPal have had their policies about "objectionable" content for years. They only act on them when notified of a violation. So, I'm betting the reason "why now?" is because someone complained...


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

George Berger said:


> *Mostly* being the key word there. I think we all know there were a few, if only a very few, _much_ more questionable titles amongst the rest, and it's rather a case of a few bad apples spoiling the lot. So to speak.
> 
> PayPal have had their policies about "objectionable" content for years. They only act on them when notified of a violation. So, I'm betting the reason "why now?" is because someone complained...


And that someone would likely be a few publishers who wanted their best seller's list back.

M


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

George Berger said:


> *Mostly* being the key word there. I think we all know there were a few, if only a very few, _much_ more questionable titles amongst the rest, and it's rather a case of a few bad apples spoiling the lot. So to speak.
> 
> PayPal have had their policies about "objectionable" content for years. They only act on them when notified of a violation. So, I'm betting the reason "why now?" is because someone complained...


And that is exactly my problem. This whole thing is being publicized (especially by BookStrand and ARE) as if this was a rampant problem. And indie Erotica authors are being painted with a very broad brush. It just didn't happen that way..

Yes there were a few bad apples, but the vast majority of Indie Erotica writers were playing by the rules... at least the ones I saw were. Why weren't just those titles removed and the rest left alone. This continues to feel like something else to me. And I know feelings aren't facts. But this feels like a test run, to see how easy it is shut the gates, and keep the Indie Barbarians out.

Today it's the erotica writers.. who's next?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

mrv01d said:


> And that someone would likely be a few publishers who wanted their best seller's list back.
> 
> M


If that's what it is (and I'm not sure since publishers don't generally list on Smashwords), the main effect will be forcing a large part of it on Amazon which does not use Paypal.

I don't envy Amazon since it's an enforcement nightmare keeping the stuff off that blatantly crosses over the legal lines, but no doubt it will be profitable. Weird.

This whole thing is just plan bizarre. So far they don't seem to be targetting LGBT but I wouldn't be hugely surprised to see that come down the line since even non-sexual LGBT so often ends up labelled erotica. As a matter of fact to my disgust on Fictionwise ALL LGBT is labelled erotica or was at one time.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> If that's what it is (and I'm not sure since publishers don't generally list on Smashwords), the main effect will be forcing a large part of it on Amazon which does not use Paypal.
> 
> I don't envy Amazon since it's an enforcement nightmare keeping the stuff off that blatantly crosses over the legal lines, but no doubt it will be profitable. Weird.
> 
> This whole thing is just plan bizarre. So far they don't seem to be targetting LGBT but I wouldn't be hugely surprised to see that come down the line since even non-sexual LGBT so often ends up labelled erotica. As a matter of fact to my disgust on Fictionwise ALL LGBT is labelled erotica or was at one time.


Here's a conspiracy theory... Amazon wants content. It wants to be the king of content. Amazon becoming a haven for indies? Is aligned with their business goals.

Another theory... Small publishers were edged out of bestseller lists by indies on small retail sites... now with the indies gone, their incest books finally rank. Plus SW gets hit which just makes life harder for indies. Win-win.

Keep looking at who benefits. It is not a coincidence that small retailers and Amazon's competition have been targeted. It's just a question of sussing out why and who.

What I know for sure, this is not about sex, it's about money. The sex is just a convenient smoke screen. The rules are not consistently enforced to date. So long as Paypal's parent company is selling books they've banned on other sites, something smells.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

mrv01d said:


> Here's a conspiracy theory... Amazon wants content. It wants to be the king of content. Amazon becoming a haven for indies? Is aligned with their business goals.
> 
> Another theory... Small publishers were edged out of bestseller lists by indies on small retail sites... now with the indies gone, their incest books finally rank. Plus SW gets hit which just makes life harder for indies. Win-win.
> 
> ...


Paypal would do what Amazon wants *why*? Amazon won't even accept Paypal payments.

Paypal is owned by eBay. They are competitors.

Edit: It is interesting that authors who are being forced off the other sites are still available on eBay. The enforcement seems to be rather selective so far and eBay has been in financial trouble. I'm not big on conspiracy theories but corporations are out for their own good...


----------



## NicoleSwan (Oct 2, 2011)

The trouble with the immediate "obvious" money trail is that Amazon and eBay/PPal tend to be in competition with each other; also, PayPal gets $ from every sale, so they're cutting off some income there as well, so yes, one wonders who's really pulling the strings here.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> Paypal would do what Amazon wants *why*? Amazon won't even accept Paypal payments.
> 
> Paypal is owned by eBay. They are competitors.


Let me clarify:

Amazon cares about market share in selling books.

Paypal cares about their TOS.

Trigger Paypal's TOS and content comes to Amazon because it will have no place else to go (except B&N which Amazon will have to deal with separately).

All small retailers claiming their small piece of the market share pie are hit in one fell swoop. Indies have fewer places to find success.

Happy bonus...Paypal's revenue goes down, which means it hurts Ebay which is a major Amazon competitor.

Sales are already up at Amazon and B&N due to this situation. Why should book buyers go back to the small retailers when Amazon has everything they need?

M


----------



## George Berger (Aug 7, 2011)

Vicky Foxx said:


> Yes there were a few bad apples, but the vast majority of Indie Erotica writers were playing by the rules... at least the ones I saw were. Why weren't just those titles removed and the rest left alone.


I'm not trying to defend PayPal on this, but trying to identify "just those titles" for removal seems to run into that whole "I know it when I see it" problem, where trying to define some absolute standard for what's acceptable/unacceptable is... basically impossible.

Amazon has similarly opaque content standards regarding erotica, as has been discussed here at length in the past. I have a hard time believing they have any involvement in this dispute with Smashwords, as I'm not sure they find the titles PayPal doesn't like any more attractive.



> Today it's the erotica writers.. who's next?


Except it's not "the erotica writers". Or even "the erotica books". It's "Fiction titles which prominently depicts rape, bestiality, incest, and/or simulations of any of the above, in a positive, titillating fashion." Maybe tomorrow it'll be erotica writers in general, but for now, it's what I suspect is a fairly small subset of erotica titles by a fairly small subset of erotica authors.


----------



## Nicki Leigh (Aug 25, 2011)

As stated above, Amazon uses its own shopping cart, which is what some of these other companies should start doing. We all know that by self-publishing our works, we'll have to at times adjust to our market. The avenue is changing, that's all. It will change again (probably many times) throughout the year.

Paypal can do whatever they want. Even if it is some sort of conspiracy, they have the right to remove their services from a site at any time. I know some authors here on KB are in a panic over this, but I cannot understand all the drama. Yes, I know it sucks and that you may have gotten sales through those sites, but there are others.

The sites that are giving in to Paypal's will (if it is just Paypal that's doing this) can always use a different form of software to take and process payments. So while Paypal may be the one calling the shots, the book sellers still have the option to use a different payment method. Paypal might be the easiest choice, but easy isn't always necessarily right.

*shrugs* Adjust. It's all we can do right now.

And before folks say I can't understand since I only write fantasy, I do write erotica, but I don't post about it. Of course my erotica is of the vanilla variety and doesn't contain the 'questionable' topics that Paypal seems to be targeting.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

mrv01d said:


> Let me clarify:
> 
> Amazon cares about market share in selling books.
> 
> ...


You didn't answer the essential question.

WHY would Paypal decide to do this at the behest of a huge corporation which won't even use their service?

_They wouldn't_. They would be hurting themselves while helping their competitor. That doesn't make sense.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

George Berger said:


> I'm not trying to defend PayPal on this, but trying to identify "just those titles" for removal seems to run into that whole "I know it when I see it" problem, where trying to define some absolute standard for what's acceptable/unacceptable is... basically impossible.
> 
> Amazon has similarly opaque content standards regarding erotica, as has been discussed here at length in the past. I have a hard time believing they have any involvement in this dispute with Smashwords, as I'm not sure they find the titles PayPal doesn't like any more attractive.
> 
> Except it's not "the erotica writers". Or even "the erotica books". It's "Fiction titles which prominently depicts rape, bestiality, incest, and/or simulations of any of the above, in a positive, titillating fashion." Maybe tomorrow it'll be erotica writers in general, but for now, it's what I suspect is a fairly small subset of erotica titles by a fairly small subset of erotica authors.


No it's not just erotica. Stop focusing on the sex because the entire indie catalog at one retailer was deleted. Every genre has been touched by this and did you see the part in Coker's email where he wrote "or any other form of non-consensual violence against another
person - is prohibited."

Let's hope that's an oversight, but, if it's not, there are going to be a lot of casualties.

M


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> You didn't answer the essential question.
> 
> WHY would Paypal decide to do this at the behest of a huge corporation which won't even use their service?
> 
> _They wouldn't_. They would be hurting themselves while helping their competitor. That doesn't make sense.


Who said Amazon had to identify themselves to Paypal? Does Paypal investigate the identity of customers who complain? Do you think Amazon logged in with their Amazon.com user id on Paypal to send an email?

M


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

E. S. Lark said:


> As stated above, Amazon uses its own shopping cart, which is what some of these other companies should start doing. We all know that by self-publishing our works, we'll have to at times adjust to our market. The avenue is changing, that's all. It will change again (probably many times) throughout the year.
> 
> Paypal can do whatever they want. Even if it is some sort of conspiracy, they have the right to remove their services from a site at any time. I know some authors here on KB are in a panic over this, but I cannot understand all the drama. Yes, I know it sucks and that you may have gotten sales through those sites, but there are others.
> 
> ...


Not so easy to replace payment processors. That's a whole other problem which is why Paypal's stance is effectively a death sentence.

For the record, I do not have books anywhere except on Amazon or B&N, but I know if I don't stand up now for what's right, no one else will.

Please understand some of us have been involved with this issue for over a week and dealt with it in minute detail, we are not over stating the problem.

M


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

mrv01d said:


> No it's not just erotica. Stop focusing on the sex because the entire indie catalog at one retailer was deleted. Every genre has been touched by this and did you see the part in Coker's email where he wrote "or any other form of non-consensual violence against another
> person - is prohibited."
> 
> Let's hope that's an oversight, but, if it's not, there are going to be a lot of casualties.
> ...


"non-human"? What does that mean? Good lord. How about elves? Aliens? Ogres?

Anyway, it's all very well for someone to say "they can just change" but a company can rarely afford to make that kind of change or even begin to implement it in the kind of time period that Paypal is setting. That is NOT possible.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

So, your theory is that some special ops Amazon employees complained to PP about certain types of erotica so that PP would pressure a group of retailers into removing it so that Amazon could then benefit from being the sole purveyor said "Daddy" porn?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

mrv01d said:


> Who said Amazon had to identify themselves to Paypal? Does Paypal investigate the identity of customers who complain? Do you think Amazon logged in with their Amazon.com user id on Paypal to send an email?
> 
> M


Sorry, I consider this a serious issue and don't want to drag it into tinfoil hat conspiracy theory territory with Amazon hiring a phone room of people to telephone Paypal to complain. Dropping out of the conversation.


----------



## Nicki Leigh (Aug 25, 2011)

Monique, I think that's exactly it! /sarcasm

I've bee lurking and reading about this since it all started. There could be any number of reasons publishers are doing this. Thing is, nothing you do or say now will matter. If it's going to hit Amazon or any other avenue (not sure how it would), there's nothing you can do to stop it. All of this wasted energy on drama of what or what might not be going on.

Again, I understand the frustrations, but all you're doing is going around in a circle. Use that energy for something productive such as writing another book that adheres to these new 'guidelines' or find a new profession. This profession isn't for everyone, especially when things go belly up.

As for me, I'll keep writing. If a meteor is going to crash into the earth, nothing I do will get it out of the meteor's path of destruction.


----------



## AKLoggie (Aug 13, 2011)

Or rather than get bogged down in conspiracy theories, we can talk about how depressing it is that there is really no paypal alternative, and what chilling effects this has?

There are other credit card processors, but adult cc processors are VERY expensive and it's not like changing systems over is simple and can be done overnight.

Paypal's dominance in the marketplace means they get to dictate what they think should be written about.  I'm not ok with that.  I'd rather fiction I find personally distasteful be able to be sold.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Monique said:


> So, your theory is that some special ops Amazon employees complained to PP about certain types of erotica so that PP would pressure a group of retailers into removing it so that Amazon could then benefit from being the sole purveyor said "Daddy" porn?


I'm looking at who benefits because it's not _all_ incest or all bdsm that's being eliminated, it's just the indies. That is weird. When the things companies say don't match up with their actions, that's weird.

I highly doubt, given Paypal's long history of over reaction and immediate suspension without any proof, that anyone had to use a 'special ops' team to start the ball rolling.

Seriously, have none of you worked in Fortune 500 companies? These kind of smear campaigns are not unheard of.

M


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

It's a thorny issue and there may be a hidden agenda behind these bannings. If the bans are enforced across the board then, so be it, it's where they want to draw the line. If the ban is selective and is designed to restrict competition for certain parties, then it won't be long before people figure it out and do something about it. 

The trouble is, if it's the later then there may be a fallout that wrecks it for all writers of erotica, especially if it spread to a public debate about protecting kids from sexually explicit content. It's not a proper decade without a moral panic and online gaming just doesn't quite cut it.


----------



## Chris Strange (Apr 4, 2011)

From what I understand, it seems that the directive for this might actually come the credit card companies (for which Paypal acts as a middleman) rather than being started by Paypal itself. If that's the case, Amazon might not be totally in the clear, since it uses those same credit card companies even if it doesn't use Paypal.

I find this whole situation extremely disturbing. I don't like corporations restricting access to things people want to read any more than I like government censorship. Especially in the case of pseudo-incest or BDSM or any other topics which some people might find "icky" but are perfectly legal in most places.

I hope all the erotica authors and readers out there can adapt to these restrictions and find a way around them. And I doubly hope this doesn't turn into a slippery slope with the morality police at the bottom waiting to club anyone who slips down.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> Sorry, I consider this a serious issue and don't want to drag it into tinfoil hat conspiracy theory territory with Amazon hiring a phone room of people to telephone Paypal to complain. Dropping out of the conversation.


I have agree, that's far fetched even for me!

Moving forward I do think this brings to light how dependent, we "independents" really are on the big guys. Right now they are playing to our favor, but recent events with PayPal show what can happen when "we're no longer welcome at the party". The door can be shut or narrowed at any time.

Unless of course, indies start to figure out ways to profitably distribute their own work. What's really needed are truly 'indie' e-distributors who aren't dependent on the current infrastructure. Will that happen.. or can that happen? I don't know.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Chris Strange said:


> From what I understand, it seems that the directive for this might actually come the credit card companies (for which Paypal acts as a middleman) rather than being started by Paypal itself. If that's the case, Amazon might not be totally in the clear, since it uses those same credit card companies even if it doesn't use Paypal.
> 
> I find this whole situation extremely disturbing. I don't like corporations restricting access to things people want to read any more than I like government censorship. Especially in the case of pseudo-incest or BDSM or any other topics which some people might find "icky" but are perfectly legal in most places.
> 
> I hope all the erotica authors and readers out there can adapt to these restrictions and find a way around them. And I doubly hope this doesn't turn into a slippery slope with the morality police at the bottom waiting to club anyone who slips down.


At this point, Amazon would probably love to pay the high risk fee it would take to be the home of everyone's favorite fantasy, which also happen to be very profitable. Whether they contrived this situation or not, there is now a huge opportunity for a company willing to take it. Unless, of course, they hit a wall of morals (but remember this is the company that initially defended that how to guide that I won't name for the sake of decency).

M


----------



## Sara Pierce (May 15, 2011)

E. S. Lark said:


> The sites that are giving in to Paypal's will (if it is just Paypal that's doing this) can always use a different form of software to take and process payments. So while Paypal may be the one calling the shots, the book sellers still have the option to use a different payment method. Paypal might be the easiest choice, but easy isn't always necessarily right.
> 
> *shrugs* Adjust. It's all we can do right now.


I wish it was that simple. PayPal has, for all intents an purposes, a monopoly on the online-pay market. There is no other company out there that even comes CLOSE to engendering the same level of customer confidence as they do. I doubt their position at the top is any conspiracy, but the fact that they are targeting ebook sellers is....disturbing.

Anyone who says this is only an erotica problem, or that we "deserve" the slap on the wrist for writing titillating stories - remember that Bookstrand abolished ALL self-publishing accounts not just erotica. I don't care who you blame, just please recognize this is not merely a single-genre issue.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I think Bookstrand used the cover of this PP business to eliminate indies. I'm not sure that's what's really going on elsewhere though. Bookstrand has proven themselves to be an embarrassment to the Internet. And that's saying something.


----------



## Chris Strange (Apr 4, 2011)

mrv01d said:


> At this point, Amazon would probably love to pay the high risk fee it would take to be the home of everyone's favorite fantasy, which also happen to be very profitable. Whether they contrived this situation or not, there is now a huge opportunity for a company willing to take it. Unless, of course, they hit a wall of morals (but remember this is the company that initially defended that how to guide that I won't name for the sake of decency).
> 
> M


A very good point. On the other hand, after they backed down from defending the how to guide they went on to remove incest titles, so they aren't totally the land of free expression. Hopefully they see the opportunity here and don't start removing more titles.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Sara Pierce said:


> I wish it was that simple. PayPal has, for all intents an purposes, a monopoly on the online-pay market. There is no other company out there that even comes CLOSE to engendering the same level of customer confidence as they do. I doubt their position at the top is any conspiracy, but the fact that they are targeting ebook sellers is....disturbing.
> 
> Anyone who says this is only an erotica problem, or that we "deserve" the slap on the wrist for writing titillating stories - remember that Bookstrand abolished ALL self-publishing accounts not just erotica. I don't care who you blame, just please recognize this is not merely a single-genre issue.


BS used the paypal ruling as an excuse to cosy up to the corporate publishers and clear the deck for it's own erotica writers (was it the Siren imprint? I can't remember but it was mentioned in an earlier thread). I can see the logic behind Paypal's decision *IF* they apply it across the board. Some of the stuff they're banning would cause a public outcry if someone decided to make an issue about it.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Monique said:


> I think Bookstrand used the cover of this PP business to eliminate indies. I'm not sure that's what's really going on elsewhere though. Bookstrand has proven themselves to be an embarrassment to the Internet. And that's saying something.


Agree agree agree.

And please note I'm not coming up with conspiracy theories so much as trying to understand who benefits because there's a bigger picture here we can't see. This was a market share grab, but on the part of which party, I don't know.

These things don't just happen. This isn't a season or the earth spinning on its axis. It's a business decision and it's a business decision that targets indies. Paypal didn't wake up last week and say 'this is the day to fight incest.' There was a trigger event. Was it publishers looking to block indies or Amazon looking to increase its pool of customers or another party? Did a Paypal employee read the wrong book?

M


----------



## mathewferguson (Oct 24, 2010)

Once more the sexual hysteria of the US smashes down that beloved 1st Amendment.

All it takes is a few committed people to start calling and emailing and there goes the edges of erotica. Ah, mission accomplished. Now let's just move in a little more.

Hasn't anyone else noticed the "delete" tag on Amazon and on what products it has been applied to? This link is NSFW:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/tagging/items-tagged-with/ref=tag_dpp_yt_isrc__sr?tag=delete&search=1&goBtn.x=9&goBtn.y=19

It's an odd collection of products ... but there is clear overriding theme.

It is of no surprise to me that PayPal would do this. They blocked Wikileaks payments at the behest of politicians in the US. I'm sure some member of the lunatic morality police has influenced this move.

The insidious poison of censorship always comes in on the edge cases first. Then it moves in.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Once more the sexual hysteria of the US smashes down that beloved 1st Amendment."_

First Amendment to the US Constitution:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Neither Congress nor any state government is acting here. It has nothing to do with the First Amendment. This is a purely private matter. Private parties in the US are free to refrain from selling whatever books they choose.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

I think it's in Konrath and Crouch's co-authored thriller Serial where a victim is very graphically raped and then burned alive. I read it and it made me squeamish. I actually thought of it as violence raised to a pornographic level. I wonder if books like that will be included as well? It may be a thriller but if it has a graphic non-consensual sex scene and murder, would it fall under that purview?


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

I don't write erotica, but I find this very disturbing. I completely understand why pedophilia is a taboo topic, especially since even completely fictional written descriptions of pedophilia are illegal in some countries. I also understand why e-book vendors wouldn't want erotica featuring bestiality, necrophilia and genuine incest. Though I do wonder whether the mere act of writing about incest (not practicing it, merely writing about it) is really illegal in the US. Because that would strike me as absurd.

I've never quite understood the prohibitions on "rape as titillation", for while I find that sort of thing disgusting, there are plenty of outright rape scenes committed by the hero and described in a titillating way to be found in vintage romances. And e-book editions of these books are usually available at these smaller vendors. So why is something like _Stormfire_ by Christine Monson (infamous bodice ripper era romance with plenty of rape and sexual violence) okay, while the same content in an indie book is not okay?

These new rules against BDSM and pseudo-incest and "barely legal" erotica, however, are just another case of certain Americans trying to impose their morals on the rest of the world. None of these things are illegal in practice in the US. And while I don't get what's so appealing about pseudo incest, plenty of people apparently disagree.

While I don't agree with forcing porn sites to pay extra high credit card fees in general, erotica e-books aren't a porn site. Or does anybody think that many furious wives will cancel credit card payments for 99 cent erotica novels, when they find out their husband has bought them (or vice versa)?

And even though I don't write erotica, I do worry about how these increasing content restrictions affect my own works. One of my covers is a historical painting featuring a (painted) nude. I arranged the title to cover up an exposed nipple and pubic hair, even though IMO a painted nude on a historical painting is utterly inoffensive. 
What is more, I write historicals and in some periods it was not uncommon for 15 or 16-year-old girls (or sometimes even younger girls) to get married. I already push the age of some historical characters up to 18 or 19, if they will have or are implied to have sex, to comply with American morals, even though I come from a country where the age of consent is 16. Do I have to make those characters 21 now to avoid the "barely legal" tag? I have a serious literary novel in the works which features a 19-year-old couple (they're even married, for goodness' sake). Do I have to up their ages, too?

Plus, some of my stories feature characters, including female characters, getting captured and tied up by the villains? Sometimes the villains grope them first. Is it non-consensual BDSM for purposes of titillation, when the villain does it? What about thrillers and romantic suspense writers? Can they write about rape or sexual violence at all?

Finally, I also worry about GLBT work. My bestselling book is a lesbian western. There's no sex at all, but some vendors automatically list GLBT content as erotica, regardless of whether it actually contains explicit sex.

I agree that there should be a way to filter explicit erotica from search results and "also boughts", if you don't want to see it. But censoring writers is wrong.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

I sold on Ebay for many years, so much so that I was able to make a living from it.  The reason I left them a few years ago was twofold:  they got a new CEO who was an IDIOT (and has subsequently run a great site into the ground) and because of Pay Pal.  

Pay Pal is the stuff of nightmares.  If you read their TOS, its literally TERRIFYING the power you give them by opening an account.  And for folks that connect their checking accounts to Pay Pal...may God help you if you p*ss them off.  When I used them, their TOS literally said they could reach in your bank account and take whatever the hell out that they wanted, if they wanted to.  And there's not a thing people could do about it - because you agreed to the TOS when you opened an account.  If there is some sort of problem with them, you call and sit on hold for 12 years, have to mail recipts and letters and notarized crap to even earn the right to talk to someone, much less get your money back.  I heard HORROR stories from other sellers...things so bad...I literally lost sleep at night.  It got to the point of being very very creepy as someone that did business with them daily and I eventually ran for the hills before something terrible happened to me because with the amount of sales I did through them, I figured it was only a matter of time.  In the process, I ended up on CNN, CNN MONEY, NPR, Fox News, and the Washington Post because I went out screaming like a banshee about my concerns and managed to get the media's attention about it.  I think a few million people listened to my warnings, but not the people that matter because Ebay is pretty much in the toilet.  I hate to say it, but I told them so.  Back then Amazon was new and everyone was whispering about them.  Ebay's mistake was Amazon's boon...and this whole erotica situation will probably end up doing the same thing. 

With that said, and with what I know about Pay Pal...this Smashwords stuff is not a surprise to me.  Not in the least.  I don't think its any kind of conspiracy.  I literally think someone complained (i.e. "Hey, I bought a book and it had *gasp* sex with animals in it! I am offended and I want my money back!").  THey got a few thousand calls like that before the bean counters and lawyers start asking, "Why are we refunding these books?".  They get informed that the customers are unappy with illegal things being depicted, and BOOM there you have it.  A full blown panic that becomes a "Oh my god, we're going to get sued! We gotta get this stuff off here" frantic push for movement.  That's what Pay Pal does - split second panic decisions without any sort of logical thinking behind the decision.  I honest to goodness think that is exactly what is going on.  Pay Pal has the ego of a elephant...they're ridiculous and stomp their weight around threatening this and that all the time.  This SW thing is just more of the same from them.  I don't read erotica nor do I write it, but my honest to goodness opinion is that they just don't want those kinda of transactions on their records and they're too stupid to realize that they are throwing away money by making this decision.

All I can say is that if you have a Pay Pal account...GO READ THE FINE PRINT.  Please.  They run a bank, yet do not have to abide by the same rules banks do.  It's quite frightening.  They just do whatever the hell they want.  And when you click "Yes" to open an account, you give them permission to do so.  WAY TOO MANY PEOPLE CLICKED YES, and now they're a very powerful beast that can dictate whatever they want.  Just like now.  THey're getting what they want, yet again.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

I'm a little late to the party, but why is PayPal doing this? I'm assuming they are fine with taking payments for actual bondage equipment (handcuffs, etc.). I just googled sex dolls and the first link I clicked was a place that not only sells some eye-opening sex dolls but they also accept PayPal. 

It's weird. What's going on?


----------



## jnfr (Mar 26, 2011)

Corporations are full of people who may be either sexually constricted, control freaks, or afraid of bad PR. All of those attitudes can work against the usual pull of easy profits. We're all speculating here, but eBay/Paypal have done tons of stupid stuff over the years.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"These new rules against BDSM and pseudo-incest and "barely legal" erotica, however, are just another case of certain Americans trying to impose their morals on the rest of the world."_

How well are they doing controlling the Germans? Are the Germans complying with the wishes of those certain Americans? I think they are made of far sterner stuff than that. Germans are free to write, read, and sell whatever they choose without interference from anyone in the US. They know that. Best of luck to them.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"These new rules against BDSM and pseudo-incest and "barely legal" erotica, however, are just another case of certain Americans trying to impose their morals on the rest of the world."_
> 
> How well are they doing controlling the Germans? Are the Germans complying with the wishes of those certain Americans? I think they are made of far sterner stuff than that. Germans are free to write, read, and sell whatever they choose without interference from anyone in the US. They know that. Best of luck to them.


The TOS of American run e-book vendors are already pushing American sexual morals on writers and publishers in other countries. For example, a love story between a 16-year-old and a 22-year-old would be completely uncontroversial in most western countries, where the age of consent is 16, but it is against the TOS of AllRomance, Smashwords or even Amazon. "Barely legal" doesn't even exist here as a concept and I have literally no idea whether fictional depictions of actual incest, let alone pseudo-incest, would be an issue at all, though bestiality and necrophilia likely are. And bare breasts on book and magazine covers are only an issue at _Weltbild_, a vendor owned by the Catholic church.

As an indie writer, you are dependent on American sites and thus American ideas about underage sex, nudity, etc... The only non-American e-book platform/site is XinXii.


----------



## A. Rosaria (Sep 12, 2010)

About Pay Pal, in case they grab money from my bank account I have 30 days to charge it back and it will be my bank against them to get the credit back, their TOS is void in my country, so I don't really worry much about that. (and my account is a money black-hole so not much to get anyway)

I don't agree with this censorship(despite not liking the incest,bestiality, rape stuff), maybe smashwords needs to find alternative way to pay people, maybe payoneer is an option. I believe when a company starts abusing its power to get its way and this affects you business then you have to drop this company as soon as possible. Once proven untrustworthy you can't ever expect them to be trustworthy again.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

A. Rosaria said:


> About Pay Pal, in case they grab money from my bank account I have 30 days to charge it back and it will be my bank against them to get the credit back...


Don't be so sure about that. I heard of many cases where the banks deferred to Pay Pal...

As for their TOS being void in your country, that may be correct. I'm not sure about all that.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"As an indie writer, you are dependent on American sites and thus American ideas about underage sex, nudity, etc... The only non-American e-book platform/site is XinXii."_

Those writers are making a choice to follow the American vendors. Why are they dependent on Americans?


----------



## mathewferguson (Oct 24, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"These new rules against BDSM and pseudo-incest and "barely legal" erotica, however, are just another case of certain Americans trying to impose their morals on the rest of the world."_
> 
> How well are they doing controlling the Germans? Are the Germans complying with the wishes of those certain Americans? I think they are made of far sterner stuff than that. Germans are free to write, read, and sell whatever they choose without interference from anyone in the US. They know that. Best of luck to them.


Oh, come on Terence.

When the largest online payment processor in the world starts pushing US morality, it is a problem for everyone around the world. And no, now that PayPal have done this, the Germans aren't free to buy and sell erotica without interference from anyone in the US.

It matters nothing that PayPal are a private company. They have grown so large and into a near-monopoly position that their policy changes are now destroying freedom of speech.

How long will it be before a book titled "Why the US is Responsible for Terrorism Around the World" gets cut down by PayPal?


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

CoraBuhlert said:


> Though I do wonder whether the mere act of writing about incest (not practicing it, merely writing about it) is really illegal in the US. Because that would strike me as absurd.


Fiction is protected. Fiction about even illegal topics is not illegal.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> They can freeze their account if they don't comply! And they have been know to do exactly that.
> 
> Smashwords is paid through and pays authors through Paypal. This would be a disaster. In effect, the CAN require Smashwords to do what they want and Smashwords is pretty much forced to comply.
> 
> Edit: I am NOT happy with eBay and Paypal deciding what we can and cannot read, buy or sell. Even if it's something I personally wouldn't touch, it isn't up to Paypal to decide as long as it is legal. When did they become our moral guardian??!


PayPal is a service that Smashwords uses. There are alternatives. Smashwords is _choosing_ to remove the titles at PayPal's request because Smashwords wants to still use PayPal. If Smashwords _really_ wanted to keep selling those titles and NOT let another company tell it what it can or cannot do it would drop PayPal and use one of the available alternatives.

Will Smashwords go out of business if they stopped using PayPal?


----------



## mathewferguson (Oct 24, 2010)

NathanWrann said:


> PayPal is a service that Smashwords uses. There are alternatives. Smashwords is _choosing_ to remove the titles at PayPal's request because Smashwords wants to still use PayPal. If Smashwords _really_ wanted to keep selling those titles and NOT let another company tell it what it can or cannot do it would drop PayPal and use one of the available alternatives.
> 
> Will Smashwords go out of business if they stopped using PayPal?


In Mark's email he wrote that PayPal was so entwined with Smashwords that they can't "just change".


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> PayPal is a service that Smashwords uses. There are alternatives.


Actually, all the alternatives suddenly have the same restrictions on the same topics. Interesting, that.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> PayPal is a service that Smashwords uses. There are alternatives. Smashwords is _choosing_ to remove the titles at PayPal's request because Smashwords wants to still use PayPal. If Smashwords _really_ wanted to keep selling those titles and NOT let another company tell it what it can or cannot do it would drop PayPal and use one of the available alternatives.
> 
> Will Smashwords go out of business if they stopped using PayPal?


Very possibly since Paypal has been known to freeze accounts in situations like that--freezing the unpaid funds in the account.

And you are assuming that the FI could be changed instantaneously which IS NOT THE CASE. Not having a third-party company to process payments for days or weeks could put them under.

Smashwords is not a deep-pockets company. They are very vulnerable to this kind of threat. Do you really think Mark Coker is enjoying this?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_'It matters nothing that PayPal are a private company. They have grown so large and into a near-monopoly position that their policy changes are now destroying freedom of speech.'_

Monopoly? There are thousands of financial institutions offering credit and debit cards. Amazon is the biggest internet retailer, and it doesn't use PayPal. Credit/debit cards are routinely taken by thousands of internet retailers without using PayPal. I don't have a PayPal account and get along fine.

What freedom of speech? In the US, government is prohibited from interferring with speech and press. PayPal and Amazon are not government, public accommodations, or common carriers, so they can do business with whomever they choose. So can I. Nobody can make me sell something I don't choose to sell.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> PayPal is a service that Smashwords uses. There are alternatives. Smashwords is _choosing_ to remove the titles at PayPal's request because Smashwords wants to still use PayPal. If Smashwords _really_ wanted to keep selling those titles and NOT let another company tell it what it can or cannot do it would drop PayPal and use one of the available alternatives.
> 
> Will Smashwords go out of business if they stopped using PayPal?


I know of one small publisher/author who's having a helluva time finding an alternative. They either want to charge outrageously expensive fees, or they have the exact same content rules as PayPal.

Second, PayPal is a TRUSTED name in the e-payments business and it has no real competitors. Smashwords could switch, but a significant number of it's customers probably wouldn't trust a new payment company. Not everyone trusts entering their credit card online, which is why they use PayPal in the first place.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/24/bankers-wikileaks-free-speech

B.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> Very possibly since Paypal has been known to freeze accounts in situations like that--freezing the unpaid funds in the account.


This is EXACTLY what they do. Just keep your money until you comply with their ridiculous standards. And even then, it takes them months to figure out you actually complied.

I seriously HATE Pay Pal.


----------



## Kevis Hendrickson (Feb 28, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _'It matters nothing that PayPal are a private company. They have grown so large and into a near-monopoly position that their policy changes are now destroying freedom of speech.'_
> 
> What freedom of speech? In the US, government is prohibited from interferring with speech and press. PayPal and Amazon are not government, public accommodations, or common carriers, so they can do business with whomever they choose. So can I. *Nobody can make me sell something I don't choose to sell. *


+1



T.L. Haddix said:


> If you don't like American morality, the answer is simple. Don't bother selling to/through Americans/American companies...No one is forcing you to do business with American companies.* It's a choice you made.*


+1

Where's the standing ovation button?


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2012)

Madeline said:


> This is EXACTLY what they do. Just keep your money until you comply with their ridiculous standards. And even then, it takes them months to figure out you actually complied.
> 
> I seriously HATE Pay Pal.


I closed my account after the regretsy debacle (It wasn't the first mess I'd seen, just the final straw). It's not entirely a surprise they would start going after larger companies. My Smashwords royalties go through my publisher, who switched most of their online transactions to Nochex.

On the other hand, this does highlight a single point of failure for Smashwords - Paypal. Hopefully they will be looking for secondary or backup providers.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> If you don't like American morality, the answer is simple. Don't bother selling to/through Americans/American companies. This is like going in a place that serves hamburgers and being offended because they won't make you a pizza. You're blaming the burger joint for not giving you something they don't offer or support.
> 
> No one is forcing you to do business with American companies. It's a choice you made. Maybe this post will come across as snarky, but I'm offended. Why should American companies not enforce American morality? Should they just do a complete shift in how they do things, adopt German morality? I've never (that I recall) had any problem with you in the past, Cora, but do you have any idea how offensive your post is? And I'm sure that I'm going to be shot down by several people, but that's how this American feels.


If Paypal and the credit card companies decided that any type of violence against underage characters or any hint of sexual feelings or sexuality in underage characters were immoral, and decided that was a morality they were going to enforce, would you feel the same? If The Hunger Games and Judy Blume books suddenly came up against American morality, according to these payment processors and those new terms, would you feel the same?

I don't particularly want any kind of morality enforced by companies deciding what is acceptable for me to read. Corporations' jobs are not to enforce morality.


----------



## mathewferguson (Oct 24, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _'It matters nothing that PayPal are a private company. They have grown so large and into a near-monopoly position that their policy changes are now destroying freedom of speech.'_
> 
> Monopoly? There are thousands of financial institutions offering credit and debit cards. Amazon is the biggest internet retailer, and it doesn't use PayPal. Credit/debit cards are routinely taken by thousands of internet retailers without using PayPal. I don't have a PayPal account and get along fine.
> 
> What freedom of speech? In the US, government is prohibited from interferring with speech and press. PayPal and Amazon are not government, public accommodations, or common carriers, so they can do business with whomever they choose. So can I. Nobody can make me sell something I don't choose to sell.


You truly don't see a problem here Terence? Nothing at all that gives you pause? Not even a whisper of a thought around massive private businesses and their impact on free speech? You can't conceive there is a problem for the world when a gigantic payment business starts making moral decisions?


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

One action I can take, and intend to take, is to stop using Paypal altogether, unless I have absolutely no other option.

I don't believe my books are in violation, but I'm seriously considering removing my Todd Young novels from Smashwords. I have 13 other titles under various names, and the threat of having my account closed scares the hell out of me.


----------



## Danielle Kazemi (Apr 2, 2011)

While this does suck, it is the nature of business. Paypal can pretty much choose to do what it wants (well, within the law) in the same way we can choose not to do business with them. Smashwords is doing what they can to keep all of their other thousands of authors who are spared to stay around. If they stuck the finger to Paypal, that would be stupid. I am sure soon enough someone will make a pure incest, beastality, necrophiliac, and rape ebook store. I would not be surprised if that is already being started somewhere online right now.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

Hmm... what about the furries? Books with anthopomorphic animal characters?


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> If you don't like American morality, the answer is simple. Don't bother selling to/through Americans/American companies. This is like going in a place that serves hamburgers and being offended because they won't make you a pizza. You're blaming the burger joint for not giving you something they don't offer or support.
> 
> No one is forcing you to do business with American companies. It's a choice you made. Maybe this post will come across as snarky, but I'm offended. Why should American companies not enforce American morality? Should they just do a complete shift in how they do things, adopt German morality? I've never (that I recall) had any problem with you in the past, Cora, but do you have any idea how offensive your post is? And I'm sure that I'm going to be shot down by several people, but that's how this American feels.


Even as someone who finds much of our country's morality laughable (and who finds this wider issue highly questionable), I had a similar reaction. If you don't think American companies should enforce American morality.. whose standards _should_ they enforce? Belgium's? Mars'? Lilliputs'?

16 is no more logical for an age of consent than 18 (a truth that's reflected in the fact many US states place the age of consent at 16). If you want access to American products, services, vendors, and markets, you may have to make some concessions to American values.

I may need to barf after typing that, but let's face facts here.


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

Is a boycott Paypal movement totally absurd?


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Something many people are overlooking: incest, whether fake or not, is one of the top-selling erotica niches. It's now being removed by companies that really do have a lot of power to make or break some small retailers, leaving it available only a few places.

One other thing: Paypal could still screw Smashwords. They are not known for being fair or reasonable. The account could (and personally I think probably will) still be frozen. That won't just affect erotica authors. Bookstrand scrambled to comply by throwing all indies out, and you still can't use Paypal there.

This is unlikely to be a morality issue, American or otherwise.


----------



## Danielle Kazemi (Apr 2, 2011)

@Todd - Unless you get some really heavy hitters to stop using it or a million people, yeah a boycott would not work.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

This might be a bit simpler to deal with if we think of PayPal refusing to deal with a vendor if it sells economics books. That gets rid of the morality issue unless one considers economists to be cretins.

PayPal is free to do that, and a vendor is free to refrain from stocking economics books. Economists might not like it, and some non-US economists might think cranky US monetarists are trying to impose their will on the rest of the world. 

A vendor could tell economists to take down their books by Monday. If they didn't, he could do it himself and refrain from selling them. And he doesn't need PayPal to prod him. The vendor can ban gardening and cookbooks if he chooses. 

Economists, gardeners, and cooks might feel their free speech is being trampled. But their free speech doesn't impose obligations on anyone to either listen or provide a forum for them. Nobody is obligated to create and maintain a place for economists, gardeners, and cooks to speak. Nobody has an obligation to market and distribute their books.

Unfortunately, I doubt there would be much of a groundswell of indignation if economics books were removed from SmashWords. The free market makes for a harsh world.


----------



## mathewferguson (Oct 24, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> If you don't like American morality, the answer is simple. Don't bother selling to/through Americans/American companies.


Or to rephrase "If you don't like American morality, the answer is simple. Don't participate in global business. Don't enter the largest market in the world. Stay off-line."



> No one is forcing you to do business with American companies.


Wow. Completely oblivious to the reality of how things work in the rest of the world. I have some news for you: in many cases the only entry to a certain market is via the US. I can't sell my eBooks anywhere they'll make any serious money without going via a US company or US payment processor.



> Why should American companies not enforce American morality?


Because when you have private business and Government power mixing you get fascism. PayPal and the credit card companies block Wikileaks because of how they revealed America's wrongdoings. PayPal now decides natural human sexuality is wrong ... evil ... depraved ... and must be blocked.

And by the way, who decided what "American morality" was? Did you have a big meeting about it? Was it that nut-job Santorum and his ilk? Perhaps you all got together and voted on it. Are you saying you support this censorship?

It always always starts with sex. How do we control the web? Let's talk about child pornography. How do we enforce our sick morality on others? Let's talk about pseudo-incest. Let's talk about things no "normal" person could possibly argue against.

The people behind this move sicken me. Lunatics on the side of a cultural war that has now spread outside the US and is poisoning the rest of the world.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

mathewferguson said:


> And by the way, who decided what "American morality" was? Did you have a big meeting about it? Was it that nut-job Santorum and his ilk? Perhaps you all got together and voted on it. Are you saying you support this censorship?


I think it's pretty obvious many of us support a company's freedom to choose how they do business while denouncing the specific business decision they may have made.

As you point out, there _isn't_ a lockstep American morality. If PayPal pushes too far, they make themselves vulnerable to eroding public opinion and competition that isn't nearly so squeamish as they are. Trust me, plenty of Americans would find this situation disgusting. But there's no contradiction in booing what a company chooses to restrict while allowing them to do business in whatever manner they see fit--and to then face the consequences of their actions.

I mean, what's the alternative here? Should PayPal have to do business with businesses they find repugnant? What if they're shunning the "ickiest" erotica not because they have any moral objective to it, but because they feel it will hurt their bottom line? Is it still "censorship" if their decisions are based on profit rather than morality?


----------



## Kevis Hendrickson (Feb 28, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> PayPal is free to do that...Nobody has an obligation to market and distribute their books.


Problem is some people only like the free market (a la Paypal) when it does what they want it to do. When it decides to exercise the "free" choice aspect of their market powers for the benefit of their business, they're evil conspirators and greedy fundamentalist robber barons.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"You truly don't see a problem here Terence? Nothing at all that gives you pause? Not even a whisper of a thought around massive private businesses and their impact on free speech? You can't conceive there is a problem for the world when a gigantic payment business starts making moral decisions?"_

Moral decisions? Thank God people and private businesses make them everyday. You want a world where they don't?

Sure there is a problem. There is a problem for people who can't get someone else to provide a mechanism to get their books to market. They can't get someone else to do the work for them.

Free speech? Fine. Go ahead and speak. Just don't demand I buy a magaphone for you.

Note that in the US, freedom of the press has generally applied to the technology. The government cannot prevent anyone from using the technology to express themselves. However, there is no right to have the technology provided.


----------



## MJWare (Jun 25, 2010)

shelleyo1 said:


> One other thing: Paypal could still screw Smashwords. They are not known for being fair or reasonable. The account could (and personally I think probably will) still be frozen. That won't just affect erotica authors. Bookstrand scrambled to comply by throwing all indies out, and you still can't use Paypal there.


I have to agree, Paypal is really out of control. This past December they locked me out of my business account with about $75,000 in it. This was just a couple of weeks before Christmas and I was looking at not only not being able to pay my employee's their Christmas bonuses , but having to take out a loan just to make payroll.

I do enough business that I have a dedicated account team and when I called my main contact the reason I was given was that, I had a significant increase in sales *without *any customer complaints. That's right apparently they expect when your business increases so will your complaints.

It's just mind blowing how poorly I was treated. I lost thousands of dollars in sales and they are still holding over $20,000 of my money and won't tell me why or when they will release it. Read the fine print in the terms, they don't have to even tell you why they are holding your funds. Even my attorney said that they can get away with all kinds of crazy behavior because of the way the terms are written.

Basically, they can do whatever they want, *and they do*. Here's a guy who had 3/4 of a million locked up: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103385-PayPal-Freezes-750K-in-MineCraft-Devs-Account


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Kevis 'The Berserker' Hendrickson said:


> Problem is some people only like the free market (a la Paypal) when it does what they want it to do. When it decides to exercise the "free" choice aspect of their market powers for the benefit of their business, they're evil conspirators and greedy fundamentalist robber barons.


But we're really talking about something else that "free choice" here when a company suddenly enforces a policy like this and gives the companies they do business with two weeks to comply, which they know perfectly well is if not impossible then close to it and certainly does not allow enough time to bring in a different company. They also do this threatening to close their account and freeze the funds in the account.

That does come pretty close to the behavior of fundamentalist robber barons in my book. We are not even close to talking about a company behaving reasonably.

Take a look at MJAWare's story. That is the kind of thing Paypal can and does do.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Well, I'm back out of lurk-mode and freaking out all over again.

As I just removed 9 titles from Smashwords, I am reminded of Mark Coker's words and I'm paraphrasing, but it was something like... they [referring to Amazon in another case] are trying to empty competitor's shelves of Indie books.

I don't know why those words were going through my head, but they were...l

Now, a practical question:

Can I take my titles, which are romantic vampire stories, tone down the sex scenes and re-release them as non-erotic titles

Is that a valid thing to do? Or, am I going to be accused of something else by doing this. I have had them in the category of erotica, but they are really just paranormal romances with plot lines and character development, which happen to have just a little more steamy sex scenes in them. If I lower the steam, can I re-release them with new titles as paranormal romances.

Thanks in advance... [expecting good advice]!


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

MJAWare said:


> I have to agree, Paypal is really out of control. This past December they locked me out of my business account with about $75,000 in it. This was just a couple of weeks before Christmas and I was looking at not only not being able to pay my employee's their Christmas bonuses , but having to take out a loan just to make payroll.


They did this to me a couple of years ago--because I changed my phone number. That flagged the account as suspicious. I'd had the account for 8 or 9 years at that point. I guess terrorists change their phone numbers every decade or something.

The transfer into my bank that I initiated earlier that day, as I did every Friday for years, was reversed that night and the account locked. Unfortunately, the money that I would have had available to me by Tuesday morning was held for two weeks while we played games. I uploaded a scan of my driver's license and waited several days for them to tell me they really needed my social security card too, then several more days passed. Because times were tight then and I'd been getting out of a financial hole, I didn't have extra money. Clients paid me through Paypal, and I needed every dime yesterday. I couldn't pay bills or buy food, and was starting to fear they were never going to let me have my money. Clients kept paying, and they kept holding it.

Since they've treated everyone different in this situation, I have a sour feeling there will be no consistency in enforcement, and all these smaller companies are going to end up with their accounts frozen for at least a while. Maybe permanently.

The tricky part is that they claim it's the credit card companies behind this. If that's true, then we're really in trouble.



Scarlet Scrivener said:


> Well, I'm back out of lurk-mode and freaking out all over again.
> 
> As I just removed 9 titles from Smashwords,
> Now, a practical question:
> ...


If they're just romantic vampire stories with some erotic content, then I don't even understand why you removed them.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

E. S. Lark said:


> And before folks say I can't understand since I only write fantasy, I do write erotica, but I don't post about it. Of course my erotica is of the vanilla variety and doesn't contain the 'questionable' topics that Paypal seems to be targeting.


Me, too. But, I just pulled it all from Smashwords, lest I be accused falsely of something. The e-mail I got said they were going after anything that had been put in that category.

I didn't want to lose my whole account because of this.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Scarlet Scrivener said:


> Me, too. But, I just pulled it all from Smashwords, lest I be accused falsely of something. *The e-mail I got said they were going after anything that had been put in that category.*I didn't want to lose my whole account because of this.


No it didn't. Read it again.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

shelleyo1 said:


> No it didn't. Read it again.


I read it, again. This doesn't look like a problem that's going to go away. And, it looks like you could be falsely accused of something...

I just had a title temporarily deactivated ('til they admitted they made a mistake - wasn't even erotica, but dealt with crime - many of my characters are victims of some kind of crime) at another place over this kind of thing... I don't want to deal with this.

It's just not safe to have this stuff.

_"DO NOT try to hide or obfuscate violating content by changing book titles, book
descriptions and tags. If we discover such shenanigans, said authors/publishers
will risk account deletion and forfeiture of any accrued earnings, per our Terms
of Service."

"We do not want to see PayPal clamp down further against erotica. We think our
authors should be allowed to publish erotica. Erotica, despite the attacks it
faces from moralists, is a category worthy of protection. Erotica allows readers
to safely explore aspects of sexuality that they might never want to explore
in the real world. "

"
Significant gray area remain. Erotica is still permitted, though if authors
try to push the limits of what's permitted, we risk further clamping down. Please
be responsible. Don't go there. If you're going to push the limits, push the
limits of great writing, not the limits of legality."
_


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Scarlet Scrivener said:


> I read it, again. This doesn't look like a problem that's going to go a way. And, it looks like you could be falsely accused of something...
> 
> I just had a title temporarily deactivated ('til they admitted they made a mistake - wasn't even erotica, but dealt with crime - many of my characters are victims of some kind of crime) at another place over this kind of thing... I don't want to deal with this.
> 
> It's just not safe to have this stuff.


That was a mistake, and they fixed it right away. It's perfectly safe to write erotica. The dire warnings are about trying to slip forbidden content through.

Do what you want, of course. If you remove explicit sex and the stories are romantic, then sure you could put them under paranormal romance. You could probably leave the sex in and still do that, depending on how much sex there is and how explicit it is. Laurel K. Hamilton doesn't go in the erotic section, after all.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

shelleyo1 said:


> That was a mistake, and they fixed it right away. It's perfectly safe to write erotica. The dire warnings are about trying to slip forbidden content through.
> 
> Do what you want, of course. If you remove explicit sex and the stories are romantic, then sure you could put them under paranormal romance. You could probably leave the sex in and still do that, depending on how much sex there is and how explicit it is. Laurel K. Hamilton doesn't go in the erotic section, after all.


Okay. I republished them for now. Thank you!

A couple of mine have the word erotic in the title. I think I'd have to change that. My stuff is really mild - I mean Victorian mild!

I have a collection, in fact, with the word "erotic" in the title. Maybe I could repackage it with more titles, remove the old one for sale everywhere and put them back out under a similar, but revised title with the same cover. I don't want to be accused of trying to resell the same titles as another title... I've seen people who said they got in trouble for that.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Harper Alibeck said:


> In that case, it gives Amazon a huge revenue source. A lot of the erotica PayPal seems to be clamping down on isn't illegal (i.e. consensual BDSM, pseudo incest between consenting adult characters). Driving authors to Amazon seems counter-intuitive as a business practice on PayPal's part.


I'm not an expert on this area, but the opposite scenario occurs to me:

All the "little guys" have fallen in line to PayPal's demands. All that's left are Barnes and Noble, and Amazon, right?

So NOW eBay/PayPal can say this:

"Everyone else has banned these sort of morally disgusting books. Why then, do Barnes and Noble, and Amazon, persist in carrying such filth?"

They don't have to control the purse-strings with the Big Two to get them to fall in line, as they did with these smaller distributors.

Now they can use bad PR and public humiliation to shame everyone else into compliance.

My prediction? Barnes and Noble will either bend to the pressure quickly, or accelerate spinning Nook off into its own company so they can claim, "It's not us!"

Then all that's left will be Amazon... and they'll either ban it, too, due to the PR/bad publicity pressure, or they'll try to spin it in their favor.

Sadly, considering the current censorship targets, Amazon is probably not likely to fall on their sword, either.

Which sets a bad precedent: because next, PayPal could target something more of us DO write, like paranormal romance, horror, or even religious fiction!

And if you think it can't happen... remember... they just got away with it here. Until someone says, "This IS worth fighting over," they can and likely will keep looking for new targets to ban.

It falls under the principle of "never negotiate with terrorists."

A bunch of folks just caved to the terrorism of PayPal. Once they've caved once, they're unlikely to resist the next time... or the next... or the next...

There's a lot of stuff I don't read. That's my choice.

But it's MY choice. And everyone else should have THEIRS. It ought not be PayPal's choice.


----------



## A. Rosaria (Sep 12, 2010)

Vicky Foxx said:


> I know of one small publisher/author who's having a helluva time finding an alternative. They either want to charge outrageously expensive fees, or they have the exact same content rules as PayPal.
> 
> Second, PayPal is a TRUSTED name in the e-payments business and it has no real competitors. Smashwords could switch, but a significant number of it's customers probably wouldn't trust a new payment company. Not everyone trusts entering their credit card online, which is why they use PayPal in the first place.


Paypal with their antics will eventually run out of trust. What smashword can do is run alternatives payment systems along with Pay Pal.

Or maybe opt to use this http://bitcoin.org/ It's very experimental however it would be nice if they offered this as an optional way to get paid.

Best is not to depend on only one way to do transactions.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Couple of things:
1) This sucks, no pun intended.  I'm thinking I'm going to write a letter to PayPal.
2) I depend on PayPal for quick payments on my editing work.  It's quick and easy for both me and my clients.  That said - I don't let large amounts of money build in that account and I would consider it foolish to do so.
3) Lastly - I don't think this is PayPal enforcing morality.  This is PayPal getting tired of people complaining, or someone has threatened to sue, or similar.  But I would imagine it's a purely business decision - I doubt they give a rat's butt what people are reading.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Scarlet Scrivener said:


> Okay. I republished them for now. Thank you!
> 
> A couple of mine have the word erotic in the title. I think I'd have to change that. My stuff is really mild - I mean Victorian mild!
> 
> I have a collection, in fact, with the word "erotic" in the title. Maybe I could repackage it with more titles, remove the old one for sale everywhere and put them back out under a similar, but revised title with the same cover. I don't want to be accused of trying to resell the same titles as another title... I've seen people who said they got in trouble for that.


Well, I keep re-reading the email from Smashwords and the part about "rape for titillation" is what worries me. I went back and unpublished a couple of mine, again. My characters are somewhat autobiographical, even though this is paranormal fiction. I've lived through some horrific things, personally, I try to put a lighter spin on some of it, but I have one character who is raped by her husband, which is her reason for fleeing into the night into a Twilight-zonish environment. (It is written in first person with the narrator telling you in past tense what happened to her and trying to rationalize her feelings about it.) And, another that is raped by a cop, although this is only mentioned and the act itself is not described. Both of these incidents are pivotal to something in the story... I don't want to take them out. In one, if I do take it out, it pretty much ruins the story.

It is not "rape for titillation," but as part of the plot, it is the impetus for a character taking some sort of action. But, I'm sure somebody could argue that it is rape for titillation. This concerns me.

And, to add my feelings about all of this... This is why I was upset the other day when my book, which is an odd little book, that I wrote for violent crime survivors was accidentally pulled in one of these purges. Things happen to people. They really do - not just people on television, but your neighbors, you friends, your mother, etc. and through no fault of their own, not because they made a bad decision or they are bad people or they asked for someone to try to murder them. Now, we can't talk about it IRL, get anyone prosecuted for it (except rarely) and in many cases we are prevented by the law from defending ourselves - and now, you can't even write about it in a work of fiction without possibly being accused of being "obscene." (I read PayPal's new terms today - it prohibits the sale of anything considered "obscene," - who is going to decide this) This is why I was crying the other night when they deactivated my New Age self-help book.


----------



## RubyGoodnight (Dec 9, 2011)

I haven't read the entire thread, so forgive me if this has been repeated. To be honest, this doesn't surprise me, and I don't think it'll stop at rape/incest/bestiality. 

My job (outside of writing ebooks) is writing content for pornography sites. Those type of sites haven't been able to use Paypal for years, since Paypal has a policy against all forms of 'obscene content/ pornography', not just what they are going after Smashwords for. I'm not talking sites where those themes are present, either. I'm talking just straight up naked girl sites. 

There are a number of alternatives to Paypal that are in use, that are just as big as Paypal in that 'world', and are options for Smashwords. 

It won't surprise me at all if Paypal go after erotica as a whole quite soon.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

I wonder if this Paypal melodrama is what has delayed Smashwords updating their figures. It would be terrible if there was a boat load of our money, frozen in a Paypal account because someone had a hissy-morality-fit. And I can't see Paypal being too particular about passing on non-Erotica payments just to be nice - they'll probably freeze the whole lot and nobody'll get paid. Time for Smash to start looking for some long term solutions because it's just not wise to put all your eggs in such a rickety basket.

Sad to say, this all makes Amazon look incredibly appealing and Select look like a good way to sit out the drama and watch how it unfolds.


----------



## Rex Jameson (Mar 8, 2011)

First they came for the BDSM authors because they claimed consensual sex was rape,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a BDSM author.

Then they came for the pseudo-incest stories between a man and a non-biologically related step daughter,
and I didn't speak out because I had never written such a story.

Then they came for the fuzzy were-rapists in those werewolf novels, because werewolves are like honey badgers and they don't give a %[email protected]#,
and I didn't speak out because I hadn't yet written such a book.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me because paranormal romance is practically the whole book market now, and they got shutdown in the last line--you know the one about honey badgers and were-rapists. Also, we can't forget that vampire sex is the willful, necrophiliac desecration of a reanimated corpse.


If the "American morals" police from the conservative Christian movement would have had their way, Harry Potter never would have made it across the pond. This isn't just a slippery slope. It's a steep cliff that's been coated with KY Jelly, originally meant for some fun in the bedroom. The question is, how far are some of you willing to go to defend company rights and deny entry into the free market for others that you feel are morally inferior to you, even though demand exists in the market place for their work?


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Herc- The Reluctant Geek said:


> I wonder if this Paypal melodrama is what has delayed Smashwords updating their figures. It would be terrible if there was a boat load of our money, frozen in a Paypal account because someone had a hissy-morality-fit. And I can't see Paypal being too particular about passing on non-Erotica payments just to be nice - they'll probably freeze the whole lot and nobody'll get paid. Time for Smash to start looking for some long term solutions because it's just not wise to put all your eggs in such a rickety basket.
> 
> Sad to say, this all makes Amazon look incredibly appealing and Select look like a good way to sit out the drama and watch how it unfolds.


I have separate accounts there and one that has only alternative health and new age titles. It hasn't updated, either. And, up to this point I've had payment set for PayPal because I thought it was a surer way of actually receiving payment than a check because the postal service is really lousy where I live. But, I'm thinking of changing them all over to "check" now. May not have a choice.


----------



## Anjasa (Feb 4, 2012)

RubyGoodnight said:


> There are a number of alternatives to Paypal that are in use, that are just as big as Paypal in that 'world', and are options for Smashwords.
> 
> It won't surprise me at all if Paypal go after erotica as a whole quite soon.


Last I checked into it, though, those sites take a lot higher percentage on each sale, right? Which would be another consideration.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> If you don't like American morality, the answer is simple. Don't bother selling to/through Americans/American companies.


American morality? What is that? Something some suit at Paypal gets to decide?

Everyone in America has a different view of what is moral and what isnt, and the closest you can get to 'American morality' is what we've collectively decided through our laws. And since our laws allow erotic books about rape, beastiality, and incest, it appears our 'American morality' is much more tolerant than you or PayPal.

As a private company, PayPal is free to make these kinds of decisions. But please don't try to paint it as 'American morality', when it flies directly in the face of what the majority of Americans believe in, which is freedom of speech.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Well, I re-thought it and pulled all of my fic titles except one really clean one (except for that scene with the blood-drinking ritual, they're vampires, for Pete's sake) from Smashwords.  For sure I'm putting one back out after I go over it and tone down anything in it, although it is very mild - it's, a paranormal fic that is more plot and character than anything else, anyway.  

I'm thinking of doing the same thing at Amazon.  It's only a matter of time before there's a problem there, too.  

Then, I'm seriously considering whether I will even write fiction, again.  All my fic titles, which are only about 4 months old, make less than $50 per month.  It's just not worth it.  I have one in KD Select and it hasn't had either a sale or a borrow since I put it in there.  They're really good stories, too, but there is just a sea of competition.


----------



## RubyGoodnight (Dec 9, 2011)

Anjasa said:


> Last I checked into it, though, those sites take a lot higher percentage on each sale, right? Which would be another consideration.


Not necessarily. It's a different fee structure for each client, with a lot of these other systems. The higher the 'risk' (ie chargebacks, fraudulent billing, etc), the higher the fees involved. Since I don't see folks trying to use stolen credit cards to buy ebooks, I would think that the fees wouldn't be as high as other situations.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> Then, I'm seriously considering whether I will even write fiction, again. All my fic titles, which are only about 4 months old, make less than $50 per month.


Just because you're only making $50 per month after four months doesn't mean you won't be making a lot more in a year or two. There's no reason to overreact at this point, IMHO. Again I offer the useful phrase, "Don't panic."



> I wonder if this Paypal melodrama is what has delayed Smashwords updating their figures. It would be terrible if there was a boat load of our money, frozen in a Paypal account because someone had a hissy-morality-fit. And I can't see Paypal being too particular about passing on non-Erotica payments just to be nice - they'll probably freeze the whole lot and nobody'll get paid.


I'd like to think Smash would have put this info into the email if this had been the case. In fact, this statement:



> As with the other ebook retailers affected by this enforcement, PayPal gave us only a few days to achieve compliance otherwise they threatened to deactivate our PayPal services.


seems to imply that PayPal didn't deactivate their services because they complied. Maybe they've just been too busy to get to the updates?


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

I'm reading this at Selena Kitt's blog:

http://theselfpublishingrevolution.blogspot.com/2012/02/slippery-slope-erotica-censorship.html#comment-form

It was a link in Mark's e-mail.

As I'm reading I'm remembering coming across a site on sex workers and what sex work is. There have been some attempts to classify erotica writers as sex workers and arguments over whether this is valid or not. Of course, it isn't. About 15 years ago, the same people did this to dancers (and actually began referring to us - I was one for many years - as sex workers, which we weren't. This was in the day of no physical contact and we danced on a stage with costumes, etc.) and the night club business went steadily down hill and there is not much left of it, now - not as it was, anyway. It seems like there is an attempt to define all kinds of things as sex or sexually oriented that aren't. Probably by definition in some states (like Texas), stores like Bookstrand (which is headquartered in TX), would be considered sexually oriented businesses, S.O.B.s.

Just something I thought of.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> And you are assuming that the FI could be changed instantaneously which IS NOT THE CASE. Not having a third-party company to process payments for days or weeks could put them under.
> 
> Smashwords is not a deep-pockets company. They are very vulnerable to this kind of threat. Do you really think Mark Coker is enjoying this?


I'm not "assuming" anything. And I doubt that Coker is enjoying this. What I'm saying is that Smashwords is choosing to remove the questionable titles in order to keep doing business with PayPal. If they want to keep those titles in their inventory then they can stop doing business with PayPal. They have a choice. I would suggest that they start looking for alternatives so that their business isn't so entrenched with PayPal.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

NathanWrann said:


> I'm not "assuming" anything. And I doubt that Coker is enjoying this. What I'm saying is that Smashwords is choosing to remove the questionable titles in order to keep doing business with PayPal. If they want to keep those titles in their inventory then they can stop doing business with PayPal. They have a choice. I would suggest that they start looking for alternatives so that their business isn't so entrenched with PayPal.


In reality, they didn't have a choice. Faced with the deadline presented, they had to make the decision they made.

Now, going forward, they have the choice of separating themselves from PayPal, but that's a different decision than the one they just made.


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

I don't like this at all. I don't read erotica, but if the morality police start choosing what we can buy and read, that could lead to any genre being censored. Horror stories, detective, crime and police stories often have characters that might be considered immoral. Then the whole brigade that considers any mention of magic as the work of the devil could control what they will let us buy.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> Then the whole brigade that considers any mention of magic as the work of the devil could control what they will let us buy.


Conversely, religious-themed fiction could be targeted, too. It's easy to imagine how this sort of thing could be wielded against just about any type of work.


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

Based on the position Paypal have put them in, I think Smashwords have handled this as well as they possibly could.  It sounds as if they did their best to negotiate for as many titles as possible to stay (the fact that they have consensual BDSM as allowed, whereas Paypal told Selina it was against the rules, shows that they were at least able to achieve something.

If they'd made a stand against censorship, that resulted in all the authors who publish through Smashwords losing a big chunk of all accrued but as of yet unpaid royalties, and the total loss of Paypal on the site - then there would have been even more of an outcry.  This is a bad situation and there was no perfect solution available to Smashwords or the other smaller retailers (Though Bookstrand's response of removing all self-published authors... well, that's a different story and an exercise in how NOT to handle things well!)

It's a really tricky position all round.  On one side, I'm against censorship, on the other, I respect the right of a business to decide who and what it deals with as long as it doesn't involve discrimination.  The tricky aspect is determining to what extent the censored topics deserve to be defended against the legal right of a company to choose what it sells.  It does seem to boil down to what seems reasonable.  I might personally think that the concept of censoring books where an eighteen year old has sex is ludicrous (the age of consent over here is sixteen and, once you're legal, you're legal) but - to other people that is a really sensitive topic.  

If you really look at what it is and isn't fair to censor in fiction, then the argument would tend to lead towards it being fairest to not censor anything, even the most horrible, icky, illegal, non-consensual sex stuff going - because extreme violence, torture and murder are allowed in fiction.  As long as something isn't inciting people to commit the acts described, there would seem to be an argument for its right to exist uncensored, regardless of our personal opinions about the material.  However, there is also an argument for what customers do and don't want to see on the virtual shelves and what companies do or don't want to have associated with their names.  Erotica is very popular but there is also a large section of the customer base who don't want to see it.  So what do companies/payment providers do?  There isn't really an easy answer.

If I were working in an office and shopping online in my lunch break, then I wouldn't want a load of graphic erotica titles to show up in my search results - or to cause my work's internet software to ban access to the book website entirely based on those search results.  However, I am also horrified at the archaic and puritanical laws being signed off in the US at the moment, and if this is a sign of a further descent down that slippery slope then I'd agree that it needs to be stopped.  The question is, which is it?  Is it just business/personal taste, or is it something more sinister?  In the absense of any evidence of puritanical influence behind the scenes, or any proposed laws against erotica, we have to assume it's the former - and just be wary about the latter possibility.

My sympathies are with the authors and companies who are hit by this.  I hope this is the end of the matter.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Zelah Meyer said:


> If they'd made a stand against censorship, that resulted in all the authors who publish through Smashwords losing a big chunk of all accrued but as of yet unpaid royalties, and the total loss of Paypal on the site - then there would have been even more of an outcry.


A big point many people are missing is that this could still happen. It all depends on whether or not Paypal decides the site has fallen in-step quickly enough--they gave Smashwords a few days to do that. Bookstrand tossed all indies on their ear a number of days ago now, and their Paypal is still gone.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> First they came for the BDSM authors because they claimed consensual sex was rape,
> and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a BDSM author.
> 
> Then they came for the pseudo-incest stories between a man and a non-biologically related step daughter,
> ...


Awesome post.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Rex Jameson said:


> First they came for the BDSM authors because they claimed consensual sex was rape,
> and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a BDSM author.
> 
> Then they came for the pseudo-incest stories between a man and a non-biologically related step daughter,
> ...


This is precisely what is so scary about the PayPal censorship program. When a single corporation has this much power over commerce something is wrong.

PayPal paints with a very broad brush. I have no problem in stores refusing to sell books of real incest or real underage or real rape or real sex with animals. But I think they have gone too far, but I can understand with many trying to push the envelope as far as they can.

Amazon will surely get a big increase in sales I'm sure, but they were lucky. This isn't an Amazon conspiracy.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

jackz4000 said:


> PayPal paints with a very broad brush. I have no problem in stores refusing to sell books of real incest or real underage or real rape or real sex with animals.


I have no problem with stores refusing to sell anything they don't want to sell, but all these stores were selling this stuff by their own choice until a payment processor came along and threatened to pull. That's vastly different.

(And there is no real anything in the books--since it's fiction.)


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

JRHenderson said:


> Rex, your post gave me a good belly laugh.
> 
> But I have just one question: If Romeo was 15 and Juliet was 13 -- where does that leave Bill Shakespeare's plays?


That's totally different-- that is literature and we teach it in schools. And 500 years ago things were different and kids were more mature than they are today.   

p-s: I thought Juliet was 12, err...but very mature for her age. Ha!


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

shelleyo1 said:


> I have no problem with stores refusing to sell anything they don't want to sell, but all these stories were selling this stuff by their own choice until a payment processor came along and threatened to pull. That's vastly different.
> 
> (And there is no real anything in the books--since it's fiction.)


I know. PayPal has taken on the role of the Catholic Church in the middle ages when it comes to censorship. They are guarding the morality of America.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

MJAWare said:


> I have to agree, Paypal is really out of control. This past December they locked me out of my business account with about $75,000 in it. This was just a couple of weeks before Christmas and I was looking at not only not being able to pay my employee's their Christmas bonuses , but having to take out a loan just to make payroll.
> 
> Basically, they can do whatever they want, *and they do*. Here's a guy who had 3/4 of a million locked up: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103385-PayPal-Freezes-750K-in-MineCraft-Devs-Account


Yup, here come some of the horror stories. I ran for the hills after hearing too many of them. I feel for ya.


----------



## A.R. Williams (Jan 9, 2011)

JRHenderson said:


> But I have just one question: If Romeo was 15 and Juliet was 13 -- where does that leave Bill Shakespeare's plays?


...or The Song of Ice and Fire?

...or Lolita?

I appreciate the links to some of Paypal's actions in the past. I wasn't aware that the company could (and has) acted in such a fashion. So it is definitely time to rethink how I want to handle certain aspects of my publishing (i.e. vendors I distribute through, an online store on my website, uploading to sites myself where possible).


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals (Feb 21, 2012)

I'd just like to echo what Zelah said, I was very impressed with Smashwords blunt, honest, and mature approach to it. I felt like I was being treated as an adult and that they were being open about who was at fault (Paypal) and what needed to be done, in realistic terms. This is how you deal with something like this and retain the support and trust of your authors. 

As far as Bookstrand, they may have axed all their indies, but putting a disclaimer that "Our titles with twins don't count as incest because they never ever touch each other, only the man/woman sandwiched between them which we mandate in our submission guidelines they double or triple penetrate" is exactly the kind of fake evasion that Smashwords was warning authors not to bother with. They're a textbook example in all ways of how not to deal with this. The "clutched pearls" email blaming indies is the worst piece of corporate damage control I've seen since Cook's Source.

As for me in general, if these were the rules that were established by the resellers or by publishers or by authors themselves, I would not particularly have a problem with it. It's the fact that it's a third party payment transactor using its monopoly power in a market to mandate what people are allowed to read that burns me. It may not be unconstitutional, but it's certainly un-American.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

What I don't know is if only applies to the erotica genre or is this applied to all genres. If a thriller has a rape scene is it in violation? Or underage sex--two 17 year olds in a paranormal? Does the ban apply across all genres? Or will it be in the future?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"I don't read erotica, but if the morality police start choosing what we can buy and read, that could lead to any genre being censored."_

Correct. Any genre can be targeted by anyone. Any vendor can choose to refrain from dealing with any genre, book, or author. However, morality isn't necessary as a motivation. Some vendors today are refraining from carrying books because they don't like what the parent company of the publisher is doing. Some bookstores are refraining from carrying authors because those authors do business with Amazon imprints. Some vendors are refraining because they can't come to contract terms. Vendors can refrain from books because they disagree with the political positions expressed, don't like male authors, the author is independent, magic is mentioned, or because the author uses too many adverbs.

So, if one is worried about morality motivated deletions from inventory, one may as well recognize the potential is far larger than just the morality motivated situations. Any book, any genre, any subject, and any author can be removed from a seller's inventory for any reason. The reason does not have to be reasonable. It doesn't have to be responsible. It doesn't have to be rational. It doesn't have to be consistent. I't doesn't have to be defended, and we don't have to approve.

You have no obligation to provide me with reading material. You don't have an obligation to write it. You don't have an obligation to sell it. You don't have an obligation to open a store to feature it. You don't have an obligation to build a world-wide computer network to distribute it.

If someone else has an obligation to provide me with books I want, doesn't that imply someone else has an obligation to write what I want to read? Who here accepts that obligation? Isn't it my right?

People may not like or approve of the situation I describe. This isn't advocacy. It's reality.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

R. M. Reed said:


> I don't like this at all. I don't read erotica, but if the morality police start choosing what we can buy and read, that could lead to any genre being censored. Horror stories, detective, crime and police stories often have characters that might be considered immoral. T*hen the whole brigade that considers any mention of magic as the work of the devil could control what they will let us buy. *


Finally, someone says it! LOL.. this is what I've been driving at. My erotica is pretty tame by most standards, and recent events haven't really effected me. But they do scare me.

Also, I lost a distributor (BookStrand) which now leaves Amazon as my main source of sales. That's scary.

And yes a business should be able to decide what they will or won't be associated with. But this PayPal scenario, really feels like "something else".

And I keep asking myself *"Why only Indie Erotica Authors..." *

Established presses are being left alone.. Go to Bookstrand and ARE you can still buy kinkier titles published by larger presses, just not the indie stuff.


----------



## Pnjw (Apr 24, 2011)

Arkali said:


> Couple of things:
> 1) This sucks, no pun intended. I'm thinking I'm going to write a letter to PayPal.
> 2) I depend on PayPal for quick payments on my editing work. It's quick and easy for both me and my clients. That said - I don't let large amounts of money build in that account and I would consider it foolish to do so.
> 3) Lastly - I don't think this is PayPal enforcing morality. This is PayPal getting tired of people complaining, or someone has threatened to sue, or similar. But I would imagine it's a purely business decision - I doubt they give a rat's butt what people are reading.


I make my living through Paypal. Have for over ten years. Two things when dealing with Paypal:
1)Always have a separate bank account tied to Paypal. Never leave money in that account.
2). Never leave any significant amount of money sitting in your Paypal account. Transfer it as soon as possible.

I agree with Anne. This sucks.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Deanna Chase said:


> I make my living through Paypal. Have for over ten years. Two things when dealing with Paypal:
> 1)Always have a separate bank account tied to Paypal. Never leave money in that account.
> 2). Never leave any significant amount of money sitting in your Paypal account. Transfer it as soon as possible.
> 
> I agree with Anne. This sucks.


Excellent advice.

I went one further after they froze me out of my much-needed money for two weeks (because I make a living through them, too).

I severed the connection with the bank account, and now the moment money appears in the account I either use the debit card to pay bills with it, or hit the ATM to remove it all, or both.


----------



## Pnjw (Apr 24, 2011)

Let's hope no one ever tries to buy a VC Andrews title through Paypal.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Vicky Foxx said:


> And yes a business should be able to decide what they will or won't be associated with. But this PayPal scenario, really feels like "something else".
> 
> And I keep asking myself *"Why only Indie Erotica Authors..." *
> 
> Established presses are being left alone.. Go to Bookstrand and ARE you can still buy kinkier titles published by larger presses, just not the indie stuff.


If this is true I don't see how it conforms to the PayPal mandate unless the mandate specifically only applies to indie titles and not publisher titles.

Maybe publisher titles are more equal because the publisher has approved of the book? Seems like a stretch.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Deanna Chase said:


> I make my living through Paypal. Have for over ten years. Two things when dealing with Paypal:
> *1)Always have a separate bank account tied to Paypal. Never leave money in that account.*
> 2). Never leave any significant amount of money sitting in your Paypal account. Transfer it as soon as possible.


This is crucial. Do not tie Paypal to your main checking account. Paypal has been known to extract money out of a bank account tied to a Paypal account. In the past, they did this by piggybacking sums out of the account on unrelated transactions.

B.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

jackz4000 said:


> If this is true I don't see how it conforms to the PayPal mandate unless the mandate specifically only applies to indie titles and not publisher titles.
> 
> Maybe publisher titles are more equal because the publisher has approved of the book? Seems like a stretch.


This is why I say this whole thing is a market share grab. On small retailer sites, Indies dominated the erotica best seller lists, knocking off established small e-publishers. In Bookstrand's case I would suspect this hurt them financially as Siren is their imprint and the profit of those sales was much higher than that made on indie books.

Again, the uneven enforcement smells. Although, to date, BS has not yet had Paypal reinstated. Maybe they kicked them to the curb too, although I suspect it's more a case of Siren's incest books holding them up--no matter how many times Siren changes the disclaimer on the books.

M


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Blog post on the topic: http://michellemccleod.blogspot.com/2012/02/paypal-is-fascist-librarian-and-heres.html

M


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Banks are usually happy to help you set up another account for accepting transfers and making payments on the internet. This makes life much easier for them if there is a dispute. It makes it much easier for the customer if he maintains a very low balance in that account. Ask the local bank guy. He does this for people everyday, and he's heard the same story many times.

Also, when there are disputes involving an account, the only way to resolve them is often to close the account. If this is the same account from which you have automatic payments for everything from mortgage to electric bills, then everything cascades into a huge mess.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

jackz4000 said:


> What I don't know is if only applies to the erotica genre or is this applied to all genres. If a thriller has a rape scene is it in violation? Or underage sex--two 17 year olds in a paranormal? Does the ban apply across all genres? Or will it be in the future?


Yeah, I wondered about this too. There are a lot of steamy romance novels with sex scenes, some of them forced sex I believe.

I don't get why PayPal is doing this.

The real problem is we don't have anything else out there like PayPal that lets people move small amounts of money back and forth with ease. If someone wants to pay me for an SEO article I can't accept a credit card and no one wants to write a check for $10 and mail it. PayPal makes paying me easy and makes it easy for me to pay someone for a cover or editing work.


----------



## Decon (Feb 16, 2011)

Asher MacDonald said:


> Yeah, I wondered about this too. There are a lot of steamy romance novels with sex scenes, some of them forced sex I believe.
> 
> I don't get why PayPal is doing this.


I don't consider any of my work erotic, but your question does sort of ring alarm bells, although the book in question is not currently on smashwords. Survival Instinct has a first chapter from a serial Killer's POV carrying out a rape. The scene and chapter is not meant to titillate, but to show what a scumbag the rapist is. I have no doubt it would not be paletable to some. I balance this scene later in the book where my male MC is date raped by two women who drug him, without being explicit on the sex side, but concentrating on how he feels violated.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Asher MacDonald said:


> I don't get why PayPal is doing this.


Lot's of strange decisions of late. Another one:



> Now, interference by its parent is threatening to tarnish PayPal's good name. It may even stymie CEO John Donohoe's effort to finally turn around eBay (EBAY). At issue is a mundane-sounding decision to send out notices to sellers informing them that all payments they receive through PayPal for items sold on eBay will now be put on hold for up to 21 days. The company says the policy is aimed at protecting buyers from bogus sellers and to stem potential losses it incurs from its buyer protection program.
> 
> First introduced in December 2009, the policy only applied to a small number of sellers, mostly those with a history of complaints. Last Fall, eBay started applying the rule to virtually all of its members. That move has confused and outraged thousands of sellers -- especially ones that have used the site for years, building sterling profiles along the way. "They're treating me like a criminal," says Madeleine Calabro, an Avila Beach, California, resident who has been buying and selling on eBay since 2003, garnering 100% positive feedback. Indeed, the PayPal website forum has more than 600 pages of posts from angry sellers protesting the hold. Also a flurry of surly websites -- letssuepaypal.com, paypalsucks.com, and screw-paypal.com, among others -- have popped up in response.


http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/24/ebays-got-a-paypal-problem/

Odd moves.

B.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

Yeah, 2009 is when I quit selling on Ebay.  I had 100% feedback too.  Like I said before, John Donahoe is a complete idiot. He has single handedly run a good site into the ground.  One of these days, they'll figure that out and get rid of him, but I hope they get on that soon...there won't be an Ebay left for much longer.  I do laugh when I get their emails begging me to come back and offering all kinds of free listings, free money, free everything.  Until Donahoe is gone, you couldn't PAY me to sell on Ebay or use Pay Pal. 

The 21 day rule was originally for NEW sellers, people who just created an account.  Pay Pal kept their money for 21 days and there was not a thing that could be done about.  No interest provided on the money held, no nothing.    They claimed it was to "protect" buyers from sellers who didn't have a positive reputation.  All I could think about was adding up ALL THAT money Pay Pal was holding in a bank account...think of all the interest they are earning by refusing to give people their money.  It really, really pisses me off.    AND NOW they're doing it with all sellers?  Sellers that have been working with them for dozens of years and have never had an issue with fraud?  

It's a downright joke, I tell you.  Ughhhhhhh, I need to stop following this discussion cause I'm getting all pissed off again.  I'm having flashbacks of 2009


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2012)

Regarding Romeo, 15, and Juliet, 13, I don't recall reading that they had sex


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Okey Dokey said:


> Regarding Romeo, 15, and Juliet, 13, I don't recall reading that they had sex


They had a wedding night together, didn't they? I think the sex was implied.


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2012)

The morality police issue is a major one for authors.

But another major issue is presented by PayPal and Smashwords:

"forfeiture of any accrued earnings" said Mark Coker of Smashwords.

Excuse me, but MY money is not Smashwords money. Or PayPal's money.

Let me try to "forfeit" the money I owe to a bank because its CEO was accused of a morals or other criminal charge.

We created the "forfeiture" problem for ourselves by allowing the distributors and retailers including Amazon and B&N to hold on to our "accured earnings" long past the normal 30-day customer return period.

Mark Coker and others could earn my respect when they send authors their hard earned money the day after the return period ends. If they insist on holding "accrued earnings" for 60 to 90 days, then pass on the interest to us.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

First of all, the book publishers have typically withheld royalties for up to a year. Getting paid after 60 days is a boon to writers. 

Also, they need to hold onto the money for awhile so they can deal with returns. Even though Amazon I think gives you a week to return an ebook, I bet if you kick up a storm and complain about typos and formatting errors they will let you return one later. 

Finally, the terms of service are lopsided in favor of PayPal. Smashwords right now is wedded to PayPal, so you either have to accept the lopsided conditions or take your business elsewhere. I don't think there's any middle ground. 

It's not been a good few months for Mark Coker. First Amazon siphoned off a lot of books with Prime exclusivity, and now this.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

FYI
A Note From Kaleigha — What to do with your removed books
Posted: February 25, 2012 in Store Fronts

We at No Boundaries Press, while we do agree that some content isn’t what we prefer to publish….do not agree with censorship. We are adding a new module to our site to let us do away with PayPal and we WILL be able to SELL ALL BOOKS EVERYONE ELSE IS REMOVING.

We are still working out the details, but this will be open for anyone (I’m asking Kharisma work up somewhat of a vendor area on the site as well for publishers to have their listings under).

If you are interested in more details as we work them out, please email your inquiry to [email protected]

Kaleigha Kordero


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Keeping the contents of people's accounts when one of these big companies decides you've violated their TOS is another trend. Another reason I'm especially nervous is that back in July, right before 3rd quarter fiscal reports, I was falsely accused of violating Google AdSense's terms of service (I wasn't accused of click-fraud, which is the usual scam they run - they didn't say and I hadn't published anything anywhere in a few months). On the basis of this unproven, fraudulent accusation, they closed my account without notice and confiscated my earnings, claiming that they planned to return the money to the people I had allegedly defrauded. They did this right before they were supposed to be issuing a check. And, they did it to thousands of people world-wide. About 2 weeks later I saw a headline on CNN that the AdSense portion of Google reported its highest profits ever in the third quarter.

I got screwed out of an income stream and an accumulation of work over a couple of years, which other people are still profiting from and I am not. And, like the PayPal situation, there are no other real alternatives. Nominally, they exist. But, that's it.

Something else... I've been over at paypalsucks.com and I saw this:

_"5. If you are a bona fide, up-standing individual with hundreds of successful transactions, but someone pays you with a stolen credit card, your account (by PayPal's own admission) is immediately flagged as being "criminal behavior" and any money in that account is confiscated. If a customer "disputes" the charge, same thing happens. (See email above.) PayPal claims that they will fight chargebacks, but read this before you fall for that one."_

Interestingly, about 2 or 3 weeks ago, I got a nice e-mail from Smashwords telling me that there was going to be a chargeback on one of my titles because somebody had stolen someone else's credit card and was running around buying self-help books. This was about as congenial an e-mail as you can imagine under the circumstances and I certainly understood when they said that some money would disappear from my account for a purchase made with this stolen card.

You don't suppose they got flagged? Maybe AR is telling the whole truth as it stands and they really are just "re-shelving" things according to a several-months old plan" already in the works.


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2012)

*". . . they need to hold onto the money for awhile so they can deal with returns."*

Can't agree with this. This is a policy that dates back to bookkeeping with pen and ink.

Today all sales are recorded by computers which at the end of the day can churn out a list of all sales by title, ISBN, etc.
If the return policy says 30 days, then there is no reason to hold royalties beyond day 31. Heck, most of the money can be transmitted straight to the bank without having someone write a check.

Oh, I'm wrong. There IS a reason to hold royalties up to 90 days or beyond. It's called INTEREST which doesn't filter down to us.

And it is MORALLY wrong to FORFEIT (in other words they keep forever) money already owed to us.


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2012)

Romeo and Juliet:

I did miss reading about their wedding.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> So let me ask you all this. What happens if Paypal freezes your account and reaches into the bank account? Are they allowed to withdraw all the funds, or more than balance in the account? In other words, can they create an overdraft on your account?


I think this tidbit from http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/24/ebays-got-a-paypal-problem/ answers your question - yes!

_Vexing sellers even more is the fact that PayPal takes its 3.25% fee and eBay takes its 9% fee right away instead of waiting 21 days. Even shipping fees, which are normally covered by the buyer, are put on hold, and eBay goes into the seller's personal bank account to cover the shipping costs - a move that has caused some surprised sellers to be slapped with bank overdraft fees. "I closed my PayPal account immediately after my last payment was released," says Lisa Holman, a Miamisburg, Ohio resident who had been selling for four years. "I will never sell on ebay again and I have vowed not to buy on eBay," she adds._


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

Someone replied to my post and said that a seller has the right to choose what they sell. But this isn't a seller, it's a payment service. What if Visa and Mastercard started saying you can't buy certain things with their cards?


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2012)

Don't know if the bank would allow PayPal to overdraw your bank account, but I believe that PayPal can get your bank balance to zero. Then you could unknowingly overdraw your account at the grocery store and end up paying an overdraft fee.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

R. M. Reed said:


> Someone replied to my post and said that a seller has the right to choose what they sell. But this isn't a seller, it's a payment service. What if Visa and Mastercard started saying you can't buy certain things with their cards?


I'm fairly certain that they already do.


----------



## JoeMitchell (Jun 6, 2010)

swolf said:


> American morality? What is that? Something some suit at Paypal gets to decide?
> 
> Everyone in America has a different view of what is moral and what isnt, and the closest you can get to 'American morality' is what we've collectively decided through our laws. And since our laws allow erotic books about rape, beastiality, and incest, it appears our 'American morality' is much more tolerant than you or PayPal.
> 
> As a private company, PayPal is free to make these kinds of decisions. But please don't try to paint it as 'American morality', when it flies directly in the face of what the majority of Americans believe in, which is freedom of speech.


I have to agree with all of this. According to US law, these topics (rape, pseudo-incest, bestiality) are perfectly legal to write about.

My first guess for who's behind the conspiracy would be some moral religious group. There's a long history of them using letter writing campaigns and other means to get objectionable TV shows taken off the air. When their complaints are ignored by the TV networks, they complain to the companies that pay for advertisements, expressing their outrage and threatening boycotts if they don't stop running commercials. I can imagine the same thing happening here - Moralists write complaining letters to the booksellers and get back form letters in response. The next step would be to go after their revenue source, and PayPal is a good target for that.

Has anyone searched the internet to see which groups are gloating and claiming responsibility for this moral victory? Also, isn't it funny how much that sounds like terrorism?

I don't use Paypal anymore (I don't like how they take a cut of everything), but this fiasco helped make up my mind to close my account with them permanently.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I have to give Mark Coker a lot of credit for the way he's handling all of this. He's got to hate every minute of it. Here's a recent post he made to the Dear Author blog giving a little more insight into what's happening and why.

_I think the folks at PayPal are honest, honorable people, and I take what they tell me in that spirit. It doesn't mean I agree with their policies. This is what they told me, in their words, unedited: "We work with a number of acquiring banks and credit card associations as part of our business. Many of the items contained in our AUP are restricted by our banking partners, particularly rape, bestiality and incest related content. Our banking partners and credit card associations have taken a very strict stance on this subject matter. Our relationships with the banking partners are absolutely critical in order to provide the online and mobile services we do to our customers. Therefore, we have to remain in compliance with their rules, which prohibit content involving rape, bestiality or incest." _

http://dearauthor.com/features/industry-news/saturday-news-no-deals-just-stupidity-and-smashwords-concedes-to-paypal-terms#comment-353745


----------



## RubyGoodnight (Dec 9, 2011)

JoeMitchell said:


> Has anyone searched the internet to see which groups are gloating and claiming responsibility for this moral victory? Also, isn't it funny how much that sounds like terrorism?


I don't think that there's a group that has pushed Paypal to do this. They haven't dealt with 'adult' material for years, and they're probably just now getting around to the ebook market now that they've separated themselves from the majority of other adult retail (ie adult toy retailers, adult web sites, etc).


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Monique said:


> I have to give Mark Coker a lot of credit for the way he's handling all of this. He's got to hate every minute of it. Here's a recent post he made to the Dear Author blog giving a little more insight into what's happening and why.
> 
> _I think the folks at PayPal are honest, honorable people, and I take what they tell me in that spirit. It doesn't mean I agree with their policies. This is what they told me, in their words, unedited: "We work with a number of acquiring banks and credit card associations as part of our business. Many of the items contained in our AUP are restricted by our banking partners, particularly rape, bestiality and incest related content. Our banking partners and credit card associations have taken a very strict stance on this subject matter. Our relationships with the banking partners are absolutely critical in order to provide the online and mobile services we do to our customers. Therefore, we have to remain in compliance with their rules, which prohibit content involving rape, bestiality or incest." _
> 
> http://dearauthor.com/features/industry-news/saturday-news-no-deals-just-stupidity-and-smashwords-concedes-to-paypal-terms#comment-353745


Dittos...

All correspondence from Smashwords, including that signed Mark Coker, has been extremely human and decent. And, this is my feeling about Mark Coker and his company. I feel so bad for them right now. And, I wished there was some way I could support them better when Mark made the outcry about what he saw as an attempt to de-shelve books. I have changed my payment preferences there to check (despite the lousy postal delivery here - relying on the postal service is another way to end up in bankruptcy!). I was just starting to earn more substantial amounts last quarter.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Something else...

The people saying these companies have the right to do this and that are failing to understand an important precept to doing business whether with customers (buyers) or with clients (publishers) and that is* trust.* (I have a useless degree in Business to go along with my useless degree in English Lit. and this was a concept that was hammered over and over in everything from marketing to management in my courses.)

Ultimately, that's what we've got here is a breakdown of trust in PayPal, in this case. Also, in other companies like BS (my new pet name for Bookstrand) who are not forthcoming in their business dealings.

All successful transactions and business alliances, despite contracts and terms of service, rely on trust.

When there's no trust, things break down - like we've been seeing here since, at least, 2007 with the repeal of Glass-Steagall. We have money-handlers running amok committing crimes unchecked.


----------



## Steve Silkin (Sep 15, 2010)

Monique said:


> I have to give Mark Coker a lot of credit for the way he's handling all of this.


Absolutely.

I've been pondering this, though: What if they had cracked down on him harder: with wider - and less justifiable - content restrictions? I'm asking because I wonder not only what he would've done but what he _could've_ done?


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> So let me ask you all this. What happens if Paypal freezes your account and reaches into the bank account? Are they allowed to withdraw all the funds, or more than balance in the account? In other words, can they create an overdraft on your account?


Yes, they can and do. In theory, they only take what they are owed. But their TOS gives them permission to take as much as they want. So yeah, processing fees, convenience fees, usage fees, safety fees...it goes on an on. When you open and keep open an account with them and attach it to your bank account, you give them permission to take whatever they want out of your bank account. And they don't have to explain why they did it, nor do they have to give it back to you when you demand it. If you have less money in your bank account than you "owe" them according to them, they will debit you for the amount and you will be overdrawn. On top of that, if you STILL owe them after they empty your bank account, they will send your account to collections. Yep. They sure will.

I had a friend who sold 750.00 speakers on Ebay. The buyer got them, money was exchanged, no problems, deal was over. Buyer stripped the speakers, painted them PINK, and then decided she didn't want them anymore a few weeks later. Seller had taken the money out of Pay Pal and spent it. Pay Pal demanded it back. Seller said "No, she painted them pink - they are worthless now!" Pay Pal said, "Buyer, send the speakers back to seller." Buyer puts a bunch of rocks in a box and mails that back to seller with a delivery confirmation. Buyer provided DC# to Pay Pal as proof she mailed them back. Pay Pal goes into Sellers bank account, takes out all the money. Not enough to cover the refund and fees. Seller is overdrafted. Seller closes bank account and walks away p*ssed off. Pay Pal sends Seller's account to collections and she begins recieving collections call harrassment. Seller is out money, the merchandise (750.00 speakers), her credit is ruined, she has a box of rocks to show for it, and she can no longer sell on Ebay because of a buying scammer who painted the merchandise pink and decided to be a jerk. That is one of the hundreds and hundreds of horror stories I've heard.

I'm waiting for someone with really deep pockets to go after them legally. Really. I can't wait.


----------



## RubyGoodnight (Dec 9, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> So what are some alternatives to Paypal?


The more popular systems used by adult webmasters are CCBill, Paxum, Payoneer, and Moneybookers.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> I'll stand behind my belief that the companies have the right to do business as they see fit, as long as they don't discriminate (per our laws) and break those laws. Please note that I never said they shouldn't face the consequences of their actions.
> 
> I don't think I replied directly, but I want to answer this one - they start saying that, they get cancelled. As long as I'm not breaking the law with my purchases, it's none of their business. Since credit card companies are evil incarnate anyhow, IMHO, they'd be getting their just desserts.


But, taking money out of people's accounts that doesn't belong to them - on completely false pretenses? This is what Google did to me. This is what PayPal is threatening to do with Smashwords. And, I don't ever expect to see a payment from Bookstrand. This is _theft by fraud_ - an actual crime, at least, in some states.

When companies behave unethically and you peek beneath the veneer, you usually find criminal activity. Hence the loss of trust.

The problem is no one is prosecuting these people... "too big to fail."

Modifying to add this: I'm sure somebody is going to point out that it's in the contract with PayPal that they can freeze your accounts and confiscate your earnings for no reason. But, let me point this out... There is nothing prohibiting companies (namely Haliburton) from putting a clause in an employment contract saying that you can't sue if you are raped while working for them. And, congress voted to let this stand! This is wrong. And, it's wrong to have a clause saying that PayPal or Google or whoever can steal your money and even go into your attached bank account on a whim! No law or term or agreement can make it okay to commit a crime just because it was put in the fine print of a contract.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

What "real" publishers use PP as their payment system?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Monique said:


> What "real" publishers use PP as their payment system?


Plenty through retailers such as Fictionwise and others.

Paypal is used by a HUGE number of retailers. I just ordered a laptop through Best Buy and paid for it--with my Paypal account. If you are under the impression that Paypal is used only by small companies, you're simply mistaken.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Monique said:


> What "real" publishers use PP as their payment system?


Typically us non-Americans are getting offered paypal nowadays. We can still get a cheque, but if we want our money faster, paypal.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

It will be interesting to see if/when PP goes after fictionwise. It took me about 10 seconds to find father-daughter incest erotica there.


----------



## MJWare (Jun 25, 2010)

shelleyo1 said:


> They did this to me a couple of years ago--because I changed my phone number. That flagged the account as suspicious. I'd had the account for 8 or 9 years at that point. I guess terrorists change their phone numbers every decade or something.
> 
> The transfer into my bank that I initiated earlier that day, as I did every Friday for years, was reversed that night and the account locked. Unfortunately, the money that I would have had available to me by Tuesday morning was held for two weeks while we played games. I uploaded a scan of my driver's license and waited several days for them to tell me they really needed my social security card too, then several more days passed. Because times were tight then and I'd been getting out of a financial hole, I didn't have extra money. Clients paid me through Paypal, and I needed every dime yesterday. I couldn't pay bills or buy food, and was starting to fear they were never going to let me have my money. Clients kept paying, and they kept holding it.


Same thing here. I've had my account with them for over 10 years. My rep said, he'd never seen an account that old with so few chargebacks.

I also did the daily transfer, and found out, just like you, that they can revers those at will. Clients keep paying into that account, so the funds kept growing.

Every time you call them it's a different story. Paypal is just pushing smashwords around: business as usual for them.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Someone replied to my post and said that a seller has the right to choose what they sell. But this isn't a seller, it's a payment service. What if Visa and Mastercard started saying you can't buy certain things with their cards?"_

I may be the someone since I've said that several times. The same applies to PayPal. They are selling a service to vendors. They are free to deal with whomever they choose. They are not dealing with the customer. They are setting conditions for the businesses to whom they will sell their services.

The business is free to reject PayPal's offer of service. They are free to do that even if some consumer would like to use PayPal to buy from the business. We can see thousands of businesses that do not use PayPal. The busiensses have made this decision regardless of the wishes of some consumers.

Likewise, PayPal is free to withhold its services from a business. It has no obligation to provide service unless it chooses to do so. Again, they can do this regardless of what some consumers prefer.

Regarding Visa and MasterCard, the merchant accesses the Visa system through his own bank. Let's say he has a single bank for simplicity. His bank is free to sell him that service, and it is free to refrain from selling it. All the other banks in the system really have no relationship to the merchant. The merchant's bank collects from them, and they don't know what the consumer bought. (I have simplified a complex system here, but I think it correctly conveys the principle at issue.)

A merchant's bank can drop him for whatever reason it chooses. If it decides it doesn't want to deal with merchants who sell economics books, it is free to do so. The merchant is also free to drop the bank for any reason he chooses.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> I hate that term - "too big to fail". Bull hockey (and I'm not arguing with you, SS, I'm just saying a generalized "BH"). No company is too big to fail. It's the life cycle of business. I won't even mention the ridiculous bailouts that have happened recently, as we're not supposed to do politics on this board. Suffice it to say those left an unpleasant taste in my mouth and we'll leave it there.
> 
> I'm not a fan of frivolous lawsuits, but it wouldn't surprise me to see a class-action suit filed because of this. As a matter of fact, were I an erotica author who was being harmed by this, I'd possibly consider it myself. As I don't have a dog in the fight, legally speaking, I can't go there.
> 
> I find it highly suspicious that Paypal isn't going after the non-Indies. If this were an across-the-board campaign, we'd also probably be hearing a lot more about it in the news. Someone postulated that they could be starting with Indies, then planning to move on to the 'real' publishers. What if the 'real' publishers are the ones who are behind this? "Follow the money" is applicable in this situation, and perhaps - just my wondering 'aloud' here - a better fit.


I don't mean to be argumentative in the negative sense of that word, either. I only intend to present points and they are not directed at you (even though I'm quoting you, again). But, they are thoughts that your previous points have stirred in my mind. Stirring thoughts in people's minds, especially, if they can be productive to some positive outcome, in any way, is a good thing.

You say you don't have a dog in this race and I don't know what you do, so I'll definitely take your word on that.

But, anybody who publishes fiction at Smashwords has a dog in this race. Anyone, who publishes anything there, at all, does because they are endangered right now by the reckless actions of a company that has pretty much monopolized online payment processing for the past 10 to 15 years. They were the innovators as far as I know and they did a great job. But, now they are wreaking havoc on all of us - except possibly those publishing only at Amazon where PayPal is not a payment option.

Many times I have heard people (and I'm one of them) say, if I can't buy it with PayPal online, then I won't buy it. This, frequently, after being screwed over by their once-trusted credit card companies.

If you publish anything anywhere where PayPal is the payment processor, you are affected.


----------



## Christopher Bunn (Oct 26, 2010)

Issues of Paypal being tardy with releasing funds aside, their decision regarding incest, etc has nothing to do with the First Ammendment. Freedom of speech is purely a First Ammendment issue, therefore only applying to legislation enacted by Congress and, due to subsequent Supreme Court decisions, laws enacted by the states. It has nothing to do with decisions made by a business. Regardless of what special interest is in the cross hairs (erotica writers, neo-Nazis, Christians, whoever), a business has the right to discriminate in this regard. 

Businesses make business decisions based on their individual hierarchy of goods. You could call that a hierarchy of morals, and you wouldn't be off the mark. Even the most hardened atheist-CEO operates her business from a set of morals (whatever that might look like: profits over personnel, etc - these are all essentially moral decisions). To expect this kind of business decision making to always line up with one's own personal moral compass is just not realistic.

I suppose there will be instances when this means a company makes choices to ruthlessly realign a marketplace in order to destroy competition. That goes part and parcel with capitalism. It gets messy and bloody, but the alternatives of state-control are downright terrifying.

Paypal is being ruthless; I don't deny that. However, I think they're making a cold and calculated business decision, and I suspect it has nothing to do with people like Rick Santorum.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Paypal's reasoning to Smash sounds a bit dubious when you subject it to some scrutiny. Wouldn't the financial institutions that fund them be the same ones that fund the adult industry? After all, global financial infrastructure doesn't grow on trees. I assume the adult industry vendors get their money deposited into bank accounts, and VISA and Mastercard are heavily involved.

If this is the case, wouldn't it make more sense for those financial institutions to go after those adult oriented payment portals first? Sending money to the Donkey Capers website would surely raise a flag or two? And why hasn't Amazon said anything about it? They may not use Paypal but they certainly use the same financial infrastructure as Paypal. Why aren't they subject to the same pressure? And how are the multitude of pron sites that fill the internet to the brim, many with extreme content, able to move funds around? The internet was _built_ on erotica. Surely the same companies that have profited from it in the past haven't become moral crusaders and are now intent on saving the world rather than turning a profit? And if they are going all moral-crusader, surely there are more worthy causes?


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

JRHenderson said:


> Madeline, this might interest you...
> 
> http://www.warriorforum.com/main-internet-marketing-discussion-forum/284709-my-lawsuit-against-paypal.html
> 
> http://www.warriorforum.com/main-internet-marketing-discussion-forum/448226-paypal-wins-round-one-lawsuit.html


I first heard about the problem of Google AdSense at Warrior Forum (I'm a long-time member). They have done similar things to online publishers and internet marketers as what PayPal is doing. I was warned. And, I was sort of prepared, but nothing can prepare you for being totally ripped off.

Similarly, people have talked about suing Google. One person took them to small claims court because they happened to live in their jurisdiction. They won, initially, but then Google came back and challenged it and they just ended up having to pay more money to them.

The thing that is behind the "too big to fail" isn't just heaps of taxpayer money going to the bad guys, but the fact that they are bad guys who ran around secretly committing a bunch of crimes. They are insiders. And, yes - donning the tin foil hat, once again - they have buddies on the inside. That's how they get away with things the rest of us would never dream of trying. What is at work here is not the free market or any semblance of it. It is capitalism, which was that stepping stone on the way to government control of everything, bloodlessly, devised by Marx himself. The term came from "Das Kapital," - and that is not what business is about. If you studied economics in college - this is not the system you studied. Capitalism is a cartel system, run by gangsters for gangsters.

Therefore, I seriously doubt if there will ever be a class action suit or any other successful suit against them.


----------



## Decon (Feb 16, 2011)

American express banned the use of its  card for buying legalized medical marijuana. It says to protect them from possible legal issues if purchased by people from jusidictions where it is still illegal.  I can see the sense in that.

Try buying Casino chips with a credit card, never mind online gaming. Again Online gaming is illegal in America. So once again I can see the sense in that. I can also see that gamblers would be seen as high risk.

Porn of any type is banned by most cards, although some providing services seem to find a way around the system. Porn is banned in many countries by law, not just credit cards.

Another thing to remember is that bank cards and paypal are international and they have to be mindful of different laws in many different, states/countries, especially given the international nature of the internet.

If you buy anything on a card in the UK, the consumer has many rights. One is that any guarantee given on goods have to be picked up by the credit card company if the seller goes bust. They are also have to stand in the shoes of the retailer for the goods being fit for purpose and legal. You can't enforce a debt on an illegal transaction. But also you can be charged if you are a party to an illegal transaction

Just sayin'


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Decon said:


> American express banned the use of its card for buying legalized medical marijuana. It says to protect them from possible legal issues if purchased by people from jusidictions where it is still illegal. I can see the sense in that.
> 
> Try buying Casino chips with a credit card, never mind online gaming. Again Online gaming is illegal in America. So once again I can see the sense in that. I can also see that gamblers would be seen as high risk.
> 
> ...


Way to extinguishe the flames of paranoia with the water of logic *shakes fist* Curse you! We were just getting a nice head of steam up.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Decon said:


> American express banned the use of its card for buying legalized medical marijuana. It says to protect them from possible legal issues if purchased by people from jusidictions where it is still illegal. I can see the sense in that.
> 
> Try buying Casino chips with a credit card, never mind online gaming. Again Online gaming is illegal in America. So once again I can see the sense in that. I can also see that gamblers would be seen as high risk.
> 
> ...


Credit card companies don't seize the funds in your account and then clean out your bank account, either. (Unless, you really owe them money and they get a judgement against you, which is a long process.)

Paranoia is my thing - it's what has kept me a live so far. Seriously. Without some paranoia, I probably wouldn't be typing this right now because I'd be six feet under. It pays to keep your eyes open. Watch what's going on.

This is not affecting me in a direct way. The people who usually have problems with PayPal are merchants. I don't have a merchant's account and PayPal is unlikely to just outright steal money from me. But, I can still see that what they are doing to other people and their businesses is wrong. And, I can take action accordingly to help them, be in solidarity and protect myself as best I can.


----------



## Decon (Feb 16, 2011)

Merchants in the UK do get their accounts frozen by credit card companies if there appears to be something wrong with the way they are trading, and the funds in the pot held against future potential liabilities. Although I have not heard of them sacking accounts. Usually they will just debit the transaction against monies owed to you if its a fraud deal, or a one off dispute over faulty goods or none supply. But then credit card companies deal mainly with trading businesses. Obviouly, pay pal through eBay and the like have individuals who don't always trade, so it makes sense for them to have a means of clawing back a potential loss in the event of a dispute.

In the UK If they are wrong, then you can try and sue them. If the judgement slips through then you can apply for a garnashee order of which they are not notified and the order sacks their bank account to pay you.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Decon said:


> Merchants in the UK do get their accounts frozen by credit card companies if there appears to be something wrong with the way they are trading, and the funds in the pot held against future potential liabilities. Although I have not heard of them sacking accounts. Usually they will just debit the transaction against monies owed to you if its a fraud deal, or a one off dispute over faulty goods or none supply. Obviouly, pay pal through eBay and the like have individuals who don't always trade, so it makes sense for them to have a means of clawing back a potential loss in the event of a dispute.
> 
> In the UK If they are wrong, then you can try and sue them. If the judgement slips through then you can apply for a garnashee order of which they are not notified and the order sacks their bank account to pay you.


PayPal is a U.S.-based company.

The courts here don't seem interested in pursuing cases against really big players. And, just like with Google, if you look around, you'll see that innocent people have lost thousands of dollars and their entire business and who knows what else on the whim of one of these companies.

Maybe it wouldn't behave this way if it were a U.K. company. I hope so. I hate to think the whole world operates like this!


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Decon said:


> Merchants in the UK do get their accounts frozen by credit card companies if there appears to be something wrong with the way they are trading, and the funds in the pot held against future potential liabilities. Although I have not heard of them sacking accounts. Usually they will just debit the transaction against monies owed to you if its a fraud deal, or a one off dispute over faulty goods or none supply. But then credit card companies deal mainly with trading businesses. Obviouly, pay pal through eBay and the like have individuals who don't always trade, so it makes sense for them to have a means of clawing back a potential loss in the event of a dispute.
> 
> In the UK If they are wrong, then you can try and sue them. If the judgement slips through then you can apply for a garnashee order of which they are not notified and the order sacks their bank account to pay you.


Just ran into this on PayPal in U.K. while I was streaming from YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6eWzKDFqMU&feature=related

This man is apparently in the U.K. using PayPal. He seems to think there have been some successful small claims suits in the U.S., but I am doubtful because here everything is state by state and county by county. You'd have to go to PayPal headquarters' county and state to file the claim. Hard to do if they are in one state and you are in another. The man in the video says the U.K.-PayPal is headquartered in Luxembourg. He, also, says it is illegal to use PayPal outside your own country. I didn't know this. Not that I leave the country anymore since the travel problems here.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Christopher Bunn said:


> Issues of Paypal being tardy with releasing funds aside, their decision regarding incest, etc has nothing to do with the First Ammendment. *Freedom of speech is purely a First Ammendment issue, therefore only applying to legislation enacted by Congress* and, due to subsequent Supreme Court decisions, laws enacted by the states. It has nothing to do with decisions made by a business. Regardless of what special interest is in the cross hairs (erotica writers, neo-Nazis, Christians, whoever), a business has the right to discriminate in this regard.


Simply not true. Freedom of speech is an issue we writers should be concerned about, whether it's the government infringing upone the First Amendment, or businesses censoring books. While a business is within their rights to sell whatever they want, it it also within our right to complain about their actions, and take legal steps to fight it, such as boycotts or petitions, or even picketing their place of business.

There are freedom of speech issues all around the planet, in countries where they've never heard of the First Amendment. Take Canada for instance. There are people in jail in Canada because of things they've written. Should we just ignore that injustice because Canada doesn't have a First Amendment?



Christopher Bunn said:


> Paypal is being ruthless; I don't deny that. However, I think they're making a cold and calculated business decision, and I suspect it has nothing to do with people like Rick Santorum.


As far as I know, Rick Santorum hasn't voted for any legislation infringing upon anyone's freedom of speech, nor has he advocated it, or said he would do it if elected President. Not sure why he's being held up as an example. Perhaps you should point to the Leftists in Canada for a good example of those who would do that.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

swolf said:


> Simply not true. Freedom of speech is an issue we writers should be concerned about, whether it's the government infringing upone the First Amendment, or businesses censoring books. While a business is within their rights to sell whatever they want, it it also within our right to complain about their actions, and take legal steps to fight it, such as boycotts or petitions, or even picketing their place of business.


This is not a freedom of speech issue. Your local bookstore is not censoring free speech if they decide they don't want to sell incest fiction. Or any erotica fiction. Or books about llamas.

PayPal is a mechanism for moving money from one entity to another, from buyer to seller of goods and or services. PayPal doesn't have the power to keep a transaction from happening. It has no ability to keep me from buying an incest book from an author. All it can do is keep me from using PayPal itself to move money from me to the incest author.

Saying that, I still don't really get why PayPal is doing this. I can't really believe they are getting heat from banks over this stuff. I don't think we're getting the whole story.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Asher MacDonald said:


> This is not a freedom of speech issue. Your local bookstore is not censoring free speech if they decide they don't want to sell incest fiction. Or any erotica fiction.


Of course they are censoring. That's the definition of the word:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censoring



> : to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news>; also: to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>


If a bookstore refuses to sell a book because of objectional content, they are censoring that book.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Should we just ignore that injustice because Canada doesn't have a First Amendment?"_

I intend to ignore it. They seem to do pretty well. I'll devote my efforts to getting the US out of the mess it's in.

And censorship? Sure. That's part of freedom of speech. It's the freedom to exclude what we choose as well as speak what we choose.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

swolf said:


> Of course they are censoring. That's the definition of the word:
> 
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censoring
> 
> If a bookstore refuses to sell a book because of objectional content, they are censoring that book.


About 10 years ago, I would have agreed with Asher - only the government can truly censor.

But, it is clear that we are moving toward a fascist system wherein the government wields power through a company, which you are essentially forced to use if you want to do business. In this case, that would be PayPal.

It is censorship in the truest form, if you dare, like little Toto, to pull back the curtain and see the man standing behind it.


----------



## Kevis Hendrickson (Feb 28, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"Should we just ignore that injustice because Canada doesn't have a First Amendment?"_
> 
> I intend to ignore it. They seem to do pretty well. I'll devote my efforts to getting the US out of the mess it's in.
> 
> And censorship? Sure. That's part of freedom of speech.* It's the freedom to exclude what we choose as well as speak what we choose.*


Still looking for that standing ovation button. Where's Betsy?


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

I just further sanitized one of my stories... the one I was most worried about is the one about the spousally abused wife.  It wasn't very graphic to begin with, but I just went back and made it less so.  I, also, pulled a book with the word "erotic" in the title from everywhere, including Amazon.  This after I re-shelved them all to get them out of the erotica category.  I deleted another that I thought someone might - might - be offended by.  

Yes. I'm paranoid.  But, like I said, I'm still alive.

I put those stories in erotica categories originally because I thought they might sell better there.  But, now I think they're going to go into horror and paranormal romance categories, which is what they really are.  They're mostly character driven and a few of them have gimmicky hooks, which I like.  Maybe they'll do better there... maybe PayPal is doing me a favor in a round about way by scaring me into doing something else with them.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

I think what people are missing... is that we are moving into a purely electronic age. This in turn is putting the power of the currency, not in the hands of goverment, but in the hands of business. 

Businesses can now decide who's allowed to trade, and who isn't. If PayPal says you aren't invited to the party, then you're out. And good luck finding another payment processor. If MC and Visa say you're out.. then you're done. 

Entire businesses can now be easily bullied into compliance without any need of a court of law. 

This is where we are heading, and there's no real way to stop it.  That's the danger I see in this.


----------



## Kevis Hendrickson (Feb 28, 2009)

Vicky Foxx said:


> I think what people are missing... is that we are moving into a purely electronic age. This in turn is putting the power of the currency, not in the hands of goverment, but in the hands of business.
> 
> Businesses can now decide who's allowed to trade, and who isn't. If PayPal says you aren't invited to the party, then you're out. And good luck finding another payment processor. If MC and Visa say you're out.. then you're done.
> 
> ...


Not so long ago, before books went digital, the Big Six and bookstores decided who got to attend the dance. Is it any different now? Or did the Johnny Come Lately's to the ebook free-for-all fiesta actually think that there wouldn't be a downside to epublishing? Did the flag-waving, "I hate traditional publishing" army of indie authors think it would be all peachy now that you could cut out the middle man and upload your books at the click of a button? Every author selling their book at someone else's book store is only doing so because it benefits that business to put your name up in neon lights in thier catalog. If they want to kick you out of the party, they can do so. And guess what? They don't owe you a reason. You don't have to like it. But since none of us control the mechanisms that allow us to sell our books, no one should take it for granted that we are all subject to the whim of a major corporation. It's always been that way. ALWAYS. No amount of hand-holding, indie flag-waving, American bashing, first amendment quoting, will change that.

Again, you don't have to like it. You can all boycott, picket, and scream bloody murder until your heart is content. But contrary to that "ebooks are forever" crap that your favorite blogger spouts, you only get to attend the dance if the powers that be say so. That, my friends, you can take that to the bank.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Vicky Foxx said:


> I think what people are missing... is that we are moving into a purely electronic age. This in turn is putting the power of the currency, not in the hands of goverment, but in the hands of business.
> 
> Businesses can now decide who's allowed to trade, and who isn't. If PayPal says you aren't invited to the party, then you're out. And good luck finding another payment processor. If MC and Visa say you're out.. then you're done.
> 
> ...


How is this any different from ever?


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"Should we just ignore that injustice because Canada doesn't have a First Amendment?"_
> 
> I intend to ignore it. They seem to do pretty well. I'll devote my efforts to getting the US out of the mess it's in.


Yeah, in Canada you can go to jail for writing something the goverment deems inappropriate. And, as an author, you call that 'doing pretty well?' Seriously?



Terrence OBrien said:


> And censorship? Sure. That's part of freedom of speech. It's the freedom to exclude what we choose as well as speak what we choose.


And censorship is part of freedom of speech? Wow. That's scary.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

And yet, today I sold many books across many platforms and, judging by the sales charts, I was not alone. The world of epublishing has not fallen into the abyss, Amazon still irks everyone, and Smashwords has yet to fold. One fourth rate online bookstore banning indie books does not mean the end is nigh for digital publishing, and even if paypal bans all erotica transactions, the rest of the fledgling industry will continue to grow. And even if there was a total ban by Paypal, there are other online payment portals that online bookshops can use to sell erotic literature if there is a demand for it. 

The most dissappointing aspect of all this rubbish is that it gives Amazon, Apple, and B&N a boost at the expense of the smaller retailers.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

swolf said:


> And censorship is part of freedom of speech? Wow. That's scary.


I tend to think of censorship as banning something, not suppressing it.

And I'm certainly not happy about what PayPal is doing, but labeling it as censorship seems to me the wrong word choice.

Anyway, if you define censorship as choosing not to sell something, then there are a lot of bookstores exercising censorship.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_'Yeah, in Canada you can go to jail for writing something the goverment deems inappropriate. And, as an author, you call that 'doing pretty well?' Seriously?"_

I would never speak as an author. I couldn't stop laughing if I tried. As myself, I observe the Canadians are doing very well, better than the US in the current economic mess. And in terms of efficient allocations of resources, I'll let the Canadians take care of their own problems, while I do my part to take care of ours.

_"And censorship is part of freedom of speech? Wow. That's scary."_

The entire notion of free speech is scary to many folks. It's a relatively new concept in historical terms, and hardly enjoys universal acceptance.

Free speech essentially allows one to express himself as he chooses on the subjects he chooses. That includes remaining quiet. It allows one to distribute material and advocate for the ideas one chooses. It also allows one to refrain from distributing materials and advocating for ideas. When speech is forced, it is not free.

That's why refraining from distributing books falls under free speech. If one chooses to apply the label "censorship" to refraining from distributing*, then we can say censorship falls under free speech. There is nothing at all scary about the right to choose what books one distributes.

[*"If a bookstore refuses to sell a book because of objectional content, they are censoring that book." - SWolf]


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

I'd suggest that censorship is the proper word, and that this PayPal example is a more powerful form of it than government censorship.

Think about it:

A school board can censor access to books it deems unfit... within the school library.

A state government can enact censorship within the boundaries of that state. (Oregon, for instance.)

A national (federal, in the case of the US) government can censor within its national boundaries.

But what PayPal is doing? As a private company? They're global. And they've just restricted the ability of their customers to buy books of their own choice on a global scale. Anywhere PayPal is used. Smashwords has customers around the globe who now have access to fewer choices.

Who cares if those choices are ones we ourselves would like or not?

The point is, this is a form of censorship that goes beyond even government boundaries. A company like PayPal makes a decision, and the entire world loses access to whatever PayPal deems unfit. (At least, not via Smashwords, ARe or BookStrand, and whoever else they've bullied.)

Not even the US can do that.

Not even the British Empire, at the height of its greatness, could pull that off.

This is censorship with a global impact. A form of censorship beyond the influence of governments, which is why political targets are pointless.

No one passed a law to make this happen; a board of unelected directors, accountable only to PayPal stockholders (if it's a public company...it may not be), made a decision and the entire world's access is cut off.

PayPal is the bad guy here.

Therefore, it shouldn't matter if they are targeting stuff you write or not; the stuff you write could be next, and that's reason enough to be concerned.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Realistically speaking, what I write won't be next. Neither will be anything you write. Or anything else.

Paypal isn't threatening vendors over moral reasons. They're threatening vendors over financial reasons. Paranormal romance, sci-fi, thrillers, horror, whatever--dealing in those things is not a threat to Paypal's bottom line. They don't care about the content they're going after because they find it squicky. They're going after it because it risks their profits.

I don't like Paypal's decision. I don't like the way they're treating their business partners. But I'm not afraid of any slippery slope. If Paypal decided to throw up their hands and say whee! all the way to the bottom, the bottom is exactly where they'll end up.


----------



## Vera Nazarian (Jul 1, 2011)

B. Justin Shier said:


> This is crucial. Do not tie Paypal to your main checking account. Paypal has been known to extract money out of a bank account tied to a Paypal account. In the past, they did this by piggybacking sums out of the account on unrelated transactions.
> 
> B.


I am somewhat confused on how that would work, as in, under what circumstances?

When and how can they legitimately remove money from your bank that is not theirs?

Also, are we talking about some kind of penalty fees, or actual large amounts pulled directly out of your checking an not authorized by you?

*concerned*

**edited to add*
*
Never mind.

I read the rest of the comments, and wow, that's scary stuff.


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals (Feb 21, 2012)

> Paypal isn't threatening vendors over moral reasons. They're threatening vendors over financial reasons. Paranormal romance, sci-fi, thrillers, horror, whatever--dealing in those things is not a threat to Paypal's bottom line. They don't care about the content they're going after because they find it squicky. They're going after it because it risks their profits.


How does it risk their profits?


----------



## RubyGoodnight (Dec 9, 2011)

Katie Elle said:


> How does it risk their profits?


Adult material in general is risky for companies like Paypal. While we don't lump ebooks and porn in the same kettle, Paypal does. That kettle is risky for them since there is a higher percentage of fraudulent transactions associated with that line of purchases. Dealing with those transactions costs them money, which in turn lowers their profits.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> They don't care about the content they're going after because they find it squicky. They're going after it because it risks their profits.





RubyGoodnight said:


> Adult material in general is risky for companies like Paypal. While we don't lump ebooks and porn in the same kettle, Paypal does. That kettle is risky for them since there is a higher percentage of fraudulent transactions associated with that line of purchases. Dealing with those transactions costs them money, which in turn lowers their profits.


A lot of people are saying this, but I don't think it's correct. If that were true, they'd most likely want the removal of all erotic material, not just a few niche topics, particularly when one of those topics is one of the best-selling niches in erotica.


----------



## RubyGoodnight (Dec 9, 2011)

shelleyo1 said:


> A lot of people are saying this, but I don't think it's correct. If that were true, they'd most likely want the removal of all erotic material, not just a few niche topics, particularly when one of those topics is one of the best-selling niches in erotica.


I think that's on the way. They just started with the 'most objectionable', since it posts the highest risk (in Paypal's eyes).


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals (Feb 21, 2012)

RubyGoodnight said:


> Adult material in general is risky for companies like Paypal. While we don't lump ebooks and porn in the same kettle, Paypal does. That kettle is risky for them since there is a higher percentage of fraudulent transactions associated with that line of purchases. Dealing with those transactions costs them money, which in turn lowers their profits.


But they're not refusing to deal with erotica, they're picking and choosing which specific themes in erotica they are willing to process billing for. That doesn't jibe with it being a chargeback issue.

Also, I've read at least one person who was dealing direct (Selena Kitt?) who said that the chargeback rate was not high.


----------



## RubyGoodnight (Dec 9, 2011)

Katie Elle said:


> But they're not refusing to deal with erotica, they're picking and choosing which specific themes in erotica they are willing to process billing for. That doesn't jibe with it being a chargeback issue.
> 
> Also, I've read at least one person who was dealing direct (Selena Kitt?) who said that the chargeback rate was not high.


Well, I do think erotica as a whole being banned isn't far down the line. They don't deal with any types of adult material, and I'm very surprised this hasn't happened earlier.

I don't think erotica ebooks have a high chargeback rate - I know adult material as a whole does. Paypal doesn't seem to want to make the distinction between ebooks and any other forms of adult entertainment. It's overgeneralizing on their part, but that's what big companies like Paypal like to do.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

swolf said:


> Yeah, in Canada you can go to jail for writing something the goverment deems inappropriate. And, as an author, you call that 'doing pretty well?' Seriously?


Hooboy. Americans are pretty danged funny. *bites tongue til it BLEEDS*


RubyGoodnight said:


> Well, I do think erotica as a whole being banned isn't far down the line. They don't deal with any types of adult material, and I'm very surprised this hasn't happened earlier.
> 
> I don't think erotica ebooks have a high chargeback rate - I know adult material as a whole does. Paypal doesn't seem to want to make the distinction between ebooks and any other forms of adult entertainment. It's overgeneralizing on their part, but that's what big companies like Paypal like to do.


I seriously doubt it and I won't believe it until I see Paypal do the same thing on eBay.

It is very noticeable that this attack on erotica isn't coming from the CC companies. It is coming from a company that has a stake in the game.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I'm pretty sure bleeding is against Forum Decorum...let me check...I know it's here somewhere...










Betsy


----------



## PAWilson (Jan 9, 2012)

NathanWrann said:


> PayPal can't "require" Smashwords to do anything.


The letter explains the 'require'. Paypay is integrated into the Smashwords system. It's how they pay their authors. If Smashwords refuses to comply, Paypal will shut down the account and no one gets paid. So, Smashwords choice is to comply or stop business until they can untangle paypal and make another payment option.

It's time for a paypal competitor, I think.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I'm pretty sure bleeding is against Forum Decorum...let me check...I know it's here somewhere...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ha ha. Is that Kerouac's novel? I know he wrote one on paper like that.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

RubyGoodnight said:


> Adult material in general is risky for companies like Paypal. While we don't lump ebooks and porn in the same kettle, Paypal does. That kettle is risky for them since there is a higher percentage of fraudulent transactions associated with that line of purchases. Dealing with those transactions costs them money, which in turn lowers their profits.


Interestingly, though (and I mentioned this in a previous post, but this thread is now so long it would be easy to miss) the only charge back issue I've had at Smashwords involved someone using a stolen credit card. This occurred in the last week or two. (By the way this bit of information connects well to what people were saying about having their PayPal accounts flagged or frozen. Apparently, PayPal blames the vendor in cases where a criminal uses a stolen credit card to make a purchase on his site.)

And, although I have almost as many erotica titles as I do Health and New Age, it was a Health book - not an erotica or even a fiction title - that was involved in the theft. So, there was a very nice e-mail to me and others affected by Smashwords, which explained the situation and that they were having to refund money to the wronged party.

This is the only charge back I've had at Smashwords in the year or so I've been using them.

I don't buy the excessive charge back excuse in light of the evidence against this theory.

I don't even think its about money as much as its about power. Criminal minds think like that; normal ones don't, so it's hard to grasp until you've been victimized a few times. It's all about exercising power over another person. And, that is what PayPal is doing. If they succeed, they get Mark's family's money, your money, my money and they've destroyed his business. Worst case scenario... but, possible.

Even though money (a symbol of power) is involved, it's still about power.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

RubyGoodnight said:


> I think that's on the way. They just started with the 'most objectionable', since it posts the highest risk (in Paypal's eyes).


But we can still buy video pron and sex toys with Paypal...why only ban erotic fiction?

I agree with what others have said, until Ebay takes down their pron, this really isn't about the pron. I continue to believe it's a market share grab.

M


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Scarlet Scrivener said:


> Interestingly, though (and I mentioned this in a previous post, but this thread is now so long it would be easy to miss) the only charge back issue I've had at Smashwords involved someone using a stolen credit card. This occurred in the last week or two. (By the way this bit of information connects well to what people were saying about having their PayPal accounts flagged or frozen. Apparently, PayPal blames the vendor in cases where a criminal uses a stolen credit card to make a purchase on his site.)
> 
> And, although I have almost as many erotica titles as I do Health and New Age, it was a Health book - not an erotica or even a fiction title that - was involved in the theft. So, there was a very nice e-mail to me and others affected by Smashwords, which explained the situation and that they were having to refund money to the wronged party.
> 
> ...


I agree, very much. It's no different than the BS I saw in corporate America. Like I've said elsewhere:

At my previous employer, Warren Buffet was on our Board of Directors. You bet my CEO had a direct line if he needed to talk. That's how big business operates, top down. All it would take is a few emails between power players and voila! shut down indies operation is underway. Erotica is just the foot in the door, the weak ***** in our armor, the genre no one will defend, so it falls first.

Indies have been very disruptive to business-as-usual and with romance/erotica being such big selling genres, successful indies were probably taking too big a bite of the pie--especially on small retailer sites. I am sure we've been the subject of many high level mgmt conversations and if they started looking at the books that made the best seller lists (which was a lot of Woody Allen/Adopted Daughter type incest) that was all the ammunition they needed.

We are likely victims of our success.

This is a power grab, it's a market share fight--it is not about the sex, that's just the excuse.

M


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Tin foil hats for sale! Get your tin foil hats for sale!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I don't believe there's any tin in tin foil any more....it's a conspiracy to make them ineffective.


Betsy


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> Tin foil hats for sale! Get your tin foil hats for sale!


I wish it really were a tin foil hat situation. But, what the previous poster described is very much how big corporations (corporate fascism is really a redundancy) the size of PayPal, Google and others work. It's, also, how laws and such that affect how companies do business or whether they even get to do business is decided. Unfortunately, I have too much real world experience with some things to be able to go back to my _happy place_.

Modified to say: I see the poster is in Canada. So, I wanted to add that things might be different where you are. I hope so. But, I can think of examples here in my state of what I'm talking about. I've been legislated out of a previous business because somebody somewhere was trying to make a name for himself or pander to big companies with more power than the little guys. This is how capitalism works and this is why people who have looked at the subject a little deeper say capitalism is a bad thing that has been sold to the public as something else, something it isn't. It is an imposter. And, it is posing as the free market system, which does not exist - at least, in the U.S.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"The point is, this is a form of censorship that goes beyond even government boundaries. A company like PayPal makes a decision, and the entire world loses access to whatever PayPal deems unfit. (At least, not via Smashwords, ARe or BookStrand, and whoever else they've bullied.)"_

Isn't it pretty big leap from Smashwords to the world? On a more local scale, the Walgreens a few blocks away reduced its book offerings from about 100 to 25. They never did take PayPal at the register. More censorship? And the B&N a few miles away has booted hundreds of books in favor of jigsaw puzzles of baby turtles. Even more censorship?


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Isn't it pretty big leap from Smashwords to the world? On a more local scale, the Walgreens a few blocks away reduced its book offerings from about 100 to 25. They never did take PayPal. More censorship?


Yup.

In all of this, I don't see anyone telling incest authors that they cannot write their work. I don't see anyone telling bestiality authors they cannot write their work. What I see is businesses making decisions. Nothing more. Nothing less.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I don't believe there's any tin in tin foil any more....it's a conspiracy to make them ineffective.
> 
> 
> Betsy


Aluminium hats for sale! Get your aluminium hats!


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"The point is, this is a form of censorship that goes beyond even government boundaries. A company like PayPal makes a decision, and the entire world loses access to whatever PayPal deems unfit. (At least, not via Smashwords, ARe or BookStrand, and whoever else they've bullied.)"_
> 
> Isn't it pretty big leap from Smashwords to the world? On a more local scale, the Walgreens a few blocks away reduced its book offerings from about 100 to 25. They never did take PayPal. More censorship?


The difference (and it's not a small one) that makes what a government can do ten thousand times worse than what PayPal can do, is that when PP says you can't do this - they mean you can't do this with PP; you can still do it, just not using PP. When a government says it, it means you can't do it. At. All. Saying what PP is doing is worse than what a govt can do is pretty disingenuous.


----------



## Susan Spence (Feb 26, 2012)

Even though I don't write in the now banned genres, I am concerned about what paypal is pulling.

Mark Coker needs to stand up for himself. If, as a business owner, you find an employee stealing, not doing their job or whatever, do you continue letting it happen? No, you fire the employee. If you have a cancerous tumor, do you let it grow? No, you cut it out.

I had a bad experience with paypal and do not trust them at all. Given what they are now doing, I am considering removing my book from Smashwords. I don't want to as I like what Mark Coker is doing, but I don't care to deal with paypal.

There are other ways to distribute royalties. Switching over will take work and it may disrupt things for a while, but in the end Smashwords will be stronger for it.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> Yup.
> 
> In all of this, I don't see anyone telling incest authors that they cannot write their work. I don't see anyone telling bestiality authors they cannot write their work. What I see is businesses making decisions. Nothing more. Nothing less.


I agree.

However, it is a perfectly VALID question why this particular company is making this particular decision affecting certain booksellers but not others. Of course it's a business decision. Now who will it help and who will it hurt and who will make a profit on it? And is Paypal OWNED by one of the companies involved? Hmmm.... *ponder ponder*

(Edit: Now some people might consider one corporation undercutting another conspiracy, but in the real world it's business as usual  )

And you're a Canadian. Why aren't you in jail? Hie you off to jail with the rest of the oppressed Canadians.

*pretends not to be bleeding* Who me? I wasn't biting my tongue. Really!


Susan Spence said:


> Even though I don't write in the now banned genres, I am concerned about what paypal is pulling.
> 
> Mark Coker needs to stand up for himself. If, as a business owner, you find an employee stealing, not doing their job or whatever, do you continue letting it happen? No, you fire the employee. If you have a cancerous tumor, do you let it grow? No, you cut it out.
> 
> ...


I am also concerned because I know how easily this can spread to other sub-genre and God knows I've complained enough about the classification of LGBT lit.

However, we don't even know that Smashwords can afford the hours of work they'd have to spend and for companies fees are involved--often large upfront fees--in gaining a new FI to handle online banking transactions. (You have NO IDEA how large the fees are that your bank pays for those online services you use, for example)

I don't think we can know the reasons for Coker's decisions without knowing a lot more about the situation in the company. Unlike many, I'm not a huge Mark Coker fan but I see reason to think he'd change if it were a practical possibility. It probably isn't in the short term.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> However, we don't even know that Smashwords can afford the hours of work they'd have to spend and for companies fees are involved--often large upfront fees--in gaining a new FI to handle online banking transactions. (You have NO IDEA how large the fees are that your bank pays for those online services you use, for example)
> 
> I don't think we can know the reasons for Coker's decisions without knowing a lot more about the situation in the company. Unlike many, I'm not a huge Mark Coker fan but I see reason to think he'd change if it were a practical possibility. It probably isn't in the short term.


Yes. He mentions this in his e-mail:

_You might wonder if Smashwords should simply switch to a different payment provider.
It's not so easy. PayPal is designed into the wiring of the Smashwords platform.
They run the credit card processing for our retail store, and they're how we
pay our authors and publishers. PayPal is also an extremely popular, trusted
payment option for our customers. It is not feasible for us to simply switch
to another provider, should such a suitable provider even exist, especially with
so few days notice._


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

The beauty in all of this is that no one has made it illegal to write or sell these types of erotica. You (whoever you are) are free to create a website and sell it. I think you'll find the issues Mark is dealing with are not so easily overcome, but they can be. 

Go for it.


----------



## RubyRoyce (Feb 25, 2012)

So, Pay Pal would not be willing to do any transactions on extremely explicit works, featuring rape, incest etc. so they would not want to earn any money on George R. R. Martin or Philip Roth or Bret Easton Ellis (just the first who came into my mind)


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Monique said:


> The beauty in all of this is that no one has made it illegal to write or sell these types of erotica. You (whoever you are) are free to create a website and sell it. I think you'll find the issues Mark is dealing with are not so easily overcome, but they can be.
> 
> Go for it.


100% behind that.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Monique said:


> The beauty in all of this is that no one has made it illegal to write or sell these types of erotica. You (whoever you are) are free to create a website and sell it. I think you'll find the issues Mark is dealing with are not so easily overcome, but they can be.
> 
> Go for it.


And, how are you supposed to take payment - PayPal? Then, they'll be going into your bank account. No, thanks! I used to sell books from my web site with PayPal, but now that I see what they're doing to people there is no way I would risk it. Furthermore, you don't make nearly as many sales as a larger, older site (that's how the search engines are set up) and it takes about six months of hard internet marketing even to get noticed.

There are other alternatives, but no large numbers of people are using them or the are too expensive for an upstart to deploy.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

RubyRoyce said:


> So, Pay Pal would not be willing to do any transactions on extremely explicit works, featuring rape, incest etc. so they would not want to earn any money on George R. R. Martin or Philip Roth or Bret Easton Ellis (just the first who came into my mind)


You are not understanding the issue.

This is concerning _erotica_, not fantasy, science fiction, or books written two centuries ago.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Eric Cartman is behind PayPal.


----------



## Andre Jute (Dec 18, 2010)

*Is the Paypal/Smashwords "banning" of rape, incest and bestiality censorship?
*
Any publisher can choose what he prefers to publish, or not to publish. I've read the mail from Smashwords on this (for some reason Mark Coker didn't send me a copy of his round robin letter, and I had to read it on a blog advertised on Indie Authors International) and to me it sounds like Smashwords is relieved to be able to make the decision once and for all, and to blame it on Paypal.

Now, everyone knows that I'm absolutely the maximum champion of freedom of speech, the one indivisible liberty, that I gave up a perfectly good motherland, and a seven-figure income, and the security of my family, for the principle of free speech.

But this light breeze in a chamberpot isn't about freedom of speech. Nobody is stopping anyone from publishing smut with their own skills, their own investment and at their own risk.

What this is, instead, is a commercial money collator, Paypal, deciding that they are vulnerable to action by political pressure in the global village, and therefore they will no longer extend their service to publishers of the more questionable strands of smut. Such publishers are free to use another collator.

It just happens that Smashwords is so integrated with Paypal, they'd fall down flat without Paypal.

Smashwords effectively had to choose between a few of the more extreme smut merchants and survival. They chose to meet their promise to the 99% of their clients. It's clearly the only practicable course, and it wouldn't be difficult to make a case for it as the principled choice.

Next we'll hear a lot of rubbish about great literature being suppressed. We can expose that instantly by simply asking who is making that silly case, and evaluating their work on the smut-literature scale. If we find any worthwhile writers, qua writers, I'll you know. Don't hold your breath. We should be a little careful here. My contempt for the writers of smut doesn't mean that in a case where they were genuinely deprived of free speech I would not stand up for them (I've stood up for the free speech of far less appetising people because it is always the principle that matters); it merely means that this isn't that occasion.

Or we can look at the history of literature and ask them to supply us with a single work of literature that was actually, provably, suppressed for erotic content. They can't provide one. (The one good book notoriously suppressed for decades, Scenes From Provincial Life by William Cooper, was suppressed by fear of British libel laws, nothing whatsoever to do with erotica.)

It's nonsense to think for a moment that this Paypal/Smashwords alteration in the terms of service to exclude books of titillation about rape, incest and bestiality is censorship. For censorship to appear here, restraint of trade must first be proved. It can't be, not in this or any other similar case. Paypal and Smashwords don't say, "You have no right to publish," they simply say, "Do you mind publishing elsewhere." That's their inalienable right. They don't owe anyone publication.

Case dismissed.

[reprinted from Andre Jute's blog Kissing the Blarney]


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Scarlet Scrivener said:


> And, how are you supposed to take payment - PayPal? Then, they'll be going into your bank account. No, thanks! I used to sell books from my web site with PayPal, but now that I see what they're doing to people there is no way I would risk it. Furthermore, you don't make nearly as many sales as a larger, older site (that's how the search engines are set up) and it takes about six months of hard internet marketing even to get noticed.
> 
> There are other alternatives, but no large numbers of people are using them or the are too expensive for an upstart to deploy.


Well, no, obviously you can't use PayPal. I mean, that is the crux of all this. But there are other payment processors. The fact that they're more expensive is not relevant. You'll just make a little less money. That's what people expect Mark to do, isn't it?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> You are not understanding the issue.
> 
> This is concerning _erotica_, not fantasy, science fiction, or books written two centuries ago.


Problem solved!

Just call the book with explicit sex scenes involving a 14-year-old girl fantasy and you're all set. 

I always knew Martin was a smart man.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Monique said:


> Well, no, obviously you can't use PayPal. I mean, that is the crux of all this. But there are other payment processors. The fact that they're more expensive is not relevant. You'll just make a little less money. That's what people expect Mark to do, isn't it?


The point is that your proposal is not practical for the average independent, at least, not this one. I used to have a small business and it isn't a breeze trying to get a payment processor. Now, double your trouble for integrating it into the shopping cart of your online store.

Reality... it's a - well, you know.

Modified to add: Furthermore, if you are selling the really bad smut and if you believe the BS (Bookstrand), then their credit card processor was objecting to it, as well.

You can put a web site and try to get Google AdSense advertising traffic, but you know what? - they'll shut you down on their end, too, because it's against their TOS. It really is.


----------



## RubyRoyce (Feb 25, 2012)

Krista D. Ball said:


> You are not understanding the issue.
> 
> This is concerning _erotica_, not fantasy, science fiction, or books written two centuries ago.


I only wanted to point out the double standard. 
If in a Mega-bestseller a brother doodled his sister in all detail it's fine to everybody gaining money on it.
If I wrote it in a little Indie Sex Short Story, it would not. According to PayPal


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> Problem solved!
> 
> Just call the book with explicit sex scenes involving a 14-year-old girl fantasy and you're all set.
> 
> I always knew Martin was a smart man.


I know you're just being a snot now 

But for those who don't know, Martin doesn't write erotica because the driving force of the novel (aka the plot, the theme, the whatever) is not about the sexual relationship, sexual development, or sexual arousal.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Andre Jute said:


> My contempt for the writers of smut


*sigh*

If I said "my contempt for writers of literary/fantasy/science/adventure/horror fiction," wouldn't that be silly and offensive? I would never paint a large group of writers with such a broad brush.

I write in a variety of genres, but based on my erotic fiction you have contempt for me. I'm sorry about that.


----------



## RubyRoyce (Feb 25, 2012)

Krista D. Ball said:


> I know you're just being a snot now
> 
> But for those who don't know, Martin doesn't write erotica because the driving force of the novel (aka the plot, the theme, the whatever) is not about the sexual relationship, sexual development, or sexual arousal.


Although one might get the impression that he does...


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

RubyRoyce said:


> I only wanted to point out the double standard.
> If in a Mega-bestseller a brother doodled his sister in all detail it's fine to everybody gaining money on it.
> If I wrote it in a little Indie Sex Short Story, it would not. According to PayPal


It isn't a double standard. A fantasy with explicit sex scenes does not make it an erotica. Nor does an erotica with pointy-eared elves make it fantasy.

Genre > subgenre rules do apply in this care, rather strongly.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Krista D. Ball said:


> It isn't a double standard. A fantasy with explicit sex scenes does not make it an erotica. Nor does an erotica with pointy-eared elves make it fantasy.
> 
> Genre > subgenre rules do apply in this care, rather strongly.


Still, Martin uses the techniques of erotica, and in those sections is writing with the same aims as erotica, but since _most_ of his book is about other things, it's all cool.

I'm not saying the genre distinction isn't huge and self-evident, but on some level, it does get kind of arbitrary.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> You are not understanding the issue.
> 
> This is concerning _erotica_, not fantasy, science fiction, or books written two centuries ago.


Isn't that kind of sad?

But also, I would not count on it just being erotica.

M


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Scarlet Scrivener said:


> The point is that your proposal is not practical for the average independent, at least, not this one. I used to have a small business and it isn't a breeze trying to get a payment processor. Now, double your trouble for integrating it into the shopping cart of your online store.
> 
> Reality... it's a - well, you know.
> 
> Modified to add: Furthermore, if you are selling the really bad smut and if you believe the BS (Bookstrand), then their credit card processor was objecting to it, as well.


No one said it was going to be easy.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"The point is, this is a form of censorship that goes beyond even government boundaries. A company like PayPal makes a decision, and the entire world loses access to whatever PayPal deems unfit. (At least, not via Smashwords, ARe or BookStrand, and whoever else they've bullied.)"_
> 
> Isn't it pretty big leap from Smashwords to the world? On a more local scale, the Walgreens a few blocks away reduced its book offerings from about 100 to 25. They never did take PayPal at the register. More censorship? And the B&N a few miles away has booted hundreds of books in favor of jigsaw puzzles of baby turtles. Even more censorship?


You do understand this involves more than one retailer? At last count, I believe we are up to 4 that have had to shut down indie erotica (not traditionally published erotica, mind you, just indies).

B&N uses paypal--they may decide to get rid of the indies too and then that will leave just Amazon.

M


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

shelleyo1 said:


> *sigh*
> 
> If I said "my contempt for writers of literary/fantasy/science/adventure/horror fiction," wouldn't that be silly and offensive? I would never paint a large group of writers with such a broad brush.
> 
> I write in a variety of genres, but based on my erotic fiction you have contempt for me. I'm sorry about that.


I don't understand the contempt, either. But, I'm a woman and I've gotten used to it.

It has to come from a lack of education about the genre, which is broad. The historical erotica, in my opinion, is very valuable because it gives us an insight into things that we wouldn't ordinarily get from the 18th or 19th century.

Some of it is written very well and as I've gone back over some of my stories and tried to "sanitize" them further, I am finding more creative ways to _not say _something that I'm saying. And, that is really an art.

I have one piece that I wrote pretty much as an exercise in writing erotica because when it's good, it does seem to follow a pattern or a formula. It's literature. It's part of the human experience as much as anything else in life. It can be beautiful or ugly. It can be done well or it can be done badly. I've seen a lot I thought was done badly, but no more than any other genre.

I don't understand the contempt, but it seems to go hand in hand with lack of education.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> I know you're just being a snot now
> 
> But for those who don't know, Martin doesn't write erotica because the driving force of the novel (aka the plot, the theme, the whatever) is not about the sexual relationship, sexual development, or sexual arousal.


Well, yes, I was being a snot but there is still double standard that if it is LABELED erotica and has that element it's verboten but if it isn't labelled that and has the exact same element, it's not.

I'm sorry but this just doesn't make sense. Then again, I happen to think that puritanism rarely makes sense.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Andre Jute said:


> *Is the Paypal/Smashwords "banning" of rape, incest and bestiality censorship?
> *
> Any publisher can choose what he prefers to publish, or not to publish. I've read the mail from Smashwords on this (for some reason Mark Coker didn't send me a copy of his round robin letter, and I had to read it on a blog advertised on Indie Authors International) and to me it sounds like Smashwords is relieved to be able to make the decision once and for all, and to blame it on Paypal.
> 
> ...


I find these arguments sort of useless because they essentially tell people to 'sit down and shut up' which is not really helpful.

Further, the danger with this situation is that the buzzwords are used at face value by Paypal to push their agenda.

Incest that was being published was primarily Woody Allen and his adopted daughter incest. That is not illegal.

Rape was defined as equivalent to BDSM by Paypal. BDSM is not illegal either and it is not rape.

Bestiality--I don't actually know of any books that crossed that line, so why is it even brought up? Oh right, to make sure no one will think Paypal is doing anything wrong.

Underage--(not in your post, but another charged buzzword used in this situation) There were no underage erotica stories, but there were 18 and 19-year-olds in erotic fiction. Legal in real life but banned in indie fiction.

These buzzwords may be distasteful to some (although given the best selling status of the pseudo incest genre, apparently we all want to sleep with our Stepdaddies) but they aren't illegal.

It doesn't bother you that Paypal's parent company sells some of the same books they've banned on other sites? You don't think that's off? At all?

It's not strange to you that traditionally published books with overt incest are still being sold on sites that banned Indie erotica?

That sites deleted their entire indie catalog, across all genres?

At what point would you think any of this is off? When they're burning the books? Seizing accounts? Banning all indie erotica? Driving small retailers out of business and shrinking opportunity for all indies?

M


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> It isn't a double standard. A fantasy with explicit sex scenes does not make it an erotica. Nor does an erotica with pointy-eared elves make it fantasy.
> 
> Genre > subgenre rules do apply in this care, rather strongly.


That rather is not the point. Yes, they are different genres, however:

Sex with an underage minor in non-erotica is good.

Sex with an underage minor in erotica is bad.

That, my dears, is a double standard.

However, I suspect that is not the primary purpose of the whole endeavor on the part of Paypal. They don't care what is good or bad. They may pretend to but all they care about is their own bottom line and I do NOT mean that in a sexual context. ROFL (ok, gay joke--you quite have my permission to ignore that)


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

The trad publisher conspiracy theory doesn't make sense because it's not Smash or ARe or BS that's the problem for the publishers. It's Amazon and Apple. This whole thing smells of a poorly implemented, half-hearted attempt at creating a squeaky clean corporate image ala Apple. The difference is that Apple has competent(sp?) people all throughout their organisation while Paypal doesn't.


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals (Feb 21, 2012)

Saying people can in some theoretical way publish elsewhere if they want to publish incest or bestiality is not of any particular comfort to me. I don't publish incest stories, nor pseudo-incest, nor beastiality. However, I lost about 20% of my sales when Bookstrand removed indies from their website. And that is a company that not only accepted incest stories quite gleefully, but who continue to sell incest stories under their own house imprint.

The big aspect of this that really chills free speech is the thuggish manner with no due process in which Pay Pal deals with its customers. They do not send notices and allow a reasonable time. Some get a few days to bring thousands of titles into compliance, others like BS get no notice and are just cut off without any explanation. Their policies are inconsistent in the extreme. One rep says to remove rape. Another rep says to remove anything with dubious consent. A third says that anything with consentual BDSM is rape even though its not. And when they make mistakes, they dig in their heels and circle the wagons. This is a company that dug in its heels through a week of withering national press criticism over seizing donations to buy children Christmas presents, even though the site in question was not actually breaking any of their policies.


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Katie Elle said:


> Saying people can in some theoretical way publish elsewhere if they want to publish incest or bestiality is not of any particular comfort to me. I don't publish incest stories, nor pseudo-incest, nor beastiality. However, I lost about 20% of my sales when Bookstrand removed indies from their website. And that is a company that not only accepted incest stories quite gleefully, but who continue to sell incest stories under their own house imprint.
> 
> The big aspect of this that really chills free speech is the thuggish manner with no due process in which Pay Pal deals with its customers. They do not send notices and allow a reasonable time. Some get a few days to bring thousands of titles into compliance, others like BS get no notice and are just cut off without any explanation. Their policies are inconsistent in the extreme. One rep says to remove rape. Another rep says to remove anything with dubious consent. A third says that anything with consentual BDSM is rape even though its not. And when they make mistakes, they dig in their heels and circle the wagons. This is a company that dug in its heels through a week of withering national press criticism over seizing donations to buy children Christmas presents, even though the site in question was not actually breaking any of their policies.


Great comment. Consider posting it here: http://techcrunch.com/2012/02/26/paypal-erotica-smashwords-censorshi/

The media is starting to pick up the story.

M


----------



## RubyRoyce (Feb 25, 2012)

Perhaps one should sell it as "biography" or "cookbook" (when stuffing a goose, in fact.. ) --- forget about it.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Scarlet Scrivener said:


> I don't understand the contempt, either. But, I'm a woman and I've gotten used to it.


I'm a woman too, and I still find it pretty sad. People can have contempt for me all they want for writing a few erotica titles. Erotica doesn't define me, nor do their opinions. I'm just as good a person as anybody on this board, and no better than a single one, no matter what a few small-minded people think.

The issues--rape for titillation. In an erotic story, that's pretty easy to define. When a fantasy story can be published on "a, b & c" sites only once you remove that rape scene that's key to the plot because it might titillate someone, things will be different. How many women throughout history have lost a husband and married the husband's brother? I had an aunt that did it. I guess she committed "disgusting" pseudo-incest. When that really needs to come out of that historical novel because, well, it's incest, that will be a shame.

People in offices are already deciding what the writer was thinking and judging the work based on these psychic abilities. If you say she's 23, well, you probably meant her to be underage to cater to those who like underage girls with adult men, because she's not as mature as we think she should be, so that has to go. That rape fantasy the woman has when she sees a psychic flash of her future murderer, well, you probably meant that to be non-consensual and titillating, so that has to go.

These things genuinely worry me. And even if most writers scoff and say it's only erotica, I think these things are worth all writers keeping in mind. Forget the titles that had to come down. That's really not as important as where this could lead one day.

What Paypal has done is worrisome, inconsistent and questionable. Businesses have a right to publish what they want--that's true. But these businesses were publishing them (and people can say they didn't really want to, but they did it and cashed the checks), and then were pressured into not doing that anymore by a 3rd party. Bookstrand's Paypal button is still gone, despite all their changing disclaimers about how certain Siren titles aren't incest because the brothers are not "touching for titillation" when they're making love to other men and women at the same time.

As awful as I think Bookstrand has behaved throughout this whole mess, they should not have to do that. I keep watching the disclaimers appear, disappear and change, and it's like watching someone trying to satify someone who just keeps shaking his head and saying not good enough.

Paypal just bears watching, and the changes it's demanding (and will probably continue to make) with these small publishers bear watching. That's not tinfoil-hat stuff as some people think, just common sense. Especially since Smashwords is in no way out of the woods.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"You do understand this involves more than one retailer? At last count, I believe we are up to 4 that have had to shut down indie erotica (not traditionally published erotica, mind you, just indies).'_

Four? What I describe is happening at 8,000 Walgreens across the US as they take books off the shelf. And B&N is taking down books at 700 stores. And none of it involves erotica or independents. Censorship?


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

shelleyo1 said:


> I'm a woman too, and I still find it pretty sad. People can have contempt for me all they want for writing a few erotica titles. Erotica doesn't define me, nor do their opinions. I'm just as good a person as anybody on this board, and no better than a single one, no matter what a few small-minded people think.
> 
> The issues--rape for titillation. In an erotic story, that's pretty easy to define. When a fantasy story can be published on "a, b & c" sites only once you remove that rape scene that's key to the plot because it might titillate someone, things will be different. How many women throughout history have lost a husband and married the husband's brother? I had an aunt that did it. I guess she committed "disgusting" pseudo-incest. When that really needs to come out of that historical novel because, well, it's incest, that will be a shame.
> 
> ...


Well said.

I have seen this pattern before. Whenever individuals start to make money online, corporate interests come in and claim the pie made by others. I believe this is the beginning of that portion of the business cycle. This was just a chess move to facilitate market control.

No one was worried about us in the beginning, but now indies claim spots on best seller lists. We have our own movie deals--we are a force that cannot be ignored and we can eat up both market share as well as the profits of other companies (erotica is a great example of that, especially on Bookstrand whose own imprint couldn't stay on top against indies).

In six months to a year, those who did nothing and didn't think this bears watching will wonder why being an indie is not the great opportunity it once was, willfully oblivious to the competitive strikes that stole it from under their noses.

M


----------



## mrv01d (Apr 4, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"You do understand this involves more than one retailer? At last count, I believe we are up to 4 that have had to shut down indie erotica (not traditionally published erotica, mind you, just indies).'_
> 
> Four? What I describe is happening at 8,000 Walgreens across the US as they take books off the shelf. And B&N is taking down books at 700 stores. And none of it involves erotica or independents. Censorship?


Is it censorship or isn't it? I don't know, I'm not privy to the details. I don't find this comment to contribute anything substantive to the discussion. Your viewpoint seems to be you think everything is fine and everyone here is wrong. Good luck with that.

M


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

Too much power in too few hands is a recipe for disaster. If you can't buy it, it is effectively banned.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

None of this comes close to touching my books, so I should just sit down and shut up while others are censored? Especially because, personally, I don't like the stuff being censored anyway?



> First they came for the communists,
> and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
> 
> Then they came for the trade unionists,
> ...





> "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." -Leo Tolstoy (War and Peace) (not Edmund Burke, as popularly believed)


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Oh Kevis... you know that *you and I* should ALWAYS just sit down and shut up, ya big lug.  We're just a pair of miscreants... that's what we are.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

QuantumIguana said:


> Too much power in too few hands is a recipe for disaster. If you can't buy it, it is effectively banned.


I feel this is a valid point. These books can still be read, so censorship is perhaps the wrong word. But in the near to medium term, the ability of consumers to purchase these books has certainly been curtailed. Developing a competitor to PayPal is a daunting task. Many small merchants stopped using PayPal in 2009, and no new competitor managed to enter the market to fill the void. Part of the reason is the capital required. Part of the reason is the enormous regulatory burden placed on new entrants. And applying free market rationales to the banking system as a whole...I think the past few years have suggested that the banking "market" is anything but free and fair.

B.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"And applying free market rationales to the banking system as a whole...I think the past few years have suggested that the banking "market" is anything but free and fair."_

The regulatory burden on any industry defines how free it is to operate. Some have more regulations, and some have less. Banking has a lot. So, to the extent that any industry is regulated, we can say it operates under free market practices within the constraints of the regulation. (When we have a spare year, we can discuss the notion of how the regulatory environment spawned the current mess.)

We also have to distinguish between investment banking and commercial banking. The headlines of the last few years fail to make the distinction. I actually wish we had two completely different words. Most of the bad press has been reserved for investment bankers. I don't let commercials off the hook, but what we read isn't an accurate story of what they did. The issues in this thread deal with commercial banking.

Commercial banking is very competitive, with all the banks looking for customers. Any metropolitan area is loaded with banks competing for business. That competition takes on many of the aspects of free markets.

So, at a basic level, it is difficult to say any system is free when there is a central bank involved. We tried it without a central bank, and it didn't work too well. Lots of places tried it with similar results. But in various markets like mortgages, business loans, payments processing, and credit cards it is very competitive and free. Anyone remember the free toasters?

We can find a few thousand porn sites on the internet that take credit cards. That demonstrates the competitive nature of the segment. If there is a demand, someone will compete to fill it. So I'm not sure we see an unhealthy concentration of power in banking.

What PayPal did was to make it easier to use the existing banking and credit system. I suspect there are two major factors. The first is consumer trust. Consumers don't trust internet vendors because they don't know anything about them. They don't want the vendor to have their credit card information. So they use their credit card behind a PayPal account to get their goods and hide their information from the vendor. (I think one needs a bank card to have a PP account.)

The second factor is payment to suppliers. Vendors with lots of suppliers can use PP to send them money. It's easy. It's also expensive.

But we can see thousands of internet vendors who do not use PP. Amazon comes to mind. Note there is no trust problem with Amazon. In many ways they are a competitor to PP because Amazon will stand between a consumer and a purchase from an unknown party using the Amazon retail system.

So I'd say the commercial banking system is operating under free market principles within constraints mentioned above. Given the thousands of commercial banks, and the thousands of businesses that don't use PP, it's hard to consider PP a concentration of power. But, it's easy to see how a business may have chosen to become too dependent on PP. That's not the fault of a concentration of power, but the fault of poor planning by the business.

But fair? I never know what people mean by that. I'm content to say no market is fair.

When we get that spare year, we can solve all the rest of the problems.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Katie Elle said:


> Saying people can in some theoretical way publish elsewhere if they want to publish incest or bestiality is not of any particular comfort to me. I don't publish incest stories, nor pseudo-incest, nor beastiality. However, I lost about 20% of my sales when Bookstrand removed indies from their website. And that is a company that not only accepted incest stories quite gleefully, but who continue to sell incest stories under their own house imprint.
> 
> The big aspect of this that really chills free speech is the thuggish manner with no due process in which Pay Pal deals with its customers. They do not send notices and allow a reasonable time. Some get a few days to bring thousands of titles into compliance, others like BS get no notice and are just cut off without any explanation. Their policies are inconsistent in the extreme. One rep says to remove rape. Another rep says to remove anything with dubious consent. A third says that anything with consentual BDSM is rape even though its not. And when they make mistakes, they dig in their heels and circle the wagons. This is a company that dug in its heels through a week of withering national press criticism over seizing donations to buy children Christmas presents, even though the site in question was not actually breaking any of their policies.


Yes. 100%, yes and special emphasis on the lack of due process in the way they conduct themselves. It is a terroristic act to threaten to wreck someone's company by not giving them sufficient notice to comply with some new term.

And, also, the "no rape" thing and the subsequent threats to our accounts have really scared me. So, this is having a strong censoring effect already because I'm having to censor myself. I re-wrote an entire piece involving a spousally abused wife (a character based on real life incidents) and revised the language, which was already pretty tame and not to excite but as an important part of the plot, because I was afraid some nut job (like an exec in a suit or a presidential candidate) might look at it and accuse me of writing rape for titillation.

How can you write with tyranny standing by your side (almost) as you type?

What scares me isn't losing an account to some people who are obviously liars or having to take down a few titles or even having titles removed (all by mistake!) - although, that is really scary. * It's where is this going to end up?*


----------



## Mike McIntyre (Jan 19, 2011)

Andre Jute said:


> *Is the Paypal/Smashwords "banning" of rape, incest and bestiality censorship?
> *
> 
> Or we can look at the history of literature and ask them to supply us with a single work of literature that was actually, provably, suppressed for erotic content. They can't provide one.
> [reprinted from Andre Jute's blog Kissing the Blarney]


What about Tropic of Cancer, Lady Chatterly's Lover, Fanny Hill, and Ulysses? All of them were banned by U.S. Customs.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Asher MacDonald said:


> I tend to think of censorship as banning something, not suppressing it.
> 
> And I'm certainly not happy about what PayPal is doing, but labeling it as censorship seems to me the wrong word choice.


And it's obvious you don't know the meaning of the word.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

shelleyo1 said:


> I'm a woman too, and I still find it pretty sad. People can have contempt for me all they want for writing a few erotica titles. Erotica doesn't define me, nor do their opinions. I'm just as good a person as anybody on this board, and no better than a single one, no matter what a few small-minded people think.
> 
> The issues--rape for titillation. In an erotic story, that's pretty easy to define. When a fantasy story can be published on "a, b & c" sites only once you remove that rape scene that's key to the plot because it might titillate someone, things will be different. How many women throughout history have lost a husband and married the husband's brother? I had an aunt that did it. I guess she committed "disgusting" pseudo-incest. When that really needs to come out of that historical novel because, well, it's incest, that will be a shame.
> 
> ...


Absolutely! And, I've never really gotten used to the contempt, either. In fact, their contempt can have devastating consequences on your entire life, as you can see from this one example.

The erotica genre was once dominated by men (and is now dominated and most widely read by women) because even during the height of the development of the novel only men were permitted to write such things. Even in the genre (the early Gothic, which evolved into Romance) she pioneered, Ann Radcliffe, could not write the kinds of shocking things in her books that Matthew Lewis wrote in its brilliant, although tawdry rival, "The Monk." (In the Monk there is more than a mention of a gay relationship between a couple of men of the cloth.) It was enough that women were writing anything at all to make them harlots - just as they're now talking in some circles about classing us with "sex workers." It seems like little has changed (I wrote about this in one of my erotic stories, by the way - I show the reader how things have not changed for women in the past 150 years in a vampire love story - which I had to pull out of fear that my entire account would be targeted.)

Writing in the erotica genre is not only perfectly valid, but it can make you a better writer. Because we write about how the character feels, what she thinks, how her thoughts reflect what others think about her in this situation. We write, not only about human psychological response, but human physical response in a sensual way, so that you can hear, feel and vividly see all the colors and occurrences in the surroundings. It is a very sensual way of writing that, if you can begin the exercise of trying to master it, can help all of your writing and improve it.

It should not be maligned, especially by other writers. And, people who do so are uneducated.


----------



## Jamie Case (Feb 15, 2011)

B. Justin Shier said:


> I feel this is a valid point. These books can still be read, so censorship is perhaps the wrong word. But in the near to medium term, the ability of consumers to purchase these books has certainly been curtailed.


I've never seen incest-positive/rape-positive fiction on the shelves of any of the bookstores I frequent and I'm not particularly sheltered. Same goes for DVDs/magazines on the shelves of the local Blockbuster (RIP) or B&N (RIP). I use Apple Store/Netflix/Hulu for movies and tv shows and it's the same thing there...nothing hard-core, nothing controversial. But I'm sure if I wanted to buy any of those items right now, with a simple Google search I could have it on my hard drive within a few minutes. I just can't get it from Smashwords. I don't think customers' ability to purchase this category of erotica has been curtailed much, if at all. What's been curtailed is the ability of Smashwords authors _*to sell*_ incest-positive/rape-positive erotica. But that's a completely different thing.



B. Justin Shier said:


> Developing a competitor to PayPal is a daunting task. Many small merchants stopped using PayPal in 2009, and no new competitor managed to enter the market to fill the void. Part of the reason is the capital required. Part of the reason is the enormous regulatory burden placed on new entrants. And applying free market rationales to the banking system as a whole...I think the past few years have suggested that the banking "market" is anything but free and fair.


I don't think it's as capital-intensive or has as much regulatory burden as you're suggesting. 
Paypal isn't a bank, never has been a bank, and has maintained its "non-bankness" in order to avoid oversight of the sort you're suggesting. There are also lots of new entrants to the payments space. Just off the top of my head: Dwolla, Stripe, Wepay, Square, Intuit, Google Payments, Amazon Payments. Quite a few of those are under-capitalized startups, but you might recognize the names of the last three. Unfortunately, they weren't the first mover.

Paypal entered the payment space when it was _*hard*_ and when no one thought you could reliably move money over the internet. They endured tens of millions of dollars worth of fraud _(in fact if you poke around you can find stories about how naive the founders were about the fact that lots of bad actors would immediately converge around a system that moved money)_ and had the government breathing down their necks until they proved they were not a bank. They survived and built a network (particularly after they were acquired by eBay) that will be incredibly difficult for any other company to overcome. And if any other company does, the types of actions taken by Paypal will be replicated unless that company also discovers an algorithm that will prevent anyone who would run a scam from signing up.

See, the trouble is that erotica/pornography (along with a few other categories) has always been a favorite target of scammers because most of the scammees were often too embarrassed to report it to the CSR at their credit card company. But now with the advent of online payments/ online banking the scammees can click a button and demand their money back. If you were a manager at one of these companies and you discovered that you could cut your fraud rate by 30% simply by eliminating 1 category, what would you do?

TLR: 
1)The internet is 95% sex-related consumption, 2% LOLcats, and 3% substantive content. Anyone who wants erotica can get it quickly and conveniently.

2)If anyone in this thread ran Smashwords/Paypal they probably would do no differently than what's been done.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I would never speak as an author. I couldn't stop laughing if I tried. As myself, I observe the Canadians are doing very well, better than the US in the current economic mess. And in terms of efficient allocations of resources, I'll let the Canadians take care of their own problems, while I do my part to take care of ours.


Huh? What's this got to do with economic issues?



Terrence OBrien said:


> The entire notion of free speech is scary to many folks. It's a relatively new concept in historical terms, and hardly enjoys universal acceptance.
> 
> Free speech essentially allows one to express himself as he chooses on the subjects he chooses. That includes remaining quiet. It allows one to distribute material and advocate for the ideas one chooses. It also allows one to refrain from distributing materials and advocating for ideas. When speech is forced, it is not free.


And no one is advocating any forced speech. Are you actually reading and comprehending the words I'm writing?



Terrence OBrien said:


> That's why refraining from distributing books falls under free speech. If one chooses to apply the label "censorship" to refraining from distributing*, then we can say censorship falls under free speech. There is nothing at all scary about the right to choose what books one distributes.


It's the definition of the word. And calling censorship freedom of speech is like calling gun restrictions the right to bear arms.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> Hooboy. Americans are pretty danged funny. *bites tongue til it BLEEDS*


I would bite my tongue too if I lived in a country that put people in jail for writing a story.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Jamie Case said:


> I've never seen incest-positive/rape-positive fiction on the shelves of any of the bookstores I frequent and I'm not particularly sheltered. Same goes for DVDs/magazines on the shelves of the local Blockbuster (RIP) or B&N (RIP). I use Apple Store/Netflix/Hulu for movies and tv shows and it's the same thing there...nothing hard-core, nothing controversial. But I'm sure if I wanted to buy any of those items right now, with a simple Google search I could have it on my hard drive within a few minutes. I just can't get it from Smashwords. I don't think customers' ability to purchase this category of erotica has been curtailed much, if at all. What's been curtailed is the ability of Smashwords authors _*to sell*_ incest-positive/rape-positive erotica. But that's a completely different thing.
> 
> I don't think it's as capital-intensive or has as much regulatory burden as you're suggesting.
> Paypal isn't a bank, never has been a bank, and has maintained its "non-bankness" in order to avoid oversight of the sort you're suggesting. There are also lots of new entrants to the payments space. Just off the top of my head: Dwolla, Stripe, Wepay, Square, Intuit, Google Payments, Amazon Payments. Quite a few of those are under-capitalized startups, but you might recognize the names of the last three. Unfortunately, they weren't the first mover.
> ...


I disagree with a lot of what you said, but the main thing is this: Smashwords did not choose to censor anything. At least, not if you believe Mark Coker in his e-mail and I have no reason not to. This was not their choice. They don't like it. Their hand is being forced.

More is affected than people not being able to sell material someone else doesn't like at Smashwords. I've already enumerated the effects this whole thing has had on me. I don't write that stuff... but, it's been a huge problem for me, so far.

... and this has been said before. But, I'll say it, again. The PayPal rules are not being applied evenly, but selectively.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks,

I've removed several posts that I considered to be against Forum Decorum.  Contribute to the discussion or not, but belittling comments that do not contribute to the conversation will not be allowed.  Lots of other threads here to post in.

Betsy


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

swolf said:


> I would bite my tongue too if I lived in a country that put people in jail for writing a story.


Hate to disillusion you but I'm not a Canadian.

You might try opening your mind to the idea that Canadians may not agree with you that protecting people from attack is not limiting free speech. There is an old principle known as "your rights end where my nose begins" and it doesn't just apply to physical violence, but verbal as well.

Edit: Sorry, Betsy. Obviously, tongue biting didn't work but I won't argue this further because the concept that the way it is done in the US is always the best and most wonderful and everyone else has to fall meekly into line and adopt the US ideas is just too foreign for some.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Huh? What's this got to do with economic issues?"_

Nothing. It was in response to your statement: "Yeah, in Canada you can go to jail for writing something the goverment deems inappropriate. And, as an author, you call that 'doing pretty well?' Seriously?"

_"And no one is advocating any forced speech. Are you actually reading and comprehending the words I'm writing?"_

You told us, "_If a bookstore refuses to sell a book because of objectional content, they are censoring that book._" That is an exercise in free speech. The bookstore owner refrains from distributing speech he objects to. He chooses what ideas he will support, and he chooses which he will oppose. Refraining from distributing ideas he does not agree with is an exercise in free speech. You have chosen an odd definition of censorship, so I'm simply dealing with the description you provided, and letting you own the word.

_"It's the definition of the word. And calling censorship freedom of speech is like calling gun restrictions the right to bear arms."_

Ok. Let's use your definition. The definition describes an activity that is an exercise in free speech. Refraining from distributing ideas one disagrees with is covered by free speech. It's OK if you want to call that censorship or lollypops. The description you provide is an exercise of free speech.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

This is a broad response to some posts: 

I don't know of another payment processor out there that is widely used.  But, if or when Smashwords or anyone else important in my life comes up with one, I'll begin using it, too.

The alternative I've seen most often used is AlertPay.  I believe it is a Canadian company.


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

How did a financial entity become the moral arbiter for the nation?

I'd boycott them if I weren't already boycotting both eBay and PayPal over their financial practices.


----------



## Jamie Case (Feb 15, 2011)

Scarlet Scrivener said:


> ... and this has been said before. But, I'll say it, again. The PayPal rules are not being applied evenly, but selectively.


I never said they were. Nor do I think it's reasonable that they should be.

You think all erotic titles should all be held to the same standard because they all contain similar content. Unfortunately that's not the way it works in the real world. The traditionally-published erotica writers of the world have an advantage because they have actual businesses standing behind their books. Paypal and other payment companies can be sure that [non-indie publisher] had their books rubber-stamped by their in-house legal teams (or at the very least someone who is not the author and is willing to stake their paycheck on the book in the case of smaller publishers) and even if it still ticks somebody off/is offensive/turns out to be fake, those publishers have PR teams that can take most of the heat. See: James Frey, Kaavya Viswanathan, JT Leroy etc.

And when offended customers return those books en masse, the bookstores can return them to the distributors, and the distributors can return them to publishers. And everyone along the chain feels assured that the publishers are solvent enough (and have the insurance necessary) to absorb all those chargebacks without going broke because they already spent all the money on rent and a retainer for their kid.

Indie authors don't come with this guarantee. Compare a book like Lolita which is eternally controversial to the Amazon pedophilia scandal. Amazon took all the heat on that and for what? $0.0x in revenue on each copy sold. They had no copyright and no guarantee of exclusivity on the title. Should they have tarnished their image to protect a book that could have been removed at any time at the author's whim? Authors in this thread seem to be suggesting that profit-seeking businesses should take on all the social and economic risks just because. Paypal should bend over backwards and continue to service a high-fraud sector because that makes life easier for authors, in spite of the fact that (based on the responses here) most of the authors in question are either indifferent or highly averse to Paypal.

It's an emotional response, and one you're entitled to have, but it's not a logical one.


----------



## Andre Jute (Dec 18, 2010)

Mike McIntyre said:


> What about Tropic of Cancer, Lady Chatterly's Lover, Fanny Hill, and Ulysses? All of them were banned by U.S. Customs.


Any more? The paucity of examples proves my point. Two of these examples are in any event arguable. Tropic of Cancer is "literature" only in a "never mind what the talking dog says, that he talksat all is the news" manner, and Ulyseses wasn't so much suppressed for sex as official befuddlement. And the case of Lady Chatterly's Lover is contaminated by the fact that part of the objection to it isn't about the fact of sex but to sex between the classes. Sorry, Mike, I'd like to be impressed by your examples, but basically you're left with Fanny Hill, which sets out unashamedly to titillate, succeeds, and becomes literature by accident. That's a list of one example, and not a particularly apt one.

None of the writers Paypal and Smashwords are targeting are in the class of Henry Miller, even, the weakest writer in your list.

By the way, you've left out an example of a good quality novel that is entirely about sexual possession, and is certainly graphical, and which was suppressed at one time or another almost everywhere in the world, The Story of O.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

Jamie Case said:


> I never said they were. Nor do I think it's reasonable that they should be.
> 
> You think all erotic titles should all be held to the same standard because they all contain similar content. Unfortunately that's not the way it works in the real world. The traditionally-published erotica writers of the world have an advantage because they have actual businesses standing behind their books. Paypal and other payment companies can be sure that [non-indie publisher] had their books rubber-stamped by their in-house legal teams (or at the very least someone who is not the author and is willing to stake their paycheck on the book in the case of smaller publishers) and even if it still ticks somebody off/is offensive/turns out to be fake, those publishers have PR teams that can take most of the heat. See: James Frey, Kaavya Viswanathan, JT Leroy etc.
> 
> ...


I'm amazed that you can find anything emotional whatsoever in my previous post.

And... I don't think any such things... This is called "projecting."

Just for fun, here's a definition from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

_Psychological projection_ or _projection bias _is a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others originate those feelings.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Maybe I'm cynical, or maybe I've spent too long working in and with big corporations, but I swear I can see this playing out deep in the bowels of Paypal. 

A group of employees with a team leader are tasked with the job of implementing the non-acceptable content terms in the TOS. They'll be ideologues from both camps - cries of 'It's disgusting filth' will be met with 'You cannot censor the people'. There will be neutral prisoners of process ('lets just do it already'), there will be disinterested parties ('This is heaps better than working in the call centre. At least you don't talk to customers here). And leading them will be an individual halfway up the corporate ladder who believes that this could be their make or break project. Screw it up and the best he or she could hope for in terms of career progression would be 2ic in the complaints call centre.  

Can you see the conflict? 

'B&N uses us and has all this non-compliance stuff, but look at the size of that account! I could get my a$$ kicked if I screw that one up. Hey, what about this lot. Not too big, not too small. Okay, folks, we've got our direction. We target these four. Better ban one of 'em so the others know we ain't fooling around.'


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals (Feb 21, 2012)

> A group of employees


I have kind of the opposite view. A single employee makes a mistake, misreads a policy on the donations button and cuts off an entire retailer seizing thousands of dollars of previous donations and sales. The PayPal corporation backs them 100% even though it's obvious the employee made a mistake and the donation button is perfectly within their rules because as a corporate culture, it doesn't admit wrong ever ever.


----------



## AKLoggie (Aug 13, 2011)

I keep seeing people say 'just use another payment processor'.

It's not even a matter of it costing more to use an adult processor.  They are ALL saying no to selling taboo erotica.  Even the mildest of psuedo incest.  You can't even use 'daddy' in a title now.

Which, honestly, boggles my mind.  Porn sites that offer visual rape scenes, totally fine.  

Writing about fake incest between consenting adults, totally verboten.  

When Selena Kitt can't find a processor to work with, what does it mean to someone without her much larger resources?  That fantasies that are totally legal to write about are unable to be sold to someone who wants them.


----------



## RubyGoodnight (Dec 9, 2011)

AKLoggie said:


> I keep seeing people say 'just use another payment processor'.
> 
> It's not even a matter of it costing more to use an adult processor. They are ALL saying no to selling taboo erotica. Even the mildest of psuedo incest. You can't even use 'daddy' in a title now.


Who have you (or Selena) approached? I know a number of processors who wouldn't say no to erotica.


----------



## Ms T (Nov 19, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> It isn't a double standard. A fantasy with explicit sex scenes does not make it an erotica. Nor does an erotica with pointy-eared elves make it fantasy.
> 
> Genre > subgenre rules do apply in this care, rather strongly.


Please enlighten me as to the difference.


----------



## Guest (Feb 27, 2012)

Some best selling writers honed their writing skills in the erotica field early in their careers.

Dean Koontz comes quickly to mind.


----------



## portiadacosta (Feb 28, 2011)

Hmm... I guess this is related.

An epublisher I write for, who publishes a wide variety of subgenres, including erotic romance, has now informed overseas authors that they can't be paid via Paypal any more. They say it's for a variety of reasons. Yeah right. 

Great... more jumbo bank charges for converting dollars.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

PayPal isn't distributing anything but money. They aren't selling the books, they are just facilitating buyers giving money to the sellers. The problem is, they want to look over your shoulder.

This illustrated a problem with our relationship with money. With cash, your money doesn't care how it is spent. The George Washingtons in your wallet do not care if you are buying a book which paints George Washington in an unfavorable light. The transaction is a private matter between you and the person you buy from.

I have no problem with a third part facilitating transactions online in exchange for a payment. I just want them to butt out. They should be as blind to what is being transacted as is cash.

If one seller chooses not to sell certain books, that is a small matter, I can always buy from someone else. But when on-line transactions are facilitated by just a few companies, you have an oligopoly, and that is a problem. If I have many sellers to choose from, I can still get what I want. But a few facilitators can effectively ban certain content. If it is not possible to purchase certain content, the effect is no different than if it was banned.

Popular speech doesn't need protection, it's not under threat. It is unpopular speech which needs protection. If companies can block our access to legal books, is there any reason to think they will stop at the most objectionable?


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

portiadacosta said:


> Hmm... I guess this is related.
> 
> An epublisher I write for, who publishes a wide variety of subgenres, including erotic romance, has now informed overseas authors that they can't be paid via Paypal any more. They say it's for a variety of reasons. Yeah right.
> 
> Great... more jumbo bank charges for converting dollars.


This is yet another fine example of how this is impacting everyone.

I'm taking a break from further sanitizing the only 6 of my vaguely erotic titles that are going to remain published, so that they are no more erotic than a Harlequin. I have 2 or 3 others I won't change, but I've unpublished them everywhere (including Amazon) except AR, lest they offend someone. None of these stories come anywhere near violating anyone's TOS, but I just want to be sure and I want nothing to to with the erotica genre since this is starting to look like a witch hunt to me.

Modifed to say: Make that an "old-fashioned Harlequin." Out of curiousity, I just popped over there and found out they, also, have erotic romances for the "modern woman." I just checked out the description on the first one. Yowza! I had to douse myself with hot sauce to cool off! I wonder what payment processor they're using. [*Packs ice on self and ventures over to the site, again*] It looks like they don't take PayPal, only Visa and MC.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> Make that an "old-fashioned Harlequin." Out of curiousity, I just popped over there and found out they, also, have erotic romances for the "modern woman."


The Blaze line has been around for years and years. I think they have even hotter stuff now.

My erotic stuff is pretty dang vanilla, so I'm not too worried on a personal level, and have no intentions of editing any of it. I am not thrilled by one company wielding this sort of power, though.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

EllenFisher said:


> The Blaze line has been around for years and years. I think they have even hotter stuff now.
> 
> My erotic stuff is pretty dang vanilla, so I'm not too worried on a personal level, and have no intentions of editing any of it. I am not thrilled by one company wielding this sort of power, though.


Yeah, I feel like a cheap sell-out doing it. But, I can't afford principles right now. I need my livelihood.

I really got spooked because of my 2 inadvertently deactivated titles over at AR. One is still in the deactivated state, but I'm not even going to question them about it at this point.

I just changed those few so they'd be more mainstream. It's not that I wrote something that was in violation - it's a fear of being accused. False accusations can be very dangerous. As we see from the PayPal saga, not everybody is reasonable.


----------



## portiadacosta (Feb 28, 2011)

EllenFisher said:


> The Blaze line has been around for years and years. I think they have even hotter stuff now.
> 
> My erotic stuff is pretty dang vanilla, so I'm not too worried on a personal level, and have no intentions of editing any of it. I am not thrilled by one company wielding this sort of power, though.


Yes, up until recently they published the super hot Spice line, along with Spice Briefs. The former line has been closed, and the latter is winding down. I've written for both. The closure isn't anything to do with Paypal though... just sales numbers lower than hoped, I guess.

I really do wish I could write non erotic stuff too, Scarlet... so I wouldn't fall foul of anybody's terms and whatnot, and I could self publish easily everywhere. But alas erotic writing is the only thing I've ever really been successful at.


----------



## Scarlet Scrivener (Aug 30, 2011)

portiadacosta said:


> Yes, up until recently they published the super hot Spice line, along with Spice Briefs. The former line has been closed, and the latter is winding down. I've written for both. The closure isn't anything to do with Paypal though... just sales numbers lower than hoped, I guess.
> 
> I really do wish I could write non erotic stuff too, Scarlet... so I wouldn't fall foul of anybody's terms and whatnot, and I could self publish easily everywhere. But alas erotic writing is the only thing I've ever really been successful at.


It takes a great deal of daring and boldness to write erotica, even when you're not worried about falling afoul of TOS.


----------



## MarionNYC (Sep 1, 2011)

Let's be clear about one thing (at least). Paypal/Smashwords isn't censoring content, they are censoring categories.  There are plenty of books that feature incest, rape and even bestiality and various other offensive or transgressive content that won't be touched by a ban because they aren't listed as "erotica."  That doesn't mean that no one ever got off on them, only that it wasn't advertised as being for that purpose.


----------



## Alex Anders (Apr 11, 2012)

I did a podcast interview with Mark Coker about the conflict with Paypal. He goes into detail about the behind-the-scenes of it. It's a great story filled with things I would never have suspected. 

I just posted part 2 of the interview. Both are worth listening to. It's at www.SoundsEroticPocast.com


----------

