The New Bankers Of Internet Porn
from the such-a-stigma dept
It's not entirely clear why legal porn gets such a stigma. Yahoo was forced to stop selling porn DVDs years ago because one reporter noticed that they had this option in their stores -- even though everything there was completely legal. Now, a lawsuit over a bank ditching iBill, one of the more popular payment services for porn has people looking at the new bank that handles the merchant accounts for iBill and, apparently, for competitor ccBill. The article also notes that iBill's deal to be acquired was canceled last week, over concerns that the acquiring company would be delisted for handling the credit cards on porn sites. While I really couldn't care any less about what happens with porn sites, I'm wondering why there's so much attention being placed on companies associated with the industry. If they're not breaking any laws, then what's the problem? If they are breaking laws, then someone should accuse them of actually breaking laws.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Legal does not equal moral
I resigned from a job because the struggling company I worked for decided that hooking up with an online port distributer would quickly solve their cash problems. Sorry, but I just dont want that on my resume thank you very much.
The industry may be "legal" in this part of the world, but in others it is not legal. It is a moral issue. Enough people (me included) feel that the porn industry is immoral and objectionable in every way. It victimizes women and children, and destroys true intimicy between married men and women.
Like it or not, enough people share my view as to not want to do business with those that support porn.
Just thought you would like an explanation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Legal does not equal moral
I believe that this omission demonstrates a cultural bias against males and towards females as victims. Neither characterization is fair or accurate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Legal does not equal moral
Prehaps you have heard, but maybe not. A study in Australia has found that porn is not harmful, and my infact be health.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Legal does not equal moral
By making that statement goes to show that you SIR don't know your own ass from porm, porm has broken up so many families I guess if you were to be a fly on someone wall that's dealing with those issues right now and if you were to listen to a child's cry because one of his parents has broken the marriage rules and has crushed the family, then you might know how to put the meaning moral and what's immoral in perspective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Legal does not equal moral
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chargebacks
It's been said that porn related purchases result in a larger percentage of chargebacks and contested payments (be it with dissatisfaction or the anecdotal spousal factor - "Honey, I didn't do that. Must be a mistake - I'll call the card company and get it reversed.")
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The New Bankers Of Internet Porn
The big deal is because sex is Evil! Ashcroft spent $8,000 to cover up a stone (or was that aluminum?) boob!
We are a stupid people, we Americans.
Faz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
moral vs legal.
NotActive Jeff said
"It was legal for Bayer to conduct experiments on Jews during WWII"
Bad example since the experiments were done against the wishes of the Jews. No one in porn is forced to make it, watch it or pay for it.
And if morality was so tied to doing the "right" thing, then why are the largest users of porn located in the bible belt? Don't believe me, go check the numbers. Before the internet, "adult" entertainment was limited to large cities and in certain areas. NY, Boston, LA were the hot spots. When internet porn became available the demographics changed practically over night.
The adult business is a multi-billion dollar industry yet everyone is against it. The truth is the majority of people want access to it, but without anyone knowing.
Can you say hypocrits?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: moral vs legal.
The most famous counterexample is Linda Lovelace, the star of "Deep Throat," who claims that her husband forced her to act in porn. Details in her autobiographies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: moral vs legal.
thanks for the info.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Legal vs. social sanction
The fact that a particular form of commerce is legal (that is to say, not illegal) does not make it compulsory. Deciding to target certain classes of customers is a business decision. So long as there is no violation of law (e.g., by discrimination against a protected class), one step in that targeting might be to decline to serve other potential customers. Management makes such decisions - the shareholders have the right to agree or disagree. Customers, of course, vote with their money, as always.
It seems likely that there is a place for social sanctions that are beyond those encoded in law. Etiquette, for example, is a semi-codified version of social sanctions. Does everyone agree with every social sanction? Of course not - but then not everyone agrees with every law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
response
But what can you expect out of rejects who built the country on the genocide (wiping out the whole indigenous culture all together which was in general on the higher level of tolerance and alignment with natural laws that the kind of 'purist' understanding of Christianity these rejects brought with them).
Sex is not evil, sex is beautiful, and if someone wishes to be watched for money or not no harm will come out of it, but all those opposing that are (in general) against gun control, against Muslims, against blacks, Germans, Slavs, Chinese and against everything different, and they'll all stuck up not knowing that this kind of attitude lead their wives/husbands to addiction to hard ass pounding with their neighbors husband/wife, hiding vibrators and other sex-toys, dreaming about big MILFs or big cocks etc, etc.
Living so uptight and in such a hypocrisies has its own price, and you'll all pay for it.
But unfortunately the rest of us may also pay for it, because of the built-up of unburned adrenaline and testosterone in your bodies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]