Quote:
Originally Posted by murraypaul
I'm guessing the actual discussion was a bit more detailed than that!
|
That may be, but I am not privvy to the negotiations, so I can only go by what I am told.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murraypaul
They still have Bibles for sale, so it clearly isn't a blanket ban.  |
That may simply be an indication of prejudice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murraypaul
Oh, and:
http://www.smashwords.com/press/release/28
a) Smashwords clearly think this is just targetted at BR&I in an erotic context, as they are communicating to their erotic authors:
b) It isn't yet clear what is actually 'banned': |
There's the rub. When you start getting into censorship, you start getting into subjective decisions based on individual tolerance.
When I was a teen, we were watching the Inspector Clousseau movie "A Shot In The Dark" when Clousseau went undercover (maybe in a nudist colony?) on TV. Anyway, he was walking around, supposedly nude, but for a strategically placed guitar. At that point my mother walked into the room and was horrified and turned the TV off. If my mother were to make the decisions as to what should be censored it would probably be very different than most of those who agree with the Smashwords decision. Censorship is never cut and dried.
Inconsistency is one of the bad things about censorship. Chilling effect is another. Free speech a third. Generally removing free choice from competent adults is never a good thing.