Smashwords Succumbs to Censorship

[carpetmojo]

Could anyone tell me, should any company like this choose to do so, could they legally, under US law, lay down similar restrictions on copies of, say, the Koran ? Or the Bible ?
Or would that fall foul of religious freedom statutes, freedom of speech, etc... ?

[xg4bx]

Originally Posted by cHex

I don't find anything untoward here.

PayPal is not a government, is not declaring anything illegal, and is not preventing anyone from publishing or purchasing their qualifying erotica from other sources. PayPal has no legal means to force Smashwords to publish or not publish anything.

The American constitutional right of freedom of association protects PayPal from having to do business with an entity against their will.

It seems, in other words, that both PayPal and Smashwords are voluntarily making decisions they see as in their own best interests, whether from social or financial perspectives.

This may inconvenience some writers and readers, but then there is no constitutional right to convenience.

thats pretty much the size of it. they're a business and can run it as they see fit. its only censorship if its an act of government or law prohibiting it.

[DiapDealer]

Let's be clear, here. Just because something can't technically be called censorship, and no rules/laws are being broken, doesn't automatically make it all rainbows, lollipops and unicorns. It can still be a perfectly legal bad frickin' idea. Like this one. Change the legal money Moneychanger.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Never mind censorship: this is a service provider telling their *customers* how to run their business.

But Smashwords is also a service provider -- for authors -- and they also engage in such censorship. This describes Smashwords policy before PayPal stepped in:

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.

Almost everyone agrees that service providers will make these kind of judgments, not just with fiction, but also with things like manuals on how to lure kids into a car or make poison gas. The only fair way to judge PayPal would be to read the book in question. I am not volunteering.

Originally Posted by Purple Lady

So is this just against independent publishers books?

Not on purpose, but you do have a point. If Random House or Yale University Press let through a book that seemed to advocate sex with kids, there would be a public controversy over how to interpret the book in question. PayPay would probably follow the lead of the likes of MasterCard and VISA, who in turn would let the public controversy play out.

Originally Posted by DuskyRose

I don't think it's up to Paypal to decide that they can't have them by telling the retailer what they can and can't sell.

Do you really mean this literally? That they should facilitate not just selling books on making the poison gas, but the poison gas itself?

I'm wondering if you travel the subway to work every morning as I do. Since you live in Virginia, I guess it is possible.

[BeccaPrice]

DearAuthor has been having a good discussion of this - apparently it's less related to censorship tha the high rate of chargbacks on porn which lose the company money. From what I understand, credit cards charge porn sites highter rates to make up for such losses.

[ucfgrad93]

Got a link to the discussion?

[BeccaPrice]

http://dearauthor.com/?s=paypal

lists the articles - it's worth reading them in order and reading the comments as well.

[CommonReader]

Why any customer should be keen on using the services of such a crappy services provider as PayPal is beyond me.
However, just as a public utility company cannot arbitrarily decide on who they want to do business with, so a payment company should not be allowed to discriminate in such a way, either.

[ucfgrad93]

Originally Posted by CommonReader

Why any customer should be keen on using the services of such a crappy services provider as PayPal is beyond me.
However, just as a public utility company cannot arbitrarily decide on who they want to do business with, so a payment company should not be allowed to discriminate in such a way, either.

Unlike public utilities, Paypal is not the only game in town. Smashwords is free to choose another way of accepting payments from people.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by CommonReader

Why any customer should be keen on using the services of such a crappy services provider as PayPal is beyond me.
However, just as a public utility company cannot arbitrarily decide on who they want to do business with, so a payment company should not be allowed to discriminate in such a way, either.

I think they use it because it allows fast, secure deposits and withdrawals without the risk of a paycheck getting lost or stolen from the mail. No other credit card handler that I know of is capable of handling paychecks the way PayPal is.

As for PayPal, its all contract law. There's no spirit to contract law, only letter. PayPal has a habit of refusing to do business with "adult content" stuff, so I'm surprised that Smashwords is even capable of processing erotica if PayPal is their credit card handler. PayPal is insanely conservative when it comes to stuff like that.

All that having been said; besti, incest, and pseudo-loli/shota are both things most people find highly disgusting and I'd consider niche market at best. They might even be illegal in some more conservative states. Smashwords rejecting them is highly understandable, and I'm not going to complain about this. Call it censorship if you want, but a niche market is a niche market.

[emellaich]

Originally Posted by ucfgrad93

Unlike public utilities, Paypal is not the only game in town. Smashwords is free to choose another way of accepting payments from people.

Yes,

It seems to me that this is pretty simple. If we are talking rights then Paypal does have the right to determine who they will do business with.

Likewise, if this bothers you, then you can choose not to do business with Paypal. Some other people might prefer to do business with Paypal because of this policy. The 'market' will decide if this is a good business decision. On the other hand, Paypal management may be willing to absorb some negative market consequences. They may see some value morally in this decision; you might not, but obviously they do.

So, the discussion might focus on whether you will continue to do business with Paypal at all. Or, whether you will only use Paypal when you don't have an alternative. Or whether this doesn't make a difference at all. Of finally, whether you will be more likely to use Paypal because of this policy.

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by teh603

As for PayPal, its all contract law. There's no spirit to contract law, only letter. PayPal has a habit of refusing to do business with "adult content" stuff, so I'm surprised that Smashwords is even capable of processing erotica if PayPal is their credit card handler. PayPal is insanely conservative when it comes to stuff like that.

Oddly, though, Paypal processes transactions for PHE's (Philip Harvey) online adult product sales.

For those who aren't familiar, I'll link to wikipedia, NOT to the site I'm referring to. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_%26_Eve_(business)

Edited to add after half my post went missing: It seems to me that Paypal has chosen to define where the line is for them, rather than trying to navigate the hazy waters of defining "obscenity", which is better than the "we know it when we see it" hit-and-miss approach that some companies take.

[WT Sharpe]

When I first saw the title of this thread, I assumed that Snashwords was refusing to sell certain types of literature they found offensive and I thought, well—so what? They are an independent business, and have the right to determine what they sell. Then I read the article and realized thus wasn't about self-censorship at all, but about a major financial institution (PayPal) attempting to impose their moral standards upon an independent bookseller. This is outrageous.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by carpetmojo

Could anyone tell me, should any company like this choose to do so, could they legally, under US law, lay down similar restrictions on copies of, say, the Koran ? Or the Bible ?
Or would that fall foul of religious freedom statutes, freedom of speech, etc... ?

Absolutely they can and do. There are any number of companies that have an athiest or agnostic focus and will not deal with religious based businesses.

Freedom of speech doesn't require others to listen, or to be your megaphone, and freedom of association is just as important a right.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

When I first saw the title of this thread, I assumed that Snashwords was refusing to sell certain types of literature they found offensive and I thought, well—so what? They are an independent business, and have the right to determine what they sell. Then I read the article and realized thus wasn't about self-censorship at all, but about a major financial institution (PayPal) attempting to impose their moral standards upon an independent bookseller. This is outrageous.

Wait. Smashwords is allowed to refuse to do business according to its own set of standards, but PayPal isn't?