*****SPAM***** [Politech] Latex clothes website runs afoul of Paypal prudishness [fs]

From: Declan McCullagh (declan@private)
Date: Tue Aug 10 2004 - 06:28:38 PDT


SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ----------------------
SPAM: This mail is probably spam.  The original message has been altered
SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.
SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
SPAM: 
SPAM: Content analysis details:   (5.3 hits, 5 required)
SPAM: Hit! (2.7 points)  Subject contains lots of white space
SPAM: Hit! (0.6 points)  BODY: Uses words and phrases which indicate porn (12)
SPAM: Hit! (1.0 point)   Received via an IP in dynablock.njabl.org
SPAM:                    [RBL check: found 167.151.134.64.dynablock.njabl.org.]
SPAM: Hit! (1.0 point)   DNSBL: Received via an IP in dynablock.njabl.org
SPAM: 
SPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results ---------------------

----

>From: Ron Gustavson <rongus@private>
>To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private>
>Subject: censorship via Paypal
>Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:59:10 -0400
>
>[for consideration on Politech]
>
>The Baroness ( www.baroness.com ) writes...
>...
> >You know I've always believed in the power of clothing, but it seems 
> someone at Paypal thinks a latex skirt or dress may have even more power 
> than I had dared to dream. Despite a complete lack of nudity and sex on 
> Baroness.com (it's all about the CLOTHES), Paypal has closed my account 
> -with no option of review- for alleged violation of their "Acceptable Use 
> Policy", which says their service may not be used to send or receive 
> payments for any "adult, sexually oriented, or obscene materials or services".
> >
> >While the censors at Paypal apparently have the legal right to summarily 
> dismiss their clients for any reason they choose, I hope you, my readers, 
> will consider what this means for the future of free commerce for anyone 
> with "alternative lifestyles". Next time you use Paypal, consider this: 
> What if the major banks and credit card companies decided to adopt the 
> same policy? Any commercial venture they deemed "unacceptable" would 
> disappear from the Internet.
> >
> >Government censorship is even worse, and in this arena my friend Barbara 
> Nitke has been fighting for all of us. In Nitke vs. US Attorney General 
> Ashcroft, she and the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom (NCSF) are 
> challenging the obscenity statute of the so-called "Communications 
> Decency Act". Under this statute, anyone who has a website featuring SM, 
> bondage, fetish or any sexually extreme images is at risk, as are those 
> who visit it. For an overview of the case, read this: 
> http://www.wireniusreport.net/overview.html. Please visit 
> http://www.ncsfreedom.org/CDA/index.htm for more information, and 
> consider making a donation.
>
>
>Ron Gustavson~~~~~~~~~~~~~~NO-&infin;-DO
>7607 6FA2 6485 3707  42D1 99AD 7E20 52FD

_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Aug 10 2004 - 07:37:32 PDT