SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the is-a-cherub-also-child-pornography? dept.
Google has announced their new Adult Content Policy for Blogger...
Starting March 23, 2015, you won't be able to publicly share images and video that are sexually explicit or show graphic nudity on Blogger.
Note: We’ll still allow nudity if the content offers a substantial public benefit, for example in artistic, educational, documentary, or scientific contexts.
Changes you’ll see to your existing blogs:
If your existing blog doesn’t have any sexually explicit or graphic nude images or video on it, you won’t notice any changes.
If your existing blog does have sexually explicit or graphic nude images or video, your blog will be made private after March 23, 2015. No content will be deleted, but private content can only be seen by the owner or admins of the blog and the people who the owner has shared the blog with.
They also explain how a blog can be exported, presumably for use should you wish to change hosts.
https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/6170671?p=policy_update&hl=en&rd=1
Unfortunately, one man's art is another man's porn - so if you run a photography blog or just have images taken on the beach during your holidays you might want to back-up your data or recheck its contents.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday February 26 2015, @11:49PM
It means no such thing.
Sure it does. They allowed it before because they claimed they were committed to freedom of expression.
They allowed it before because they weren't being dragged into court, getting take down notices, violating local state federal and foreign laws and having to settle law suits out of court for millions.
Laws have changed. Revenge porn laws are springing up all over. Major site hacks (iCloud) are sending a flood of stolen photos online into blogs.
The never were committed to freedom of expression at the risk of losing their own freedom.
STOP: Go back and re-read the last sentence.
It was always predicated on it being legal expression. But its not legal anymore in many jurisdictions.
That much should be patently obvious.
Once something is illegal Google has to stop it. If they didn't, You yourself would be here demanding they follow the law or be thrown in jail.
[I find it patently absurd that an AC is taking Google to task for failing to shell out millions and risk jail time to protect illegal activities of others. Way to stand behind your assertions AC. Way to set an example.]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.