destyknight

I can't say I'm surprised. Unfortunately, it goes beyond an issue of whether third-party vendors should exercise this kind of judgement about what is/isn't allowed - in some jurisdictions, there's an awful lot of pressure on them to make sure that their services aren't being used in ways that the Powers That Be think need to be restricted. For instance, The Supreme Court of Canada has already explicitly said that portraying explicit sex is fine, but that it's illegal to combine it with violence or power dynamics (you can read the decision here, if you're interested: http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1992/1992canlii124/1992canlii124.html). And after last week's 'if you don't support invasive monitoring of internet activities, you are supporting pedaphiles' discussion in Parliament, it's within the realm of possibility that ISPs and services like PayPal could be held criminally liable for 'facilitating' these 'criminal' activities - it's completely predictable that they'll be OTT about protecting their own asses.