Clips4sale got more bananas
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
yukonmukon
Active Member
Sad thing is, for all the content-policing, it’s not the content that’s caused this problem, it’s the venues themselves. Films with explicit nudity, sex, gore, unconsciousness, simulated death - you name it - can be found all over Netflix and similar services, and Visa/MC have no compunctions whatsoever processing those subscriptions. Anonymous users posting genuine footage of non-consensual acts on drugged victims is an unquestionably bad thing, and all those scumbag sites that just shrugged it off as the cost of doing business until they got hit in the wallet are why it’s reached this point. An easy way to avoid letting the puritans set the boundaries of creativity in porn is to not let actual rapists and sadists exhibit videos of their work on your platform.
I don't know if that's a useful metric, I've made nine CC purchases on Onlyfans the past six months and ALL were 'flagged'* by my bank.
(*Not blocked, but requiring extra verification steps in a separate tab with PIN code).
Besides this, I'm not convinced it's the CC companies behind this crackdown. I think it's more Paypal doing the damage.
Sure, but there's a huge gap between what they put in their ToS and what level of enforcement they undertake. Their 'recent' crackdown is more serious. I know people that until about a year ago sold their gynophagia art on Gumroad, and Paypal gave them their proceeds.
Well, I was gonna say "It would certainly seem to be politically motivated" but I refrained from doing so because of your earlier remark.
It's hard to discuss causes when some of the causes are forbidden topics... So I won't.
Purchases, I'm not sure about. That could have been blocked at some point. But remuneration most certainly worked.
Or so I heard
It's ok. I appreciate you for that. But just know it has been coming down for years now. This is not a new thing. I have seen people's sites go under due to dealing with legal stuff over nonsense(stuff that was fake that appeared non con)...and often it is a liability thing and worry of investors. Like in the article I posted above.Well, I was gonna say "It would certainly seem to be politically motivated" but I refrained from doing so because of your earlier remark.
It's hard to discuss causes when some of the causes are forbidden topics... So I won't.
However, things very well may get much worse due to things we cannot discuss here lol.
I have been in communication with C4S about this and have proposed a solution to the 'sleepy' stuff with the model waking up in the same shot to say they consent. This was their(maybe AI) response.
"
Hello,
The issue is that anything involving sleep, knockouts, or unconsciousness is seen as non-consensual by default, no matter the disclaimer or context. Even if it’s clearly acting, platforms and billing partners flag it based on how it appears, not what’s explained.
We get that it’s a common fantasy and that it’s all performance, but the risk of how it’s interpreted is what makes it not allowed here.
We’ll pass along your feedback, it’s appreciated."
"
Hello,
The issue is that anything involving sleep, knockouts, or unconsciousness is seen as non-consensual by default, no matter the disclaimer or context. Even if it’s clearly acting, platforms and billing partners flag it based on how it appears, not what’s explained.
We get that it’s a common fantasy and that it’s all performance, but the risk of how it’s interpreted is what makes it not allowed here.
We’ll pass along your feedback, it’s appreciated."
iFob3
Well-Known Member
How it appears... not how it's explained...
I find that a little simplist... Like clearly showing the person is consenting not being enough... The way it's interpreted...
But it's only cinema...
Sometimes I feel that overcaring about the people's perception is not a good thing. Like it could make us somehow closed minded, and limiting our creativity.
***
Lol that would have been funny : the woman playing dead in the plate, and suddenly waking up to say : Hey guys, Im totally consenting to all this.
before getting back to playing dead again.Actually that could be a good clip idea lol, maybe not saying a disclaimer but something else. Well anyways, sorry for straying away from the subject.
Well yeah, I find it exagerate, this clip4sale idea, even after you gave a nice solution, anyhow.
unbeliever
Well-Known Member
Honestly I used to get a lot of stuff from various studios at clips4sale before but the consistent process of normalizing to a mean has taken any creativity out of most stuff posted there. Videos need to comply with rules so they get their corners steadily polished down and I lose interest because eventually everything is the same. Not to mention that both c4s and manyvids are now having every category flooded with videos unrelated to the category tag.
cala
Well-Known Member
Movies get away with this all the time but billing companies don't appear to have any issues with it.
Rumtugger
Well-Known Member
I would guess that this mostly comes down to regulation and risk. Mainstream studios are part of a well-established industry with strict rules, legal oversight, and content rating systems. Even when the content is intense—like horror or violence—it’s still produced within a framework that billing companies trust.
On the other hand, a lot of niche or independent sites allow user uploads with minimal vetting. That opens the door to potentially illegal or non-consensual content, even if it is unintentional. From a billing company’s point of view, it could be that the lack of oversight makes those platforms a much bigger liability. It’s less about the type of content and more about who’s responsible for it, and how reliably they enforce boundaries.
It would seem to be one of those occasions when a regulatory body could be a good idea. Then studios that produce the content we like could get accredited.
I wonder though because indie horror movies from anyone can be sold normally as long as there’s no sex or nudity. And some of these have full on nudity and gore .. just not actual sex or vaginal insertion. But are labeled as indie horror. And end up on Amazon or whatever.
Rumtugger
Well-Known Member
Hmm... that’s a good point. Perhaps it's not that Amazon and the like are somehow treating indie producers differently but that indie creators have to go through a review process to get listed. Also, platforms like Amazon have their own guidelines and could have quite rigorous content checks behind the scenes.
Therefore, the big difference could be that Amazon (or similar platforms) acts as a gatekeeper and as a payment processor, so the responsibility falls on them to make sure the content meets certain standards. With niche sites that allow direct uploads and don't process payments themselves, there’s less oversight and less accountability, which makes them riskier in the eyes of payment companies.
So it would be less about the content itself and more about who’s hosting it and how well they manage what’s allowed.
I wonder how long it would take PayPal to catch on if, say, a person made a site featuring ‘indie short horror films’ for sale and laced in fetish elements around the stories. But no sex or full nudity.
Some fuck wad would probably eventually report it. If PayPal ever audited it I don’t know. Also maybe to even set up PayPal or similar middle man as a payment gateway takes a whole ass circus of a review first of ‘digital goods’ being sold. But could it be categorized as art. Hmmm
Rumtugger
Well-Known Member
The trick might not be just what’s in the film, it could also be how it’s packaged and presented.
For example, how the film is described: Rather than being explicit and crude about what the film contains, indie films might have descriptions that are more highbrow like, "it's a dark psychological thriller" or "it's surreal and intense" rather than, "it's a gory sexcapade containing depictions of erotic cannibalism and abuse" which is a description likely to set alarms off in PayPals automated filters. You wouldn't even need someone to complain about it.
However, my guess is that the more professional a setup appears to be, the more likely it will be considered legit and have all the paperwork taken care of. If a studio is registered as a formal film-making business entity with clear policies on age compliance, animal rights, tax records, insurance, and all the rest... I could imagine that PayPal would be only to happy to make money from you whatever it is.
Got some clarification as far as C4S. They are a lot better than O.F. at least..in general too :
"
Hello,
Totally fair questions - happy to help clarify.
If the model’s eyes are fully open and they appear conscious, especially if the context leans more toward a robot/freeze fetish, that’s generally allowed.
But if the model appears asleep or unconscious, then nothing sexual can happen at all - even if it’s subtle. That includes touching or groping.
If someone is just sleepy or still, and there’s no sexual activity happening, especially if they’re alone in the scene, that’s usually fine. It really comes down to how it’s framed and what the viewer is being led to believe.
Regards,
Content Compliance Team"
"
Hello,
Totally fair questions - happy to help clarify.
If the model’s eyes are fully open and they appear conscious, especially if the context leans more toward a robot/freeze fetish, that’s generally allowed.
But if the model appears asleep or unconscious, then nothing sexual can happen at all - even if it’s subtle. That includes touching or groping.
If someone is just sleepy or still, and there’s no sexual activity happening, especially if they’re alone in the scene, that’s usually fine. It really comes down to how it’s framed and what the viewer is being led to believe.
Regards,
Content Compliance Team"