Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses

OnlyFans Drops Planned Porn Ban, Will Continue To Allow Sexually Explicit Content (variety.com) 163

Posted by msmash from the change-of-heart dept.
OnlyFans dropped plans to ban pornography from its service, less than a week after the U.K. content-creator subscription site had announced the change citing the need to comply with policies of banking partners. From a report: On Wednesday, the company said it "secured assurances necessary to support our diverse creator community," suggesting that it has new agreements with banks to pay OnlyFans' content creators, including those who share sexually explicit material. "Thank you to everyone for making your voices heard. We have secured assurances necessary to support our diverse creator community and have suspended the planned October 1 policy change," the company said in a tweet. "OnlyFans stands for inclusion and we will continue to provide a home for all creators," the company said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OnlyFans Drops Planned Porn Ban, Will Continue To Allow Sexually Explicit Content More

OnlyFans Drops Planned Porn Ban, Will Continue To Allow Sexually Explicit Content

Comments Filter:

  • In other news (Score:5, Funny)

    by serviscope_minor ( 664417 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @09:08AM (#61728323) Journal

    OnlyFans also announces that it has dropped plans to put all of it's money in a dumpster and set fire to it.

    Seriously? What kind of company decides to hack away their most massively dominant revenue stream and about the only thing they are known for. You may as well just wind up, and start a new company. At least that way people won't constantly be asking "wait isn't that for porn?"

    • Re:In other news (Score:5, Funny)

      by Fuzi719 ( 1107665 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @09:25AM (#61728419)
      What kind of company decides to hack away their most massively dominant revenue stream and about the only thing they are known for.
      Tumblr enters the chat!

      • What kind of company decides to hack away their most massively dominant revenue stream and about the only thing they are known for. Tumblr enters the chat!

        Textbot spittin' some truth here...

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        What kind of company decides to hack away their most massively dominant revenue stream and about the only thing they are known for.

        In the U.S., the Christian Taliban have enormous power, and they go after anyone who does not adhere to their extremist beliefs.

        OnlyFans didn't just "decide" to ban porn. Banks and credit card companies are afraid of the Christian Taliban and don't have the guts to tell them to fuck off.

        OnlyFans seems to have negotiated a deal that keeps them in the porn business, but, like all deals with terrorists, it is not guaranteed to be a long lasting deal.

        • Re:In other news (Score:5, Insightful)

          by dpidcoe ( 2606549 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @01:42PM (#61729467)
          I keep seeing this "christian extremists in control of the banks" thing cited everywhere in the comments about onlyfans drama, but if it were really some kind of right-wing christian extremist thing, how do you explain banking and payment services also having it in for anything related to firearms?

    • What kind of company decides to hack away their most massively dominant revenue stream

      Yahoo.

      But in the case of Onlyfans you may want to look into if they "wanted" to do that or if they were "told" to do that. A company that gets blocked from financial institutions may as well set their money on fire, that's ultimately how useful it would be to them. Glad they found an alternative.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by EvilSS ( 557649 )
        Yea but those financial institutions are private companies. If OnlyFans wants to host porn they could always start their own bank, payment network, and credit card company.

        Or so I'm told.

        • When Slashdot neckbeards nonchalantly say it, it always sounds so easy and doable! I mean "duh", why didn't OF think of that???

        • lol yeah my thoughts... It's kind of like if you want your own computer you can always mine metals, melt sand into sillicone. get a microscope and carve the chips.
          • This reminds me of all the trolls who say, "if you don't like capitalism why do you XYZ." Where XYZ could be: use the internet, have a job, live in a non-communist society, survive in a world where every communist project is destroyed through war and economic sanctions, or have an iPhone.

      • Re:In other news (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Rhipf ( 525263 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @09:50AM (#61728533)

        Or it could have all been an elaborate publicity stunt. Say you are going to kill off the main revenue stream of your businesses and see how much news it will generate. Wait a week and reverse the decision once the news cycle has run its course.

        Ok, maybe I am just getting a bit too cynical.

        • When you need them. It's HARD to be too cynical...

        • Re: In other news (Score:2, Interesting)

          by bradley13 ( 1118935 )
          Nah, I think they really were under pressure. In the US, both political wings have a puritan streak. Their content creators have apparently been fleeing to other sites, likr fansly - lost business is likely to stay list.

        • Or it could have all been an elaborate publicity stunt.

          Elaborate publicity stunts usually do not involve simultaneously pissing off your customers, content creators and investors all at once. Also what makes you think they need publicity? They are a huge business and you pretty much can't visit a porn site on the internet which doesn't reference OnlyFans. Shit many you can't even pirate porn without getting advertisement for Onlyfans.

          What makes you think they in any way shape or form needed the exposure?

      • Glad they found an alternative.

        There are two ways to get something done. With careful research, or being big or controversial enough to make huge headlines and then wait for the offers and incentives to come rolling in. It's how Amazon picked a new HQ.

    • They found a payment processor (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @09:54AM (#61728551)
      who would do porn. That's all. The main issue is keeping the illegal stuff off, which is harder than it sounds.

      That said, I gather it wasn't started for pron, but rather as something like Pateron, and the naughty stuff just took over, so it's possible the creators are a little miffed that their site didn't work out the way they wanted it to, not that the piles and piles of cash don't offer some condolences.

      • Re:They found a payment processor (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Jason Earl ( 1894 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @11:04AM (#61728793) Homepage Journal

        As someone who has worked for a payment card processor these sorts of businesses also tend to be the ones with the most chargebacks. The significant other finds the charge and the account holder says that he doesn't know where that charge came from. It must be fraudulent. The customer calls the credit card company to get their money back and OnlyFans, the merchant bank, and the payment processor lose money. The best processors, or at least the processors with the lowest rates, shy away from these businesses simply because of the added hassle.

        So, like you said, I am sure that OnlyFans finally heard from their processor that they wouldn't process credit card transactions for them any more. They attempted to change their service enough so that they could still work with their old payment processor and their undoubtedly better rates. This is probably how they hoped this would work. I have also worked for a web hosting company with several different brands that were on completely different platforms. Some of the brands featured a terms of service that banned pornography, some of them did not. When we tried to measure the amount of porn on the different platforms we found that the difference in amount of porn was slight. However, I am quite sure that the different policies allowed the "clean" brands to process cards less expensively. I imagine that OnlyFans expected to do something similar. They changed their policy so that it banned explicit sex, and they planned to turn a blind eye to all but the most egregious violations of the policy. Everyone else would be categorized as "artistic nudity."

        The wrinkle in this plan was that OnlyFans' customers saw the change and panicked. They apparently want more explicit sex, not less. So OnlyFans switched payment processors. This will cost them a bit more, but they will be able to keep processing credit cards.

      • Odd that the actual issue, under-18 selling and appearing in porn on the site [bbc.com] is not mentioned. That's all this was ever about - the payment processors yelling at OnlyFans for peddling illegal content (i.e. child sex abuse for money). Somehow all the summaries here leave this out.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          Ah, yes, that would be "children" being 16 or 17 years old "abusing" themselves, right?

          • Try as young as 12. You for online porn involving twelve year olds?

            • Odd how it is only bad when someone violates OF's terms of service, breaks federal law, uploads a fake ID and a host of other steps to stop it.

              But when it's Facebook not doing any of that regarding their private groups, where the photos include much younger than 12, these same folks don't seem to care.

              It's almost like there's a motivation beyond "save the children".

              • Well I don't know about others, but, yes, I think the stuff Facebook is getting away with is also sometimes nauseating. Admittedly it is sad that this only gets attention when a big news outfit like NYT or BBC does an expose. This stuff is actually illegal. Do we actually enforce laws anymore?

                • We do when those uppity women find a way to get paid without the consent of a man. But if they can't make money off it, well then it's not nearly so important to investigate.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by gweihir ( 88907 )

              The BBC article says 16 and 17 for people offering content.

            • OnlyFans' business model is about cultivating parasocial relationships. There's no practical way for a 12 year old to do that (or someone use a 12 year old to do that) in public for very long. It's a lot less vulnerable to (and a LOT less economically dependent on) drive-by uploads of illegal exploitation imagery than most other sites.

              OnlyFans users pay for stuff like their names appearing in the video. The payments themselves are very traceable too. Think pedophiles are interested in that?

              Sure, illegal mat

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by jwhyche ( 6192 )

              This will probably be a ongoing problem for as long as porn is online. This was even a problem when porn was not online. Tracy Lords anyone?

              The problem is, kids are smart. They have figure out how to make boat loads of money by sharing explicit videos and pictures of themselves. As long as these services exist, and even if they didn't, some smart kid is going to figure out away around the blocks.

          • No, the consumer paying for the content is abusing them (and the company who set up the website enabling that, which is what we are talking about). If some guy paid a 16 year old for a strip show in real life, they'd go to jail quite fast. And the person who "facilitated" would be lucky to not go down for child trafficking these days.
        • Somehow all the summaries here leave this out.

          This is similar to Tumblr. They had so much porn, including rape videos, they thought putting most everything behind an account login would fix things. But you never saw that in any of the summaries.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          Odd that the actual issue, under-18 selling and appearing in porn on the site is not mentioned. That's all this was ever about - the payment processors yelling at OnlyFans for peddling illegal content (i.e. child sex abuse for money). Somehow all the summaries here leave this out.

          No, because I doubt that makes up a significant proportion of the site users (and I'd bet that sites like Google and Apple host far more). Sure some may be into that stuff, and that stuff is illegal, but it's likely not at a high e

          • No, it's the fact that the entire industry isn't great when it comes to payment handling. The bill comes around and your significant other starts asking questions about some... bill entries. Of course, the husband acts innocent and a chargeback is initiated. The industry rate for this is extremely high, which is why payment processors charge a lot to handle those kinds of payments - the industry is known for the high chargeback rate and the costs are passed onto the vendor.
            Oh it's worse than that Google Be

    • You are making the assumption that "stay the course" was an available option.

      The credit card processors were threatening to cut them off. No processors, no money coming in, and they die.

      Trying to migrate to "non porn" gave them a route that was only probably going to kill them instead of one guaranteed to kill them.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Indeed. Such a surprise. The level of stupidity needed to make that wrong turn is pretty staggering though. Unless they knew exactly what was going to happen but had to put on a show for their bank. (Than that bank would have been staggeringly stupid.)

    • Apparently the credit card companies were refusing to accept payments, at least according to the OnlyFans article I read this morning.

  • Looks like an investor figured out what they bought and how that purchased was about to blow away like a fart in the wind.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by TimothyHollins ( 4720957 )

      Looks like an investor figured out what they bought and how that purchased was about to blow away like a fart in the wind.

      Aren't you lucky. Mine tend to linger and the only thing that disperses is the doubt as to who's guilty.

    • I can see the investors at a board room.
      (Directer playing it cool)
      We have a request from a site called "OnlyFans" they seem to be getting some good volume and seem to be a good place to invest. Does anyone know what that site is about?

      (Board members)
      Eyes shift nervously... Umm no, we never heard of it. But their numbers look good.

      (Director)
      Ok, then we should just give them our standard boiler plate offer than.

      (Board members)
      Sounds like a plan.

  • They're smarter than you think (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Locke2005 ( 849178 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @09:14AM (#61728355)
    The threat to ban porn was just a ploy for free publicity the whole time? I'm SHOCKED! I'll bet a lot more people know what they can purchase on OnlyFans now, don't they? Of course, they also know they can get better content for free, so...

    • Re:They're smarter than you think (Score:5, Insightful)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @09:32AM (#61728449)

      The threat to ban porn was just a ploy for free publicity the whole time? I'm SHOCKED!

      No, you're stupid. There's a difference. If you think Onlyfans needed publicity or decided to do it by directly pissing off its "content creators", its users, and its investors then you're delusional. This entire ordeal has not been positive for them.

      Occam's razor:
      Suicidal company decides to commit suicide in the hope for publicity it doesn't need.
      OR
      On the back of a virtually endless attacks on pornographic content by banks, one of the largest purveyors of online pornography got targetted shortly after *the* largest one did.

      Your conspiracy doesn't pass the pub test.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jred ( 111898 )
      And a lot of their content creators have moved to new platforms that take less of a cut. They don't trust OF now.

  • nothing changes but they get free advertisement everywhere.

  • Banks (Score:4, Interesting)

    by phalse phace ( 454635 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @09:17AM (#61728371)

    On Wednesday, the company said it "secured assurances necessary to support our diverse creator community," suggesting that it has new agreements with banks to pay OnlyFans' content creators, including those who share sexually explicit material.

    If the issue was really the banks, there are other non traditional banks out there.

    Heck, take crypto. I thought one of the reasons for the existence of crypto was so people didn't have to put up with slow-to-change old-fashioned banks?

    • You better believe it. They're just too slow in accepting my incoming malware payments. What with the need to scrutinize everything and government regulation.

    • Nah, that's a much worse business model. I'm already reluctant to sign up to OF because they want me to scan my driver's license to verify my identity. I'm not against that verification in principle, but I really don't care to give that information up to just anyone and maybe have it released if they're hacked.

      So on TOP of that, you want me to set up some crypto account and put money into some volatile ponzi scheme and subject myself to that sort of headache?

      Until crypto is easier to use, uses less dirty po

    • The issue was never the banks. The banks never cared. They were trying to move away from the 'underage porno' stigma, and realized right quick that they'd go out of business without it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by chill ( 34294 )

      Banking and money transmission are related, but separate industries with separate licensing and regulations [mercury.cash].

      PayPal, for example, was a licensed money transmitter long before being licensed as a bank [wikinews.org].

      There's a world of difference between the depository and non-depository worlds when it comes to licensing and regulation. Banks, Money Transfer Operators and Commercial Companies outside the US are not allowed to solicit clients from the US without being registered with FinCEN and having Money Transmitter Licens

    • I thought one of the reasons for the existence of crypto was so people didn't have to put up with slow-to-change old-fashioned banks?

      Maybe, but those using crypto have to suffer with the slow-to-process crypto markets, not to mention the very real possibility their "money" will vanish in thin air when a hack hits the exchange. And since there is no insurance like there is for the banking industry, those slow-to-change old fashioned banks will always have the advantage over crypto.

  • Call me pessimistic, but my thought is that this was all just a ploy to get OnlyFans some free marketing.

    • Not really. A lot of their "creators" jumped ship to other platforms. It's not been good for OnlyFans.

      OTOH, there's some Christian groups in the US and UK that have been causing problems for payment processors that allow porn. Their efforts mean PornHub can't take credit cards to this day. Not at all strange that they'd go after another big target.

  • Needs to stock up on that bath water.
  • People - right-wing, left-wing, no-wing are trying to shut us down. Come buy some from us!
  • So who is going to process their payments, since apparently the "traditional" banks and processors don't want the money? Spank Bank? Jizz Jangle? Fuck Bucket?

  • One word: defi. As soon as Onlyfans starts to take crypto, it's game over. Like all things with sex, sex is what will define or break a platform. They solved the battle between VHS and BETA and HDDVD and Bluray. They will now solve it for banking formats.

    • Like all things with sex, sex is what will define or break a platform. They solved the battle between VHS and BETA and HDDVD and Bluray. They will now solve it for banking formats.

      They seem to have had an outsized influence on the VHS win, but they did not win the succeeding battle. The porn purveyors preferred HDDVD, not Bluray. Bluray "won" because Sony paid absolutely massive bribes so their format could win. They were still butthurt over Beta being such a loser and were willing to do anything to make Bluray the dominant format. They paid off HDDVD to go away, simple as that. Porn didn't sway that decision.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jonwil ( 467024 )

        The fact that Sony themselves owned a large amount of content also really helped Blu-Ray.

  • They noticed they were about to kill their own business.

  • That servers will not be returning and staff remains difficult to find.

  • Most of their major content creators have already taken steps to leave the site. The halt on the ban is only temporary. They haven't said they're fully committing to keeping adult creators. So all the sex workers have already begun migrating their bases over to other sites. The trust was broken, the site takes a large percentage of payments, they provide poor support, have frequent outages, and lack a discovery service so OF provides no audience itself. There's no real reason to stay on the site besides ine
  • They made a decision before doing an analysis of what impact it would have on their revenue. After determining their revenue would drop 99%, they had to reverse course.

Slashdot Top Deals

Some people claim that the UNIX learning curve is steep, but at least you only have to climb it once.

Close