Complaint to Photobucket...
Feb. 15th, 2008 09:43 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
phynckeSo recently I got TOSd with Photobucket. My Valentine's shot was a violation of their terms of service. Everytime they do that, I send in a complaint to them. I don't think they should get away with that and I think it is important to make them see that they are wrong in their definitions of what is obscene. They are also applying a double standard...as female shots seem to go unnoticed in this regard...
I place my submitted complaint behind the cut for those who want to read it.
Dear Photobucket:
I had an image marked for a TOS violation. It was a picture of a male figure in jeans, torso exposed.
Your TOS reads...
obscene, harmful, threatening, harassing, defamatory, or hateful, or that contains objects or symbols of hate, invades the privacy of any third party, contains nudity or pornography (including without limitation any child pornography or child erotica), is deceptive, threatening, abusive, inciting to unlawful action, defamatory, libelous, vulgar or violent, or constitutes hate speech, or is otherwise objectionable in the opinion of Photobucket;
My friends and I have noticed that you are TOS-ing pictures of males as obscene but not women that are nudes or vulgar. What message do you think that this sends to your users? That you feel that it is perfectly fine to objectify women...but not men.
The picture that I posted from your site was neither obscene or nude. It was a tasteful picture of a man in jeans.
If someone reported that to you, you should have looked at it and told them...no, that did not violate photobucket's terms of service.
I find your definitions narrow and reactionary. You are small minded and it is evident that you are chauvinistic there. I find your application of the terms of service uneven and at times extreme.
Why can we not post tasteful pictures of men from your site? I would like an actually answer from you...not a form letter. I actually would like a representative from your company to get back to me on this.
I have read your TOS and the image I am talking about does not violate it.
So you get back to me. I am a paying customer and my album is private. I don't know how or why this one got flagged. It is really an outrage.
Thank you for your time.
******** (name redacted)
I place my submitted complaint behind the cut for those who want to read it.
Dear Photobucket:
I had an image marked for a TOS violation. It was a picture of a male figure in jeans, torso exposed.
Your TOS reads...
obscene, harmful, threatening, harassing, defamatory, or hateful, or that contains objects or symbols of hate, invades the privacy of any third party, contains nudity or pornography (including without limitation any child pornography or child erotica), is deceptive, threatening, abusive, inciting to unlawful action, defamatory, libelous, vulgar or violent, or constitutes hate speech, or is otherwise objectionable in the opinion of Photobucket;
My friends and I have noticed that you are TOS-ing pictures of males as obscene but not women that are nudes or vulgar. What message do you think that this sends to your users? That you feel that it is perfectly fine to objectify women...but not men.
The picture that I posted from your site was neither obscene or nude. It was a tasteful picture of a man in jeans.
If someone reported that to you, you should have looked at it and told them...no, that did not violate photobucket's terms of service.
I find your definitions narrow and reactionary. You are small minded and it is evident that you are chauvinistic there. I find your application of the terms of service uneven and at times extreme.
Why can we not post tasteful pictures of men from your site? I would like an actually answer from you...not a form letter. I actually would like a representative from your company to get back to me on this.
I have read your TOS and the image I am talking about does not violate it.
So you get back to me. I am a paying customer and my album is private. I don't know how or why this one got flagged. It is really an outrage.
Thank you for your time.
******** (name redacted)
