|
|
|
|
|
by qb45
3277 days ago
|
|
Possibly to protect the "neutrality and freedom of speech" argument - it's 3rd party content, we only publish, it doesn't contain actual nudity so CP laws don't apply, go ask the poster to take it down, we can't help you. And then in court: it's 3rd party content, we only publish, we only remove when required by law, posters are responsible for everything. Of course this cover is busted if they really edited those ads. |
|
> “At first I didn’t see the nakedness or what she was wearing or the poses she was in, but then it began to sink in, what the ad was for, and everything just fell apart.”
This does seem to imply actual nudity, which makes it even more surprising they didn't immediately take it down when it was pointed out to them.