[SunHi Mistwalker]

Well, Kobo has removed my entire catalog from their search engines. Not that I'm particularly upset since Kobo doesn't bring in much revenue, but I am curious to see what they plan to do next. I do see some other self-publisher's books online though.

 

[Claudia King]

I've managed to re-publish my bundle that was censored for the "His Girlfriend's Daddy" title it included. I renamed the offending story "His Girlfriend's Fantasy", and cut down on the usage of the word "daddy" in the description.
Fingers crossed it'll stay up, but if it got through the approval process I'm hoping everything's fine now.

I'm just lucky most of my titles are eRom rather than straight erotica, and most of the kinky stuff I've published doesn't fall under these new guidelines. I really feel for you guys with dozens of titles getting hit by this, it must be an absolute nightmare to deal with such a big chunk of your livelihood being put on hold all at once.

 

[Terrence OBrien]

I can. What, did they wake up the other day and suddenly realize they were selling porn?

Perhaps they woke up one day and discovered they had been caught, and it was time for some huffing and puffing to limit their loss.

 

[swolf]

They can't very well say, "Hey, write whatever you want as long as we can pretend to not know anything about it and collect the money." So, they have to be a bit cryptic for the sake of plausible deniability.

I haven't read the description, but the other two elements seem clear:

Title: Detention Seduction suggests an underage person being seduced.
Cover: Ditto (the title), and probably Erotic In-Laws, suggesting either pseudo-incest or in-law incest. (I think the picture is okay.)

YMMV

Yes, I understand why 'Detention' caused the Title to be rejected. But I've had other books with rejected titles that didn't mention a problem with the cover image.

And In-laws is okay, since I republished a few last night with that in the title and it got through. (Including that identical yellow sidebar.)

And In-law incest?

 

[Andrew Ashling]

Yes, I understand why 'Detention' caused the Title to be rejected. But I've had other books with rejected titles that didn't mention a problem with the cover image.

And In-laws is okay, since I republished a few last night with that in the title and it got through. (Including that identical yellow sidebar.)

And In-law incest?

Did they mention the image, or just the cover in general? I think it will be enough to just change the titles.

In-law incest: Well, since they're in-laws, they're sort of family, which makes it sort of incest.
Granted, you have to try to enter the dirty minds of those sex-obsessed sanctimonious prudes.

Going to take a shower now.

 

[swolf]

As a mandatory reporter, I know a bit about our state laws... One of them is no matter WHAT THE AGE OF CONSENT... sexual relations between a parental figure, teacher etc... is deemed child abuse. Full stop, end of story. Only exception is College age, but that is iffy at best; I imagine Michigan isn't the only state that treats it like this.

That would be a reason to block the content, and maybe the title and blurb, not the cover image.

 

[cinisajoy]

I think calling her underage is stretching it. She looks like she's in her 20's to me.

Here's the stock image page: http://www.123rf.com/photo_18200968_closeup-seriously-blonde-businesswoman-portrait-wearing-eyeglasses-standing-near-wall.html

It's titled "closeup seriously blonde businesswoman portrait wearing eyeglasses standing near wall"

And in the story, she's the teacher, not the student. I wasn't looking for a teenage girl for the cover.

Stay with me one minute and I will explain my logic. First that model looks too young to be the teacher. Second that is the standard "Catholic girl school uniform shirt". I guesstimate that model could be anywhere from 16-24.
So those factors taken with the title (note the title is important in my call) could lead one to draw the wrong conclusion like I did.
That does not look like a business woman to me no matter what the photo is called. Good luck with your books. I hope you do get them back up. And yes one of your books is in my TBR.

 

[swolf]

Did they mention the image, or just the cover in general? I think it will be enough to just change the titles.

The email specifies Cover Image:

Detention Seduction (ASIN: B00EXVP15Q) - Title, Description, Cover Image

In-law incest: Well, since they're in-laws, they're sort of family, which makes it sort of incest.
Granted, you have to try to enter the dirty minds of those sex-obsessed sanctimonious prudes.

Please, don't give them any ideas.

 

[swolf]

Stay with me one minute and I will explain my logic. First that model looks too young to be the teacher. Second that is the standard "Catholic girl school uniform shirt". I guesstimate that model could be anywhere from 16-24.
So those factors taken with the title (note the title is important in my call) could lead one to draw the wrong conclusion like I did.
That does not look like a business woman to me no matter what the photo is called. Good luck with your books. I hope you do get them back up. And yes one of your books is in my TBR.

I'll allow that the Amazon reviewer may have had the same opinion as you do.

 

[swolf]

But your cover (title on your cover) implies that perhaps.

Yes, but as I've stated, I've had other book blocked because of the title but the cover wasn't mentioned.

 

[Andrew Ashling]

The email specifies Cover Image

Sorry, in that case I got nothing.

The only way she could wear more clothes is putting on a balaclava. Or putting a brown paper bag over her head.

 

[PalomaEroti]

I can. What, did they wake up the other day and suddenly realize they were selling porn?

They knew it was there, and they were making money off of it. Probably lots of money. Someone shined a light on them, and it's "Whoa, what's that?"

Too right. It's that scene with Inspector Reynaud in Casablanca when he blows the whistle and shuts down Rick's cafe, saying he's shocked to find gambling going on, and the croupier comes along with his winnings at that very moment ...

 

[Lo/Roxie]

Seems a handful of my taboo titles got smacked with the smut stick while we were in Houston this weekend. I'm sort of amused by the way they whacked installment one in a series but not the rest of the books. 

Earlier this year, I started to pull away from taboo erotica with a third publicly unclaimed pen name and tried to keep my main two pen names "clean" because I worried this was coming again. I haven't decided what I'll do with these books. I only make maybe $2-400 a month on them so they aren't a huge part of my income. I might do Kindle "clean" versions that expunge the super naughty bits and keep the originals at other outlets. IDK.

 

[daringnovelist]

If you use an image of a marital aid, an exact image on an item that is for sale on other parts of Amazon's site, what would happen?

Or a Georgia O'Keefe flower painting, for that matter.

Just curious.

TK aka BB

Search on "Chocolate Dildo" and see what happens....

However, unlike books, those items are much less likely to ever come up in a mistaken search.

Camille

 

[Terrence OBrien]

Search on "Chocolate Dildo" and see what happens....

However, unlike books, those items are much less likely to ever come up in a mistaken search.

Camille

"When peanut M&M's made their debut, so did the tagline 'Melts in your mouth, not in your hand.' In 1960, M&M's added the yellow, red, and green colors."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%26M's

 

[RaeC]

Smashwords should be cleaning up like a sex-starved fat dude after a hot summer wedding.  Unfortunately, Smashwords' storefront has the aesthetic elegance of a sex-starved fat dude after a hot summer wedding.

 

[ghostwriter80]

If any of you feel compelled to sign the change.org petition relating to the ebook banning... goto this link:

http://www.change.org/petitions/amazon-barnes-and-noble-kobo-drop-the-clause-of-removing-erotica-and-self-published-indie-authors?share_id=ecrKvjPzoD&utm_campaign=twitter_link_action_box&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=share_petition

 

[Book Master]

Wow, I am totally blown away at how many reads and replies on this thread!!!!

BM

 

[WordSaladTongs]

Barnes & Noble may actually benefit from all this since they don't seem to be taking the same actions (that I've heard). Can readers buy books directly from Createspace? And if they're removing the Kindle versions, why are they leaving the paperbacks up for sale?

You can buy paperbacks directly from Createspace and it's a much better margin for authors.

 

[DanaDrake]

I think we're over thinking this. "Censors" got a mandate to clean up the smut, with little to no real direction. I reworked one story and description, painted panties on a cover, and changed one cover pic. Most of this will pass in time, or at least subside. As far as the stated unacceptable topics go, I think they are here to stay. It's a matter of how far you can push the envelope. The hypocrisy of selling sex toys with lurid descriptions, on a site where they ban photos of what you can legally see on most beaches, really doesn't matter. This is their sandbox. I for one, want to play here. If I have to change some things to get the bully off my back, I'm okay with it.