ASHLEY JUDD, the feminist: USED by EBAY SELLERS via Fake Nudes

It would be helpful of Ashley Judd, or some other feminist actress with a lot of influence, would put in a call to eBay and ask why THIS is allowed:

Shouldn't pictures like this require a seller to state, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, that they have signed model releases of age and consent? And shouldn't those model releases be included in the ad?

At the moment, eBay will remove an item like this if Ashley Judd or a representative asks...provided THEY fill out a form stating that the material is NOT authorized. (vero@ebay.com)

We believe that no stars, and no women (the ones on those "500 hot chicks on a CD-R" items loaded with material stolen from "revenge porn" websites) should have to jump through eBay hoops.  FEDERAL LAW:

Title 18, Sections 2257 and 2257A: all models, actors, actresses, performers and/or other persons who appear in any visual depiction or “sexually explicit conduct” (as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. §2256). 

Sellers MUST have a signed model release stating age and consent. Where in these ads, is Judd's signature on a document stating she has agreed to the sales of the photos, and that the photos are compliant with Title 18, Sections 2257 and 2257a of Federal Law? 

Elizabeth Gillies and "Offensive Materials"

Ebay has rules against "Offensive Materials" that demean a race or religion. But not women.

Somehow, imagining female celebrities raped is ok with EBAY?

Is it really asking so much of a website that already has quite a few rules and regulations of common sense and morality, to stop letting sick, nickel-and-dime misogynists get away with this? 

It's also in violation of Federal law regarding pornographic materials that require a signed model release of age and consent.

Title 18, Sections 2257 and 2257A: all models, actors, actresses, performers and/or other persons who appear in any visual depiction or “sexually explicit conduct” (as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. §2256). 

Sellers MUST have a signed model release stating age and consent. Where, next to this image is her signature on a document stating she has agreed to the sales of the photos, and that the photos are compliant with Title 18, Sections 2257 and 2257a of Federal Law? 

Twitter Bans Porn Without Consent - EBAY does not

Today's news is that Twitter has banned "revenge porn."

On eBay, this is fine.  

Why is Twitter more moral than Ebay? Is it because Ebay makes more money off this material? 

Here's a typical fake image on Katy Perry that an eBay seller is making money on, without stating that there's a signed form of consent. This is one of the milder images. Check the postings below for much worse on such a wide range of women, from underage actresses to the President's wife. 

FEDERAL LAW:

Title 18, Sections 2257 and 2257A: all models, actors, actresses, performers and/or other persons who appear in any visual depiction or “sexually explicit conduct” (as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. §2256). 

Sellers MUST have a signed model release stating age and consent. Where, next to the Katy Perry image, is her signature on a document stating she has agreed to the sales of the photos, and that the photos are compliant with Title 18, Sections 2257 and 2257a of Federal Law? 

The uploader should get a form letter stating: "You have nude photos with NO statement of age or consent. Provide this or remove the material." When it comes to obvious violations, such as Photoshopped nude celebrity or "leaked celebrity" images, they should be removed instantly, as well as the "ha ha, look at the drunk naked girl" pix or "my girlfriend naked, sleeping." In the latter two cases, people can find other things to post if they desperately need to amuse strangers.