PORN SITES that offer TORRENTS (illegal, bootleg material) are moral enough to draw the line at FAKE NUDES. Ebay is NOT moral enough to do it.
Proof?
As of today, here's the front page of PORNBAY, one of the main sites where free downloads of copyrighted material are available. They say NO to the fake nudes:
"After some consideration, it has been decided for now to not permit the "Deepfakes" videos....it is not consensual and as such falls under that section of the Forbidden List. It is the opinion of the staff that these are too invasive on the persons who are being digitally added to the actual porn..."
Yes, PORNBAY has the integrity to have a "Forbidden List." EBAY?
DEVIN WENIG, the CEO of EBAY has not officially stated EBAY forbids "digitally added" heads of celebrities Photoshopped onto porn images. There is nothing that even forbids "non-consensual" photos from being posted, including "my ex-wife" and "my ex-girlfriend" revenge porn.
While eBay phone support emphatically states that such images "are against our policy," you won't actually find it in writing on eBAY. This is what you see:
Why DEVIN WENIG, CEO of EBAY, wants to be in the same category as HARVEY WEINSTEIN, ousted CEO of MIRAMAX, is hard to understand.
What does DEVIN WENIG like about gangbang photos on the late Carrie Fisher? On pedophilia images of Emma Watson? On pictures the intentionally degrade and demean women for profit, with NO SIGNED MODEL RELEASE OF AGE OR CONSENT?
Why is it that the guy who runs PORNBAY is showing more integrity, morality, fairness, and respect for women than the guy who runs EBAY?
EBAY, in fact, allows a lot of nude images right out in the open, and not confined to their "adult" section. Report a topless celebrity image and it's not removed. Report a "Hustler"-type photo (and Hustler magazine IS restricted to the "adult" section) and it usually stays.
The excuse if you call phone support is "we have millions of auctions..." and not enough staff to handle the complaints? Not enough staff who know an offensive item that should not be viewed by a 12 year-old typing "nude photo" into the search engine? Really?
Here's EBAY's rule page on nude photos:
A very strange quirk with eBay is that in their adult section, there are plenty of images of sadism and masochism, and none are ever removed. Should they be? Not if it involves consenting adults. It's a topic not far removed from pudgy E.L. James' hit "50 Shades" movies. If men or women want to be abused, and get paid for it, and SIGN A MODEL RELEASE, fine.
The difference is that JANE FONDA, for one example (and you can find hundreds on this site) did NOT sign a model release for this obvious fake picture, and the seller should either be suspended, or forbidden from EVER selling anything similar on ANY famous woman.
No signed model release? NO SALE. It should be as simple as that.
If PORNOBAY draws the line on digital fakes of celebrities, WHAT IS WRONG WITH EBAY? Does DEVIN WENIG not know what's going on? Are the various people in phone support and other divisions of eBay afraid to ask him to STOP ABUSING WOMEN FOR PROFIT?