Unpublished

[PennLady]

But that has nothing to do with this issue. Penn Lady, what if your local stores said that they didn't want to sell anything to you in your town. I guess it would be legal, I guess that if you wanted food or clothing you could drive to the next town. Would you feel that your rights had been abused?

Aaaugh! No, it is not legal for them to do that and it is not the same thing! Unless I have caused them a problem, they cannot refuse to serve me (I say that b/c I think a biz has a right to protect themselves from abusive customers, etc.).

Mikey, please understand: PayPal has said, you cannot use our service in this manner. That is all. It amounts to bullying or censorship for Smashwords b/c SW, unfortunately, did not diversify their payment methods. If SW even would accept paper checks, they could continue to carry these titles. However, PayPal is their only payment method, and therein lies the problem.

I think that we as a people have to demand that business can't abuse our rights to use their services. When you serve the public, you have certain duties to fill.

PayPal is not a public service. It is a business that has criteria -- it could, for example, refuse to give you an account in the first place if you don't meet those criteria. It has rules for the use of that service.

But in truth I don't have a dog in this fight. I am trying to write stories with no sex and will try my luck with amazon soon. I am not trying to change the underage policy here even though I feel that it chokes the ability to tell so many stories. You could fill a book with the good novels that would not be allowed to post here under their excessive rules against underage, but I am through trying to fight that battle. Its not my fight, I'm just trying to learn to write.

So go write that book. No one's stopping you. Lit also has rules, and some sites are even stricter. EroticStories prohibits incest along with underage, etc., and LushStories doesn't allow anything of the non-con variety. So what? If you write those things, do it and start your own website so people can see it. Lit is not a public service, either.

What drew me into this thread is the blind acceptance of the right of business to do as it pleases with no concern for how it takes away our rights.

Once more, tell me what right is being taken away. People are being inconvenienced, perhaps, but we don't have a right to convenience.

 

[PennLady]

Interesting. Isn't Smashwords also a conduit into B&N? If so, the Smashwords gate may be enough for B&N.

As I understand it, though, the problem is that PayPal doesn't want its service used to purchase the things it objects to (incest, rape, etc.). If B&N has other payment options, then PayPal shouldn't need to do anything. I imagine you could just make a box pop up that says "this payment option not valid for this purchase" or something like that.

 

[alwayswantedto]

<deleted>

 

[sr71plt]

But that has nothing to do with this issue. Penn Lady, what if your local stores said that they didn't want to sell anything to you in your town. I guess it would be legal, I guess that if you wanted food or clothing you could drive to the next town. Would you feel that your rights had been abused?

You (and others) simply seem to be unable to understand this (in some cases just because it inconviences what they want to do).

Paypal is not refusing to handle banking transactions on all books you have written. Smashwords is not refusing to list and distribute any book you have written. It isn't you (so all this civil rights stuff is irrelevant). It's that they have chosen (for whatever reason--with is their constitutional right) not to represent a particular type of book.

The restaurant analogy has been used already, but you and others just aren't listening.

A restaurant can't refuse to serve you food because of who you are. It can, however refuse to serve you if it posts that you have to wear a shirt and/or shoes in the restaurant or if you haven't paid for what you ate there earlier. And, more applicable to this issue, it can choose to refuse to serve you pork if it doesn't serve pork at the restaurant for whatever reason it has not to include it on the menu. It hasn't refused you service for what it does sell (and neither Paypal nor Smashwords is blanket refusing to carry your books). It just doesn't deal in that product--by constitutionally protect freedom of its choice.

 

[sr71plt]

Chargebacks against large companies (like B&N, hotel chains, etc.) are usually not succesful but they can be a PITA for small companies like SW. However, they can be minimized through 3-D security measures, like Verified by Visa and Mastercard SecureCode (and more complex customer authentication services). Changing the website code may be onerous if it was initially poorly designed and wasn't changed as the company grew (otherwise, it would be a relatively simple matter of changing the payment gateway). The problem may be that SW is unable to obtain a merchant account directly and so had to operate through PP. If that is the case, then it very well may be that the credit card companies are putting pressure on PP.

Both Paypal and the credit companies have detailed agreements you have to sign concerning the conditions under which they will provide service. If it's in there and you signed it, it's what you agreed to. Perhaps some folks should go read the various banking agreements they've signed.

 

[alwayswantedto]

<deleted>

 

[Stella_Omega]

Of course there are agreements. The credit card companies also change them from time to time and require subscribers to comply. What is your point?

The point is that smashwords has been disregarding the agreement terms that paypal has laid down since it's very beginning.

Paypal has ALWAYS warned users that pornographic material was iffy.

ALWAYS.

ALWAYS

ALWAYS.

If that is the case, then it very well may be that the credit card companies are putting pressure on PP.

That is exactly what paypal has said, what people here have said, and the reason why adult sites have to find specific card services for their payments-- services that charge a hefty fee for their socially iffy transactions, but them's the breaks.

 

[lovecraft68]

The point is that smashwords has been disregarding the agreement terms that paypal has laid down since it's very beginning.

Paypal has ALWAYS warned users that pornographic material was iffy.

ALWAYS.

ALWAYS

ALWAYS.
That is exactly what paypal has said, what people here have said, and the reason why adult sites have to find specific card services for their payments-- services that charge a hefty fee for their socially iffy transactions, but them's the breaks.

Just like if you look at Amazon's policies it says no descriptions of graphic sex, yet how many thousands of erotic e-books are on there? Hell they have erotica forums.

Curious if Amazon will lighten up on any of their rules just to shove to to Paypal whom they despise. Wouldn't put it past them.

 

[lovecraft68]

You (and others) simply seem to be unable to understand this (in some cases just because it inconviences what they want to do).

Paypal is not refusing to handle banking transactions on all books you have written. Smashwords is not refusing to list and distribute any book you have written. It isn't you (so all this civil rights stuff is irrelevant). It's that they have chosen (for whatever reason--with is their constitutional right) not to represent a particular type of book.

The restaurant analogy has been used already, but you and others just aren't listening.

A restaurant can't refuse to serve you food because of who you are. It can, however refuse to serve you if it posts that you have to wear a shirt and/or shoes in the restaurant or if you haven't paid for what you ate there earlier. And, more applicable to this issue, it can choose to refuse to serve you pork if it doesn't serve pork at the restaurant for whatever reason it has not to include it on the menu. It hasn't refused you service for what it does sell (and neither Paypal nor Smashwords is blanket refusing to carry your books). It just doesn't deal in that product--by constitutionally protect freedom of its choice.

You know what? Go call your boss and tell her she's an idiot because she is crying censorship all over the net.

Make sure you get back to us with the results of the conversation big talker.

and the one word that you and others do not get is the Yet. They are not violating anything Yet.

Just lie down and roll over like a good little puppy Pilot, and fence sit until you know which side wins so you can say you backed it all along.

 

[alwayswantedto]

<deleted>

 

[sr71plt]

You know what? Go call your boss and tell her she's an idiot because she is crying censorship all over the net.

Make sure you get back to us with the results of the conversation big talker.

and the one word that you and others do not get is the Yet. They are not violating anything Yet.

Just lie down and roll over like a good little puppy Pilot, and fence sit until you know which side wins so you can say you backed it all along.

She's not my boss, Mule. And I told you days ago why and how she's doing this and to what purpose. If you want to look for a relationship, the proper one is that I'm her benefactor (and, in turn, she takes work off of me for whatever I want to offer to the public without profit to me). She gets all of the profit off of all of the books I have listed on eXcessica. When she throws out a figure of her earnings, they include 52 of my works that probably constitute the second largest author holdings at eXcessica. (So, get stuffed on that.)

If you want to hyperventilate and pop a gasket and stroke out over your stupidity, I'm rooting for you.

 

[sr71plt]

If PP had ALWAYS precluded SW and others from selling pornographic material, by signed agreements as you say, then why did it allow such transactions for so long and why is it suddenly stopping them now?

Isn't that irrelevant to them doing it?

But this too has been explained--ad naseum--at least the position they've given. The returns paybacks are getting to eat too much into their profits. It's logical that that would be a building problem (as deadbeat "buyers" catch on to what they can get away with). I don't think it's the only reason, but it's the one they give. Even if their real reason is puritanical--or puritanical forces dinking on them, it's their right to have it, to bend to any influences they think necessary to maintain their position, and to activate ignored policies by their choice and on their timing. That too has been explained ad nauseum here.

LOOK: All segments of the process turned a blind eye to this as long as whatever pressures they are under let them do so. It was highly profitable. And they didn't actually read any of those books as they processed them through. They waited for the complaints to roll in. And when the complaints reached a certain level, they activated polices they'd already established.

God, some of you people are dense.

 

[alwayswantedto]

<deleted>

 

[sr71plt]

The point of my original post was that the cost of chargebacks can be minimized through services offered by the credit card companies so this is unlikely to be the only reason for PP suddenly declining some of SW's offerings.

Dense? Is this really how you converse?

Have you ever responded to a chargeback? If not, do you know what the steps involved are? Do you know how the additional services I mentioned can minimize their occurrence?

When we are on the fourth page of saying the same things and folks don't get it, yes, dense is the word.

When folks come up with reasons why "they" can't do something they are actually doing, then, yes, dense is the word.

When folks ignore the real issues becauses it isn't convenient for them, then, yes, dense is the word.

I just posted (for the umpteenth time) that the paybacks don't have to be their only real reason to do what they really have a right to really do.

Want to start trying to face reality?

 

[nomoretears00]

Well, I just got an email saying that my publisher may close up shop at the end of March partly cause of this. I have one ebook with them and they were editing another. Oh boy. Plus I have another ebook with another publisher going through edits, too.

 

[alwayswantedto]

<deleted>

 

[sr71plt]

Well, I just got an email saying that my publisher may close up shop at the end of March partly cause of this. I have one ebook with them and they were editing another. Oh boy. Plus I have another ebook with another publisher going through edits, too.

They shouldn't have to close up shop unless the bulk of their holdings are over the line on acceptance. They should jetison those and go with the authors and titles that aren't problematic and build from there. So, they either are top heavy on what they should have worried about all the time they were making profit off them or they are using scare tactics (as some are doing on this thread--of course some of them are just being dumb and stubborn in the face of reality).

You should query your publisher on that point. If you want to get upset about something and your books aren't among those over the line, your most direct activity should be in pushing your publisher on sacrificing your books for those that have always been on--and now over--the edge. If your book isn't one of the problem ones, you have a right to ask not to be held prisoner to the others.

 

[sr71plt]

Well, I guess you have to excuse me because I missed the "umpteen times" you specifically said

Why would it have to be me specifically? PennLady and Stella have mentioned it constantly on this thread.

Until you stop being stupid and stubborn about this and like this statement, you aren't going to get anywhere.

Research where the reality and room for progress is. It isn't in such statements I've quoted here. You are picking ridiculous ground upon which to start moving anywhere constructive.

 

[alwayswantedto]

<deleted>

 

[sr71plt]

Your statement:

"I just posted (for the umpteenth time) that the paybacks don't have to be their only real reason to do what they really have a right to really do."

And calling someone stubborn; really?

It didn't have to be me to have posted them all. This has been posted to this thread for the umpteenth time. I'm not the only one who's posted it--in fact, since it wasn't sinking in (because folks like you didn't want to understand anything that didn't convenience you), I let the thread slide for a couple of days. PennLady has repeatedly asked for intelligence to kick in--and Stella and a few others-- have chimed in as well. But you obviously just want to stew in your misunderstandings.

You don't really want to get dug out of any real problem you have with this issue, do you? If you did, you wouldn't be mealymouthing like this. Lovecraft68 is doing it because he's dumb as a rock on publishing issues and is on a vendetta campaign. I don't know why you're doing it--unless, of course, your published books are in the newly banned area, in which case you primarily want the rest of us to carry water for you on this and volunteer to go down with you--based on falacious argumentation.

If you are one of the authors behind the eight ball here and you genuinely want to get beyond it and to be able to publish, you wouldn't be using this thread to declare that what is happening can't happen because you are entitled to force the business to support your wants. You'd be looking for and sharing information on dealing with reality and moving to new, enabling processes. And declaring what is happening isn't "right" and signing petitions in fake names ain't going to get there.

 

[nomoretears00]

I will, thanks pilot. My stuff is simple romance with nonhuman, gay male characters. (Greek gods and vampires) None of the three things talked about here are in my stories.

 

[sr71plt]

I will, thanks pilot. My stuff is simple romance with nonhuman, gay male characters. (Greek gods and vampires) None of the three things talked about here are in my stories.

If they dump you or hold you hostage to the over-the-edge titles, they aren't taking your interests into account. Look to jumping ship (you'll have to look at what you can do with your contract) to another publisher (look at the publisher listings at Allromanceebooks.com and Fictionwise or Bookstrand or 1Erotica; look for GM books like yours that publisher is doing; query them). And if none of that works, let me take a look at one of them to see if I can see where it might fit.

 

[Ironiclaconic]

The problem is that SW tied themselves too closely to Paypal. Bad choice. Looks like there is a market niche for another self-publish site that instead just takes a higher cut of the transactions to pay the higher credit card fees on the "problematic" material.

 

[nomoretears00]

I absolutely will... on both accounts. Thank you for the offer, pilot, it's very much appreciated.

 

[sr71plt]

The problem is that SW tied themselves too closely to Paypal. Bad choice. Looks like there is a market niche for another self-publish site that instead just takes a higher cut of the transactions to pay the higher credit card fees on the "problematic" material.

There's obviously room for a banking competitor to Paypal too. It's a lucrative opportunity, and entrepreneurs, as a group, aren't dumb or low risk takers, so I'm sure there are those trying to cut through all the noise like we're getting on this thread and looking for how they can grab onto it. It won't happen yesterday, though, just because of the hysteria and wallowing that's going on.