/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4084230
>whether or not major social media outlets are willing to host NSFW content.
> With advertisers and small businesses reliant on Twitter, having the surge of porn bots following them looks bad for their businesses
That is not entirely false, but the future of social media is far from that. NSFW content and creators are establishing themselves, are not seen as weirdos anymore and are even promoted due to the generational shift in companies and marketing.
>the rise of bots was what led Tumblr executives to launch a full scale purge of all NSFW
Wrong. It was because they got huge accusation of enabling pedos to circulate cp iirc Since they couldn't police every single nsfw post, they outright banned it from their site.
>With major credit card companies cracking down on servers
Porn is not the issue here, Anon. It's money. When a big company knows it can get away with screwing you over, they will do it. But, again, your completely missing the real context. NSFW artist don't do money with ads, they make money on commission and donations.
Pornstars/Porn industry =/= nsfw artist.
> porn artists are going to have a terrible time staying afloat.
Except they won't. Porn art of an existing IP is considered parody and counts as fair use. Of course, as long as you're not taking/using any assets from the people of the IP you're making porn of. As long as you don't do that, they won't ever sue you because only a stupid lawyer would dive head-first into a losing battle.
And people can report all they want, they won't get any money from that. Besides, there can't be any copyright infringement if you're not directly selling a product.
It's even rare that a companies sues an artist for making a porn of their IP. They cannot officially endorse that and never speak out about that, but they don't give a flying fuck, because it's free publicity and if they were to do something against it, it would only make fans turn against them and their IP.
Porn will always sell, Anon.