Mangadex to purge titles for legal reasons

[SkyHize]

Plenty of sexual depictions of minors in manga and anime. You guys are unable to reveal the true reasons and it's pretty obvious. If your website doesn't support freedom, then I won't support your website anymore.

 

[sorawild]

• The content itself confirms that they are under the age of 18.

Again, this is literally 80% of manga. The overwhelming majority of ecchi manga includes characters that are below 18 being put in sexual situations. You would have to delete nearly all the manga on this site to be in compliance with this rule.

 

[hibikiyamada]

Jumping back here because my previous post had a sentence that was poorly worded and came off as too much of a personal attack or moral grandstanding. I also didn't provide enough context on the content being removed, so that's on me.

I've been reading some of the replies, and thank you for voicing your opinions and concerns, whether in this thread or elsewhere. Users want clarification on the removals, so please find it below.

We were made aware of content that goes against our content policy, specifically clause 3.1.1 regarding underage characters in pornographic settings. The content that was removed, and some content still being reviewed, includes entries labelled Mature, with characters that are engaging in sexual intercourse and either:

• They are clearly very young in appearance, and the content does not confirm that they are adults.
• The content itself confirms that they are under the age of 18.

Nothing else is being examined at this time. We're currently exploring options to retain the title entry and other non-infringing metadata, but for now, we need to proceed with the removal.

Wait, so now it isn’t about law and compliance? Just some content policy that wasn’t being actively moderated on for literally YEARS? You can’t expect people to believe this is the reason why you all suddenly had a change of heart.

 

[EtherealNeko]

Well, this feels like the end of an era.

That said, I’d really appreciate some clarity.

Should I be reviewing my uploads and removing certain R-rated doujinshi preemptively? I’m aware that a handful of my uploads could potentially fall outside of VISA/MC guidelines. If enforcement is tightening, I’d much rather know upfront than unknowingly cross a line.

Is it better to be proactive here, or are there specific categories being targeted? Right now, it’s difficult to tell if it's better to let the staff do it themselves.

For example, does this only apply to explicitly NSFW content, or could it extend to SFW series that include suggestive themes or characters that might be tagged loli/shota? Are we talking strictly about explicit depictions, or is “appearance” alone enough to trigger removal?

I’m not trying to argue policy... I just want to understand where the line actually is so uploaders aren’t left guessing. Clear, official statement would help a lot. Finding out from a thread like this kind of sucks.

Titles being removed are those we have been made aware of through a legal nexus as "considered the distribution of illegal material". Moderation will not go beyond the titles mentioned; there was Papa Milk and anything adjacent, and some others still in review.

If we are notified of anything else, we will try to inform uploaders before proceeding with removals, where possible.

 

[UnnamedPlayer]

We were made aware of content that goes against our content policy, specifically clause 3.1.1 regarding underage characters in pornographic settings. The content that was removed, and some content still being reviewed, includes entries labelled Mature, with characters that are engaging in sexual intercourse and either:

• They are clearly very young in appearance, and the content does not confirm that they are adults.
• The content itself confirms that they are under the age of 18.

The first clause is pure bullshit and can be a simple artistic choice.

The second is also pure bullshit : Child pornography is not everything below 18. In nearly all countries, the sexual majority is close to 15-16 and can be even lower and go to 13. You're using a reddit/twitter/bluesky false intepretation of pedophilia and CSAM that have nothing to do with the real laws of nearly all countries.

A pure non-answer. You don't even understand the rules you try to apply. And i'm pretty sure the legal nexus excuse is pure invention, no lawyer could tell you to do that, especially about the two clause you mention. And if it's really that, then next time you want to answer to a legal injunction, try to check it first !

 

[TGN]

Jumping back here because my previous post had a sentence that was poorly worded and came off as too much of a personal attack or moral grandstanding. I also didn't provide enough context on the content being removed, so that's on me.

I've been reading some of the replies, and thank you for voicing your opinions and concerns, whether in this thread or elsewhere. Users want clarification on the removals, so please find it below.

We were made aware of content that goes against our content policy, specifically clause 3.1.1 regarding underage characters in pornographic settings. The content that was removed, and some content still being reviewed, includes entries labelled Mature, with characters that are engaging in sexual intercourse and either:

• They are clearly very young in appearance, and the content does not confirm that they are adults.
• The content itself confirms that they are under the age of 18.

Nothing else is being examined at this time. We're currently exploring options to retain the title entry and other non-infringing metadata, but for now, we need to proceed with the removal.

Yo dawg, I got some manga to report: 49 pages of titles

 

[sorawild]

Sucks America dictating for the whole world.
First they block access for everyone because titles are licensed to that country, but not the whole world.
Now loli manga. But the real cannibal pedo cabals still running loose.
The internet should be a neutral zone, that was the dream.

Nothing to do with the US. Lolisho content is completely legal here even AFTER the new Texas law passed. This is mainly because of the UK and Australia.

 

[ashikoki69]

piracy sites trying to take a moral stance on subject matter is actually pathetic. fuck MD

 

[seekermoc]

Titles being removed are those we have been made aware of through a legal nexus as "considered the distribution of illegal material". Moderation will not go beyond the titles mentioned; there was Papa Milk and anything adjacent, and some others still in review.

If we are notified of anything else, we will try to inform uploaders before proceeding with removals, where possible.

What legal nexus? Illegal how and where?

 

[Pauan]

You must be mistaking the US with Australia and UK. And for that matter, mistaking the loud, but politically powerful voices of a few religious extremists as representing the views of the whole country.

The whole Texas argument is absurd, as their law is so broad that it's unenforceable anyway. Worst case, just blacklist Texas IPs and make them use VPNs like most of Europe already needs anyway.

edit: this whole situation is also extra ironic given that MD was literally founded by a scanlation group that focused on loli manga.

It is liberals who are pushing for censoring lolis, in order to "protect women" and "stop misogyny" and "stop the male gaze".

Just like how Joseph Lieberman and Herbert Kohl had pushed in the 90s for laws to ban violent video games:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993–94_United_States_Senate_hearings_on_video_games

But people completely forgot about that, they only remember Jack Thompson, who was a complete nobody that everybody ignored and laughed at.

People falsely believe that censorship only comes from right-wing religious groups, but that's completely incorrect.

 

[Lud]

"3.1.1 Illegal Content, in particular, child pornography, child abuse and drug abuse"
This is the clause; so you're telling me that this website has to abide and delete all manga that depicts underage characters being sexualized, being abused and general drug abuse if someone demands it?
That's a death sentence, good riddance though.

 

[furryadminhypocrite]

We have to report it first so you look into it? embarrassing.

 

[elipo]

Jumping back here because my previous post had a sentence that was poorly worded and came off as too much of a personal attack or moral grandstanding. I also didn't provide enough context on the content being removed, so that's on me.

I've been reading some of the replies, and thank you for voicing your opinions and concerns, whether in this thread or elsewhere. Users want clarification on the removals, so please find it below.

We were made aware of content that goes against our content policy, specifically clause 3.1.1 regarding underage characters in pornographic settings. The content that was removed, and some content still being reviewed, includes entries labelled Mature, with characters that are engaging in sexual intercourse and either:

• They are clearly very young in appearance, and the content does not confirm that they are adults.
• The content itself confirms that they are under the age of 18.

Nothing else is being examined at this time. We're currently exploring options to retain the title entry and other non-infringing metadata, but for now, we need to proceed with the removal.

Move your legal representation from the UK to somewhere else bruh, also i doubt you will understand this since you can't separate fiction from reality either, just like their retarded government officials

 

[ulzeraj]

Sooner or later stuff that is not necessarily porn but with depictions of violence and sexual themes like Maou no Hajimekata are surely going to be purged.

Jumping back here because my previous post had a sentence that was poorly worded and came off as too much of a personal attack or moral grandstanding. I also didn't provide enough context on the content being removed, so that's on me.

I've been reading some of the replies, and thank you for voicing your opinions and concerns, whether in this thread or elsewhere. Users want clarification on the removals, so please find it below.

We were made aware of content that goes against our content policy, specifically clause 3.1.1 regarding underage characters in pornographic settings. The content that was removed, and some content still being reviewed, includes entries labelled Mature, with characters that are engaging in sexual intercourse and either:

• They are clearly very young in appearance, and the content does not confirm that they are adults.
• The content itself confirms that they are under the age of 18.

Nothing else is being examined at this time. We're currently exploring options to retain the title entry and other non-infringing metadata, but for now, we need to proceed with the removal.

Thats some corporate ass response on a site that is pretty much a crowd maintained platform fed with content from voluntary scalation groups.

 

[grrman]

How long do y'all think it'll take for MD to become a company? 5 years.

You should ask at what point they'll become a "real company" like oh so many businesses do before they go down the shitter.

 

[Basic_human]

"3.1.1 Illegal Content, in particular, child pornography, child abuse and drug abuse"
This is the clause; so you're telling me that this website has to abide and delete all manga that depicts underage characters being sexualized, being abused and general drug abuse if someone demands it?
That's a death sentence, good riddance though.

RIP takopi no genzai, oyasumu punpun... Oh wait DMCA remove them right?

 

[meccaflare]

Titles being removed are those we have been made aware of through a legal nexus as "considered the distribution of illegal material". Moderation will not go beyond the titles mentioned; there was Papa Milk and anything adjacent, and some others still in review.

If we are notified of anything else, we will try to inform uploaders before proceeding with removals, where possible.

So just to clarify... should we leave it entirely up to staff review? If future moderation decisions are made, will uploaders be penalized retroactively? Or will there be some kind of cutoff date where prior uploads won’t result in strikes?

I’m asking because predictability matters. If policies are evolving, it would help to know whether enforcement is forward-looking or if older content is at risk.

On a separate note, I think section 3.1.1 could be worded more transparently. If the driving factor here is compliance with payment processor requirements, it may be better to state that directly rather than framing it purely as a legality issue.

After all, legality varies widely by region... there are countries where LGBT content is illegal, yet that’s clearly not the standard being applied here. I'm betting this constraint is specifically tied to Visa/Mastercard policies, clarity about that would avoid confusion and speculation.

It is what it is... platforms have to operate within their financial constraints. I just think being upfront about the reasoning would go a long way.

 

[Basic_human]

RIP this manga guys and jojo part 9 too

Both have drugs in it

 

[Nepheros]

Mangadex must die then, I hope the worst for them
"muh moral, law nshiet"
it's a pirate site about drawing, stand your ground faggot, act like a man you bitch, now ban me faggot, don't care lmao, the uk is a irrelevant shithole anyway, hope for the whole mangadex team to become homeless and live under a bridge

 

[yogurtman250]

Wall texting in a forum? What kind of crazyness is this! Forum are for long talks, if you want quick snappy texts you go to discord.

I know, I wasn't expecting it 😭 This is what happens when a discord newgen goes to a forum...