Mangadex to purge titles for legal reasons

[jmic]

First I have been here since the first week MangaDex was online. I came here from the root of "Dex". I have often referred to MangaDex as "we". You perhaps cannot understand how painful that is becoming as the community is pushed aside by people who can't tell the difference between scanlation and pirating commercial translations, don't bother you're wrong. I assume that yes the current removals are about monetization. Two things. I became suspicious of such when after the DMCA nightmare I heard that Namicomi was going to manage MD. Oh goody. Then there is the fact that I have to live with Add placeholders all the time and the "guilt" tracer in the header. There have been zero actual adds since the AI crap in the fall. So a move to "sanitize" doesn't surprise me. The servers must roll. But we the community deserve to be informed. Not some offhand flip and dismissive thing like we have gotten both here and on Discord. I believe that "we" are owed an explanation. Not when someone gets around to it but to be brought into the fold so that if I am right about the above that we can understand and support. As for the question of porn. I really don't much care about it. The agnolishment that people have sex is fine but I don't want to watch. Loli porn is yes simply cringe to me. If we need to have it gone I can see that. I also think it is a slippery slope. That said I will probably be here riding the bomb down as long as I can hat in the air.

 

[meccaflare]

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.

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.

 

[jmic]

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.

Thank you for this..It does help.

 

[Basic_human]

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.

ADDRESS THE ARGUMENT DAWG!!!! WE PROVIDE SHIT LIKE THIS

Man this remind me of the case of Mike Diana the comic artist who were framed for murder and thought to be serial killer because his comic have lot of obscene and gruesome stuff.

People think he is automatically guilty because he draw obscene stuff and anti religion. But it's just drawing in the end.

After the further investigation he was innocent, but his drawing certainly are very gore. He didn't do anything and all just his imagination put into paper.

if depiction of fiction aren't allowed what about all media who have body horror and gore ?

All the revenge manga with excessive blood. Things like mortal Kombat too should be illegal because people get mutilated. Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul have a lot of scene about drug, cartel, and dirty lawyer that help criminals. Its all illegal thing that if happen in real life gonna get you big trouble. Yet nothing, no one arrested, because what happened in fiction didn't actually happen.

 

[Yohantus]

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

Ok remove Kaguya-sama love is war then there are depictions of confirmed underage characters having sexual intercourse.

 

[yogurtman250]

ADDRESS THE ARGUMENT DAWG!!!! WE PROVIDE SHIT LIKE THIS

PLACE YOUR FAITH ON BART

 

[saredesu]

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.

 

[Basic_human]

LGBT stuff is illegal in muslim contries, humbly asking for the removal of all GL and BL, thanks in advance

If law were the reason, stupid crap like this also argument

@EtherealNeko !!!!

 

[yogurtman250]

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.

Well at least for the horrible age verification shit, you can blame the UK for it...

 

[Angry_Panda]

The internet should be a neutral zone, that was the dream.

It was, but that internet's been gone since I was in high school, during the second Clinton administration.

 

[Basic_human]

PLACE YOUR FAITH ON BART

Fuckin illiterate bastards

I thought my joke with Robin about manga reader can't read just meme. These literally can't

Also fakeass demon, pussy out middle way. If you can't handle the smoke don't make the fire, stupid ass admin. Like damn

 

[seekermoc]

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.

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. (most of the largest porn sites in the US like pornhub blacklist Texas IPs already)

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

 

[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