Comments on: On Photobucket, babies in diapers are seen as 'nudity'

Photobucket dumps photos of babies in diapers from the site, claiming they violate terms of service that prohibit posting images of nudity.

[Derpinguin44]

That is a load of ********. Also, poster needs to learn how to spell. "Their (sic) butts)" not "There (sic) butts)".

Screw you photobucket.

[leeleea]

I don't think this is a horrible thing. I am a member on a very prominent crafting site where women often put up pictures of their babies half clothed wearing something they've made. I'm never offended by the pictures but I would never put a picture of my daughter in a diaper or her panties in a public forum. I don't see what's so wrong about Photobucket trying to curb child abuse or getting into trouble themselves. They're a business and have a right to run it the way they need to.

[Gryphon_Ronas]

While I do agree that PhotoBucket is a business and they do indeed have the right to run it as they see fit, I do not think that they have any right or business doing something like this because of the implications of it. They removed the images because of nudity. The images were of children. As word gets passed, chances are it becomes something to do with child pornography on PhotoBucket. The people find out it was something as foolish as this. The next time they hear "child pornography" they may be less likely to pay attention. thinking is just more foolishness.

The response from PhotoBucket was priceless. Literacy is indeed an endangered species. And yes Ms. Mills - I am fully aware of which of the two of you knows how to spell. *wink*