Questions about the new guidelines
Homepage › Forums › Small Talk › Questions about the new guidelines
This topic contains 10 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by Unseen 9 years, 6 months ago.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 29, 2015 at 7:11 pm #1741
Here are mine. What are yours?
I would hope that warnings would be used rather than expulsion in case of minor violations or rulings in “gray” areas.
The Copyright Infringement guideline would seem to prohibit most links to, for example, Youtube. Copyright law says that everything belongs to someone unless it’s too old to be copyrighted or has been explicitly put into public domain. True?
Define “nudity.” What about a woman wearing a top showing some nipple bumps or a very tight and form-fitting pair of yoga pants? Implied nudity (the model is nude but no particular “bits” are visible.)
Anyone else have questions? I think everyone wants to understand the rules and the best way to do that is out in the open.
July 29, 2015 at 8:31 pm #1753You are worried for nothing. We are not going to ban either you or any other member.
Guidelines related to Adult content has been described by google in detail here https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/4410771
Guidelines are not American constitution that can’t be edited. As they are newly written, they are not perfect. We shall edit them as needed.
July 29, 2015 at 8:53 pm #1759So, I can continue to put up the occasional youtube video or meme I found on the web?
July 29, 2015 at 9:13 pm #1760It is not my field. @gallupsmirror may try to explain.
Youtube has been banned in pk for religious reasons. I can’t see what is in a video.
July 29, 2015 at 10:49 pm #1768@unseen Good topic. We are drafting etc, and can amend rules. The thing to bear in mind are that the rules are to protect the site from abuse and try to let the ads carry the site cost. That’s all we are really trying to achieve.
July 29, 2015 at 11:54 pm #1773Youtube has been banned in pk for religious reasons. I can’t see what is in a video.
And “PK” is what?
July 30, 2015 at 12:03 am #1775And “PK” is what?
I think Umar means “YouTube is banned in Pakistan”. Its been blocked in quite a few coutnries over the years. China did something similar (not sure if thats still the case)
July 30, 2015 at 2:12 am #1778It is not my field. @gallupsmirror may try to explain.
It is lawful to link to copyrighted materials but not to infringing materials. By law, links to infringing materials technically must be removed upon discovery of the site manager or upon notice from the copyright holder. Usually it’s the originating site (not the site with links pointing to it) that gets this notice or takes this action. Read this for more details.
Google’s definition of nudity includes:
“While we recognize that interpretations of adult or mature content may vary across countries and cultures, we hold all publishers accountable to the same content requirements so that we can ensure a safe and healthy global advertising ecosystem. If you’re unsure about whether or not something might be considered adult content, our general rule of thumb is this: if you wouldn’t want a child to see the content or you would be embarrassed to view the page at work in front of colleagues, then you should not place ad code on it.”
“Google ads may not be placed on content that is sexually suggestive and/or intended to cause sexual arousal. Examples of content that may be considered sexually gratifying include, but are not limited to:
close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches
sheer or see-through clothing or lingerie
strategically covered nudity (includes situations in which genitals are blurred out by camera)
images of men or women posing and/or undressing in a seductive manner”I would add that that it’s safe to assume an image displaying body parts that would be covered by typical bathing suits would be considered an image of nudity. Probably the best test we have here at AZ is that Google cuts off our advertising when one of their crawlers decides we’re showing nudes, but naturally we don’t want it getting to that point.
-
This reply was modified 9 years, 6 months ago by
Gallup's Mirror.
-
This reply was modified 9 years, 6 months ago by
Gallup's Mirror. Reason: added the words 'that would be'
July 30, 2015 at 2:57 am #1785I would add that that it’s safe to assume an image displaying body parts covered by typical bathing suits would be considered an image of nudity.
So that something that’s literally not nude is.
July 30, 2015 at 3:04 am #1786…something that’s literally not nude is.
Yeah.
Sometimes I say it out loud two or three times, just to make myself feel crazy.
July 30, 2015 at 4:00 am #1790Sometimes I say it out loud two or three times, just to make myself feel crazy.
Of course, the irony is that using their search engine, you can find whatever you’re looking for from pedophile porn to beheadings.
-
This reply was modified 9 years, 6 months ago by
Unseen.
-
This reply was modified 9 years, 6 months ago by
-
AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.