I looked into the idea of opening commissions some time or selling an nsfw art as a product but no website or payment processor accepts that stuff

grey_scale_dragon said:
I looked into the idea of opening commissions some time or selling an nsfw art as a product but no website or payment processor accepts that stuff

At least you're asking on the right site. Dragonfruit and Tenboro have had to deal with this. You'll notice that e621 doesn't sell products or process payments (except for advertising), and E-Hentai only takes cryptocurrency. Just speaking from sites I've had a lot of experience with. Pixiv (and their brands like Fanbox) is in same boat as FA and Patreon, and has to restrict things. Japan's own JCB, plus Mastercard and Visa all make porn a PITA.

Subscribe* and Gum Road have some requirements you might not like. I've known people to use Booth (but this is censored more, since crackdown), Fanbox, Fantia, and KoFi.

You'll also probably notice that pretty much ALL ads on e621 are for porn-related products.

Most people's method is to use PayPal and hope they don't get banned, then have their whole life ruined and career taken away from them if PayPal suddenly bans them. There's plenty of payment processors that explicitly allow this sort of stuff, but they're generally also look shady as hell and you'd be hard pressed to find a customer who actually wants to use it.

Generally, you can make it a little safer by invoicing customers and making sure to never describe the product as "porn", "nsfw", "furry" or any other words that would make PayPal flag your account. If you let a customer enter the payment reference themselves (by telling them an email address to pay) and they enter "$20 for sex porn" as the payment reference you're probably going to have a bad time. The chances are if you never trigger their automated checks, nobody's actually going to manually review what you're doing for a living.

Also remember that you're making art, not porn. If PayPal were banning people for selling prints of The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife people would be shocked because "it's art" despite being just as depraved as the average furry content. Some major websites like Patreon allow artistic nudity and NSFW artwork despite taking PayPal as a payment method, but you could also just attribute this to PayPal not wanting to lose one of their cash cows. Smaller places like Furry Dakimakura have been accepting PayPal payments for ages with no problems at all, which does however seem to suggest that art is actually exempt from their "no adult products" terms.

alphamule said:
You'll also probably notice that pretty much ALL ads on e621 are for porn-related products.

The only ads ive seen are like 2 steam games, bad dragon and fa accounts with commissions. Though bad dragon does support paypal and all major cards from what i see. But paypal does allow some physical products within the us only

I cant see anything on subscibstar other than you cant upload obscene content (whatever that means.) Fanbox seems the most lenient because it only seems to ban underage, non-consensual, incest, beastiality (does anthro count?) and non-con mutilation. Kofi just allows the sexy but none of the sex or slightly too sexy

It looks like crypto might be the only way to do this. Even porn hub is strongly pushing that as payment

grey_scale_dragon said:
The only ads ive seen are like 2 steam games, bad dragon and fa accounts with commissions. Though bad dragon does support paypal and all major cards from what i see. But paypal does allow some physical products within the us only

I cant see anything on subscibstar other than you cant upload obscene content (whatever that means.) Fanbox seems the most lenient because it only seems to ban underage, non-consensual, incest, beastiality (does anthro count?) and non-con mutilation. Kofi just allows the sexy but none of the sex or slightly too sexy

It looks like crypto might be the only way to do this. Even porn hub is strongly pushing that as payment

I also have seen BD ads, NSFW furry games, artist ads (offering explicit commissions), so pretty much same thing with different descriptions. Yeah, almost all NSFW products or services.

faucet said:
Most people's method is to use PayPal and hope they don't get banned, then have their whole life ruined and career taken away from them if PayPal suddenly bans them. There's plenty of payment processors that explicitly allow this sort of stuff, but they're generally also look shady as hell and you'd be hard pressed to find a customer who actually wants to use it.

Generally, you can make it a little safer by invoicing customers and making sure to never describe the product as "porn", "nsfw", "furry" or any other words that would make PayPal flag your account. If you let a customer enter the payment reference themselves (by telling them an email address to pay) and they enter "$20 for sex porn" as the payment reference you're probably going to have a bad time. The chances are if you never trigger their automated checks, nobody's actually going to manually review what you're doing for a living.

Also remember that you're making art, not porn. If PayPal were banning people for selling prints of The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife people would be shocked because "it's art" despite being just as depraved as the average furry content. Some major websites like Patreon allow artistic nudity and NSFW artwork despite taking PayPal as a payment method, but you could also just attribute this to PayPal not wanting to lose one of their cash cows. Smaller places like Furry Dakimakura have been accepting PayPal payments for ages with no problems at all, which does however seem to suggest that art is actually exempt from their "no adult products" terms.

The term 'porn' is contentious because it's in the eye of the beholder. Frigging Miller "I'll know it when I see it" test, haha. I mean, if it was as simple as saying "No sir, this is not porn, this is a nature documentary of fantasy dragons!", I'm sure everyone would be doing it. No penetration but tons of lewd behavior in absurd setups? Not technically porn, it's a sexual comedy. A lot of people use 'porn' to mean explicit sexually-oriented content, but it (technically, old definition?) also applies to non-sexual content? Gore without any sex is still porn in the "vulgar/disturbing" sense of the word, then. The term was supposed to be used to refer to content damaging to someone's mind, in oldancient-school conservative thinking, from what I recall.

alphamule said:
The term 'porn' is contentious because it's in the eye of the beholder. Frigging Miller "I'll know it when I see it" test, haha. I mean, if it was as simple as saying "No sir, this is not porn, this is a nature documentary of fantasy dragons!", I'm sure everyone would be doing it. No penetration but tons of lewd behavior in absurd setups? Not technically porn, it's a sexual comedy. A lot of people use 'porn' to mean explicit sexually-oriented content, but it (technically, old definition?) also applies to non-sexual content? Gore without any sex is still porn in the "vulgar/disturbing" sense of the word, then. The term was supposed to be used to refer to content damaging to someone's mind, in oldancient-school conservative thinking, from what I recall.

I imagine payment processors might be a little more lenient in their terms if US federal laws regarding obscenity (and when it is and isn't covered by the first amendment) that are hundreds of years old and show no sign of ever being amended or repealed weren't so vague about what is and isn't covered.

I really feel like a lot of Internet content is only acceptable because of the lack of enforcement of these laws (and jurisdiction issues) more than anything else, I'd like to see the Supreme Court argue in favor of post #6268's serious artistic value - and that's far from one of the worst things I've seen here. People think what they're doing is all good until they get singled out and end up in jail for producing obscene pornography.

faucet said:
People think what they're doing is all good until they get singled out and end up in jail for producing obscene pornography.

To be fair, they singled themselves out and goaded the feds into taking action.

Zicari was interviewed in the documentary; he defended the company's content and challenged Attorney General John Ashcroft to take action against him.[2][3] Zicari stated in an interview for the program, "We've got tons of stuff they technically could arrest us for.[3] I'm not out there saying I want to be the test case. But I will be the test case. I would welcome that. I would welcome the publicity. I would welcome everything, to make a point in, I guess, our society".

Which was one month before they were raided. The case also says it ended in a plea deal, so there was no official ruling on whether what they did was actually illegal.

Which is another part of the problem. Aside from the incredibly subjective and vague interpretation of obscenity, a lot of cases end with plea deals so there's never an actual ruling on the matter. Which could be a blessing in disguise, since the fewer cases of harmless fiction being ruled illegal, the better, but it still leaves companies wary.

faucet said:
I really feel like a lot of Internet content is only acceptable because of the lack of enforcement of these laws (and jurisdiction issues) more than anything else, I'd like to see the Supreme Court argue in favor of post #6268's serious artistic value - and that's far from one of the worst things I've seen here. People think what they're doing is all good until they get singled out and end up in jail for producing obscene pornography.

Just quickly skimming through the article reminds me of the case against "two girls one cup" and "goatsy" which were 18+ shock websites that were the reason why every adult site needs an 18+ warning. The content was deemed morally disturbing or was too easy to access for its content
Absurd and tame situations, reactions and cartoonish depictions are what makes most of e621 fine. Its also why on screen death and tourture in film and tv are acceptable. Its not usually realistic and not painful to watch

To quote Bertrand Russell, "obscenity is whatever happens to shock some elderly and ignorant magistrate." I don't like a lot of the stuff on here—the Nazi crap, the kid stuff—but as long as no one is actually hurt I don't think it's anyone's place to tell another person what they're allowed to look at.

https://artconomy.com/ <----- THIS
I tested it with like 15 commissions (sfw but it does allow nsfw) , payment is sent to you via Stripe directly to your bank account