Comment on Why AO3 Doesn't Have an Official App

  1. PokePotter1 Fri 24 Jul 2026 01:50PM UTC

    If AO3 was actually in favor of maximum inclusiveness, they would be prepared to argue in court (via lawsuits and whatnot), that said content being illegal is a violation of the First Amendment (assuming they wish to keep their servers in New York).

    Comment Actions

    1. facingthenorthwind (spacegandalf) Fri 24 Jul 2026 02:09PM UTC

      You....want child sexual abuse material to be legal? Why do you want that?

      Comment Actions

      1. PokePotter1 Fri 24 Jul 2026 02:12PM UTC

        I'd also be okay with rewriting the first amendment to explicitly ban it-as it is, it would be considered protected speech if someone wanted to challenge it's illegality

        Comment Actions

      2. ForestTheCat Fri 24 Jul 2026 02:29PM UTC

        Emo_furry_photo_that_refused_to_load

        i dont think they support it, their just stating the facts

        Comment Actions

        1. PokePotter1 Fri 24 Jul 2026 04:45PM UTC

          Correct.

          I'd really rather not see CSAM here-but I also don't believe that AO3 should be claiming they support maximum inclusiveness by banning it.

          Maybe there's a different phrasing they could be using instead.

          Comment Actions

    3. eunaruna Fri 24 Jul 2026 02:12PM UTC

      The first amendment right does not, and never did, protect against legal action towards CSAM and other such illegal materials.

      Comment Actions