"The TOS is, simply, far too vague. Renderosity needs to clearly define what is and what is not acceptable on their site." Sadly that's impractical. In all areas I've ever seen this kind of incredibly specific detail put in place it simply leaves gaping holes to work around - allowing people to follow the letter of the "rules" whilst completely abusing the spirit of such "rules". Take the age thing as a prime example - who is to say whether a certain V3 morph is 14,16,or 18? They're ALL under one year old, the mesh being designed last year. As a further illustration of how difficult it is to capture in words the content of an image - even whilst remembering that a picture is worth a thousand words - try describing your own face relative to Michael 2 / Victoria 3 base face. Very few facial features have ever even been named! Which make sit terribly difficult to describe a human face without imagery. And that's just one face, rather than trying to describe what Renderosity might find distateful about image sin general. You're right that, strictly, many images already violate the TOS because they seem, fairly blatantly, to be cheap attempt at tittilation and therefore pornography. Some may even be "good" tasteful attempts at "promoting a sence of arousal", shall we say. Renderosity seem to lean on the side of allowing rather than banning images, but their TOS provides the legal backing they may feel they require to allow them to remove images which are felt to "overstep the boundaries of good taste". That human judgement is involved also means that there WILL be disagreements on interpretation :( "1) writings, pictures etc., intended to primarily arouse sexual desire." You don't make images of feet pornography because you cannot change the INTENT of whoever produced the image. As to deciphering the intent of the artist, that's naturally going to be difficult and down to a judgement call. Cheers, Cliff