Let me apologize in advance, as I sometimes have problems expressing exactly what I mean, but I hope this reaches who Thorne, as I am very curious if you are pulling everything, or if you will remain in sales for the time being. I had been working on some various Sci-Fi scenes, and was not terribly impressed with the current winged creatures of fantasy until I came across various models from ThorneWorks. I was amazed at the detail and realism incorportated in the models. I immediately began searching out different resources on other faerie props and backgrounds, intending to incorporate some of them into my work. But then I saw this post, and before I even clicked on the link, my heart fell. I am new to Poser and it's possibilities, and I have never yet had the pleasure of working with any of your models, although it's an understatement to say I was quite looking forward to it. The general public (unfortunately, Americans in particular, and yes I'm an American, born and raised, so this isn't a foreigner pointing the finger) is artistically illiterate it seems, and I couldn't help but wonder how long it would be until people started ranting about the anatomically-correct detailing on the available models, especially the children. However, look at all the current and old art that currently portrays human nudity, in both adults and the young. So the nude body is now to be considered pornographic in nature? Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is what I believe. I see a naked child, that's natural. I see a posed naked child, non-erotic in style, and that's art. I see a naked child in an erotic or sexually-intended pose, that's child-porn. It's all about how it's used. As has been thoroughly pointed out in this thread, nudity in art has occurred for thousands of years. Look at ancient Greek and Roman art and statues, or Renaissance paintings and sculptures for examples. Does anyone cry "child-porn" when this depicts forms of a nude child? Of course not, it's not intended to be erotic in nature, and if some perverse individual(s) see it as such, does that mean that society as a whole must also see it as such and now it must be declared inappropriate or even illegal? While growing up I don't know how many times I've heard "the one ruined it for the many" from my parents or teachers, and now even as adults we endure it - the minority creating strife that ends up ruining it for the majority. What's wrong with nudity? My entire life I been in love with the nude figure - it is so pure and delicate, yet so complex. I can just sit and admire it for hours, taking in every detail, thinking to myself, "How did God do it?". I see past the nudity itself, and see it for what it truly is - the most complex machine and creature in the world. Yet someone else can see it for simply a naked body and the sexual drive in their brain apparently overrides the intellectual side, and it instantly transforms into "porn". Too many see the human body as a sexual object I fear, something to be hidden behind locked doors, instead of a living, breathing work of art. Nudity will always be considered one of two things - art or porn. It more or less resides in the mind of the viewer, and the intentions and styles of the artist can either encourage it one or the other. So I suppose one day, we'll all live in a world where nudity in any form is completely prohibited. Well I certainly went a bit further than I intended, but in summary, I am sad to see the effect of the artistically-disinclined and the perverse on works such as those produced by a truly talented individual. I cannot say whether the decision is wrong or right, for surely we cannot know all the circumstances he/she may be facing. But I can say I will miss the opportunity to work with the models if all of them are being removed, not just the free ones.