CompelledInk You've pretty aptly demonstrated why there would be significant concerns with implementing this feature. Whilst using such a feature for the purpose of preventing piracy makes a lot of sense, the two use cases that you've supplied are far less clear cut and show the enormous potential for scope creep. Revoking someone's licence simply because they boosted your server for the minimum period of time in order to gain access to content is, I feel, not a genuine reason to revoke licenses of unrelated products even if disclosed in a Terms of Service. Additionally, I have concern over the fact that you would revoke licences not because of any malicious act that caused you financial harm, but simply because someone used a seemingly fake email address when buying your product... When you revoke licences, you are essentially taking away access to a paid product and not refunding the individual. It needs to only be done for good reason.

To be clear, I'm not against the implementation of this feature, but I do believe that your post is a great example of the onus of responsibility on Jinxxy to provide strict guidelines and training on how the feature should be used, how it should not be used, and to act as a independent arbiter of any disputes in order to ensure that consumers maintain faith in the platform.

Thanks!

RainbowCupcake How is it a red flag? It's common sense that if you break a creator's ToS, you lose the right to use their product. Don't break ToS(i.e. leaking assets, reuploading to piracy sites, etc) and you won't get access revoked, it's literally that simple....

Like, I'm sorry, but if someone buys my avatars JUST to leak them, and I can verify they've been leaking the files or even uploading them to other sites, etc... I'm going to revoke access and that's entirely within my right as a creator to do. My ToS exists for a reason- if you can't respect my ToS, you don't get to use my stuff.

Like, this viewpoint is like saying an MMO game shouldn't be allowed to ban you if you bought a subscription, no matter how many rules you break........ it's ridiculous to think you should get to break rules/ToS and receive no consequences and continue to use the product unhindered.

RainbowCupcake When you purchase an avatar, or any digital asset for that matter really. You are more or less buying a LICENSE to those digital assets.

Most of the time, these digitals assets come with a ToS. It is up to the buyer to read this ToS and make sure that the ToS is not going to be disruptive to their use case.

If you break the ToS of the seller, the seller is fully within their right to revoke access to the content you have purchased without a refund, as you quite literally broke the terms of service that YOU agreed to not break.

Creators often only use a sort of revoke/blacklisting system as a last resort for problematic people who go around mass leaking their files, thus hurting their sales in the long run.

This is not a red flag, this is simply sellers trying to defend their business and their earnings from leakers and thieves.

Creators who abuse revoking purchases for personal/petty reasons will usually get in trouble with a platform if it is reported.

I get the abuse concerns, but I think license revocation can be implemented in a way that disincentivizes the abuse you're concerned about. Jinxxy should communicate to creators that they shouldn't be revoking access to a license unless they have reasonably good evidence that terms were violated, and buyers should be able to reach out to Jinxxy support if they believe their license was revoked wrongfully. Creators would risk being banned from Jinxxy if it's found they're abusing license revocation, which is a LOT to risk, and therefore a good abuse deterrent.

RainbowCupcake that's not really a tangible concern since the feature is already implemented on Gumroad and Payhip; two absolutely beloved websites by Creators and Customers alike; the cases in which that feature is abused is so drastically low that over the 3-4 years I've been a creator in this community, I've heard of no such abuse cases; only complaints from Customers who have violated ToS/ToU and are facing consequences for their actions.

Also, what do Creator Blacklists have to do with this? Especially since 99% of the time, those blacklists are on ?

Calling security measures (OPTIONAL security measures, might I add) a "HUGE red flag" is actually a red flag back onto you, honestly /srs

(also, if a creator does abuse that feature, are their products really worth getting all up in arms about not having in the first place..?)