Business partners can be from anywhere. The site's users can be from anywhere, uploading or downloading content. The article itself rejects the geographic origin: "this change would have happened regardless of where we were hosted". I don't have an opinion on Arizona law, but at least I can offer my perceived understanding of Canadian law, for how such things might effect Canadians. How do e621's decisions align with South African law? My comment was mostly concerned with you saying there was "a failure to distinguish between fictional and real content". I've demonstrated that, if this was taking place in Canada, that Canada probably wouldn't care about such a distinction. Therefore it is not some kind of universally agreed-upon ethic that can be appealed to.
Business partners can be from anywhere. The site's users can be from anywhere, uploading or downloading content. The article itself rejects the geographic origin: "this change would have happened regardless of where we were hosted". I don't have an opinion on Arizona law, but at least I can offer my perceived understanding of Canadian law, for how such things might effect Canadians. How do e621's decisions align with South African law? My comment was mostly concerned with you saying there was "a failure to distinguish between fictional and real content". I've demonstrated that, if this was taking place in Canada, that Canada probably wouldn't care about such a distinction. Therefore it is not some kind of universally agreed-upon ethic that can be appealed to.