Heaven knows that I am not a supporter of Public Phallic Griefing, the activity of tiresome faux-rebellious delayed teenagers, but neither am I a supporter of attempts to brush such activities under the carpet.
Puzzled by this reference? Quite possible - do let me explain. Ms Anshe Chung whilst giving a press conference recently was assailed by particles and prims of an obscene nature, something which was reported upon at the time. It now appears that the corporate entity anshechung.com is threatening anyone who published Photographs or Moving Pictures of the occasion with poorly-defined "copyright" proceedings in order to erase this supposed shame.
Quite how the shame of issuing baseless legal threats is less than the shame of being unfortunately assaulted by flexible penii is beyond me, but both behaviours are quite against my particular set of beliefs as to What Is Right. For your further elucidation:
Very poor behaviour. "Copyright" over one's own form does not extend to portrayals of that form, nor should it.