Naked video clips have been given the green light, but only if it’s in the name of art. Now, the old debate continues… What constitutes art? And is Youtube's decision risky?

Youtube is one-upping Facebook with the implementation of a formal appeals process, as well as an amendment of their community guidelines which now includes ‘artistic’ purpose as the basis for allowing an exception to the rule which once banned nudity altogether.

In a nutshell, naked video clips are acceptable, but it’s all about context.

"Titling and tagging your video correctly is the best way to add context to your videos. When our team is reviewing flagged content, titles or tags with words as simple as "human rights" or "police abuse" will help us understand the context of the footage you’re uploading.

"Try to add some specific information into the description: who is in the video, what is happening, where and when did it happen, and why?"

Fair enough.

But what about the weirdos who will surely try to get their pornographic and not-so-artsy clips published on the site? 

VOTE: Is Youtube’s decision risky?