An unauthorized nude portrait of Donald Trump has been removed from popular online platforms, but restrictions from Facebook and eBay are doing little to conceal the intentionally provocative pastel drawing of the Republican presidential front-runner.

The artist responsible for the work, Illma Gore, says it’s been circulating broadly, with about 1,000 prints sold through her website. She’s made a high-resolution image available for free and says for three weeks about 15,000 people a day have taken advantage.

Someone printed it on a pillow after a front-page splash on news-sharing site Reddit.

But the freewheeling fun isn’t flying on Gore’s Facebook page. She attempted to log on Thursday morning and was informed, she says, that for violating an unspecified rule she’s subject to a 72-hour usage ban – her second – and that she must delete the offending post before rejoining.

The latest ban message warned she risks permanent removal if she continues to violate Facebook’s policies, which include a ban on nudity. Nearly two dozen fans told Gore their accounts were suspended because of sharing undeleted earlier images of the art from Gore’s page.

On eBay, meanwhile, auctions for the original artwork twice have been deleted, one after reaching about $5,000. Gore says she sought out a preemptive green light for the sale and that eBay has not provided her a satisfactory explanation, instead offering a listing in a sexual goods section with limited geographic reach.

Facebook and eBay representatives did not respond to requests for comment, nor did the Trump campaign. It’s unclear if the campaign played any role in the deletions or if grassroots Trump supporters won removal by flagging content.

It’s also unclear why Facebook would remove Gore’s access but not remove older posts, such as the uncensored debut publication of the Trump artwork on Feb. 9, which has been shared more than 260,000 times.

The censorship may backfire, says Harvard University economist Jeffrey Miron, who says the so-called “forbidden fruit” effect could increase demand.

“I think it’s quite possible,” Miron says, that continued controversy would prompt more consumers to seek out the artwork, though he cautions “it’s really hard to say in any specific instance.”

Non-consensual full-frontal renderings of prominent politicians are rare. Decades ago, however, former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau grinned proudly in front of a large painting of himself modeled on the Sistine Chapel's depiction of clothes-free Adam, the biblical first human.

Another artwork stirred controversy in Canada recently, with the 2011 painting "Emperor Haute Couture" by artist Margaret Sutherland pillorying Canada’ longtime prime minister Stephen Harper, a conservative who left office in November.

Sutherland says her adaptation of “The Emperor's New Clothes” caused relatively few problems. Her address was uncovered by letter-writing critics, but official reaction amounted to criticism of Harper appearing alongside a dog instead of a cat. The painting even was displayed in a public library.

Sutherland says she finds the Trump artwork funny and that the front-runner invites parody by commenting publicly on the size of his genitalia. During a televised debate last week, Trump said “I guarantee you there’s no problem” with the size of his genitalia, after Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida insinuated that his allegedly “small hands” implied otherwise.

“He certainly has gone there as far as mentioning pieces of anatomy,” Sutherland says. “He went down that road, he’s reaping what he’s sown.”

Gore says she believes it’s possible that the artwork played some role in Rubio’s decision to make the personal attack on Trump, but that rather than seek to mock people with small sex organs, she sought to ultimately tear down social stigma.

“I do not believe genitals define gender, power or status,” she says.

A friend of Gore’s posed for the below-the-neck part of the artwork.

Though the Trump campaign would not comment, Gore says a person claiming to be associated with the billionaire called her last month and threatened to sue her if she sold the artwork, specifically citing Trump's right of publicity over commercial use of his likeness.

UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh says what exactly the First Amendment means for right of publicity claims is unsettled, but adds, “I think the precedents point in the direction of treating such political commentary as First Amendment-protected.”

The Supreme Court protected political parody in 1988, ruling the Rev. Jerry Falwell could not win damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress after Hustler magazine printed a parody interview in which the fundamentalist minister described losing his virginity in an incestuous outhouse tryst.

Companies such as Facebook and eBay are free to set their own speech policies, Volokh adds. Facebook policies periodically inspire purges and subsequent protest, previously with a ban on breastfeeding pictures and more recently with a restriction on state-legal marijuana businesses.

Gore says she contacted lawyers and isn't concerned about an unfavorable court ruling if Trump sues, having experienced homelessness in the past.

“I’m a strong believer in what I paint, and I’m also open to being wrong,” she says. “So if that’s the way it went, I’m not scared at all. I would 100 percent go to jail or face charges for something I believe in.”

The artist says she will continue pressing for Facebook and eBay to allow her artwork. And although she favors the Democratic presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, she says the 74-year-old democratic socialist may become one of her next subjects.

“The statement here isn’t just Trump with a small penis,” Gore says. “I think it would be interesting to add female genitalia … and even Bernie Sanders, because there’s such an interesting stigma people put on it -- people would take it as a diss and it shouldn’t be.”

Sutherland says, meanwhile, she's been implored to paint Canada's current prime minister, the 44-year-old Justin Trudeau, without clothes. "It really wouldn't be a relevant comment on politics," she says with a laugh, "it would be for another reason."

Though the Trump artwork likely is viewed by few as eye candy, Gore says efforts to quash its digital distribution appears to be promoting more of it. “The artwork is almost public domain, and when it’s censored people take ownership of that,” she says. “I think people are trying to share it more.” “The artwork is almost public domain, and when it’s censored people take ownership of that,” she says. “I think people are trying to share it more.”



