Regardless of age rating, Frontier isn't responsible for stuff other players do/create inside the game with tools they have available for them. Other vice the game would be 18+ because people can draw stuff to asteroids with weapons. Forza (forza has ESRB rating of E everybody which is lower than elite as elite has T teen rating) is great example of a game that allow total customization. Same goes with Minecraft and lego worlds.
You're partially correct, but so is Tarman.
I've been a "content creator" on several "open" platforms where users can create and upload "stuff" to multiplayer worlds. Legally, the situation can get quite complex. What follows is not legal advice, because I'm not a lawyer - just somebody who has worked with these kind of issues professionally under the laws of multiple countries.
As far as "tender sensibilities" are concerned, to escape the most onerous provisions of game ratings a game company has to do two things. First, they must state in their ToS that it is unacceptable to upload content that violates the rating assigned to the game and must interpret that under the laws of the country in which they are based. They must NOT (unless they are stupid) do any kind of pre-approval for this when items are first uploaded because then they are taking editorial control and they expose themselves to legal liability if somebody disagrees with their interpretation. The second thing they can (and MUST) do is put in place a means for users to report content that THEY feel is offensive or inappropriate and undertake to promptly remove said content if that complaint is upheld. That takes care of the "moral police" - They will almost certainly err on the side of caution in adjudicating such complaints, so as not to skirt the boundaries of what might result in liability. Anyone complaining "my decal wasn't offensive!" will run smack into the brick wall of a ToS clause that contains the tactical nuke of legalese "...in our sole discretion and without recourse or compensation..." (I know it doesn't exactly make sense for them to say that when they jump through hoops to avoid taking any editorial control up front but its the way the law forces them to do it if they want to avoid the traps in the next bit.)
The other reason they cannot take editorial control concerns copyright and trademarks. If you upload a decal you must assert to FD that you have the rights to do so and they must take your word for it. If your artwork is 100% original without resembling any published work or trademarked logo, you're golden. If you use any published source material that isn't in the public domain you'd better be certain that the rights you have to it allow you not only to publish derivative works in your own right but to grant FD the right to reproduce it and use it in the game. I've seen a LOT of creators come unstuck on this one where their rights would allow personal use but they got sued because how they used the derivative works involved granting rights to a third party (in this case FD) that they were not legally allowed to. If FD are storing your uploaded decal and serving it to other players clients, under copyright law that is reproduction and distribution. If somebody tells FD "I own the copyright on X and your user has uploaded it in an infringing manner" then FD MUST take it down until the matter is resolved (possibly in court) between the claimant and you - or THEY could end up as a party to the lawsuit. Often, such disputes - at least where they cover rights to source material of derivative works for which some rights have already been granted - can be resolved out of court which is just as well, because copyright litigation is HORRIBLY complex and expensive! Nevertheless, that is why FD would be disclaiming all editorial control and removing all disputed content until the dispute is resolved. They want no part of the dispute and need it resolved between the uploader and the person claiming their rights are being infringed. If you think that's bad, we haven't even got to trademarks yet.
Anything that looks too much like a trademark, or like somebodies product is in a world of hurt. Copyright has enough grey areas in it that both sides can manage "not to look" as long as they remain on relatively good terms and the technical infringement doesn't negatively impact the rights owner. Trademarks are different. A trademark (whether registered or not) HAS to be defended legally or it loses its trademark status. Perhaps the most visible example of this is how "Hoover" became synonymous with "Vacuum Cleaner" - Only the company logo retains legal trademark status today because they didn't defend the name. If what you upload looks too similar to a company logo or like an image of one of their signature products they HAVE to send out a "cease and desist" and sue you if you don't comply, or they could lose trademark protection on that logo or product. If you thought FD would go and hide in the nearest black hole at the thought of getting caught up in a copyright squabble, just imagine what their lawyers would tell them about getting snarled in trademark disputes.
