Comment by amiga386 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by amiga386 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> They absolutely targeted paysafe and paypall

OK, I read the link. They targeted Paysafe and PayPal AND VISA AND MASTERCARD AND DISCOVER AND JCB. All of them, in no particular order. Why did you not mention those?

Why are Valve's and Itch's payment processors, instead of citing their own policies, citing MasterCard's policies?

If "MasterCard doesn't care" then section 5.12.7 "Illegal or Brand-damaging Transactions" of MasterCard's rules, that specifically lists out transactions MasterCard prohibit processors from performing, specifically citing the percieved risk to MasterCard's brand... that's a really weird way for MasterCard to say they "don't care" about those exact sorts of transactions, which Valve's payment processors have been facilitating for Valve since 2018... until now, when a media campaign has put them and MasterCard, Visa, Discover and JCB on blast.

If MasterCard "doesn't care", let them show it by completely removing section 5.12.17 of their own rules. They made those rules, and those rules say they care, no matter how much you say they don't.

Ok, I'll assume good faith and answer that. I didn't mention those because you weren't questioning them. I feel that is kind of obvious.

>(not PayPal or Paysafe)...

As to paypal's policy...

https://www.paypal.com/us/cshelp/article/what-is-paypal%E2%8...

>We don't permit PayPal account holders to buy or sell: Sexually oriented digital goods or content delivered through a digital medium. Examples of digital goods include downloadable pictures or videos and website subscriptions.

Yeah it's a good question, why would they cite mastercard instead of their own policy?

It's entirely anecdotal, but in my 10 years of experience dealing with a multitude of processors and payment gateways... that's what processors do. Their very first instinct is to make things someone else's problem. With maybe the exception of First Data, this has held up consistently for me. Of course a lot of our high dollar business was through First Data so who knows what other people's experience is.

You are still completely avoiding the fact that processors that can handle this stuff exist. Sure Mastercard should probably change their rule, but that isn't going to change the situation.

That is why Itch is looking at their options:

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/itchio-are-seeking-out-new-...

So the question is, could both Valve and Itch take on several payment processors, and choose which game on their store goes through which processor? Or would porn-shy processors have blanket rules saying your whole company can't have any porn in the same store, even if it's locked away, even if you use not-us to process payments for it?

And secondly, let's say Valve moves to a porn-friendly processor (Itch has said it's looking for one, not that it's found one). MasterCard clearly has a rule, right there in black and white, saying don't facilitate this particular type of porn. How do you think it will look if for any potential processor, and MasterCard, if Valve switches processor and continues accepting MasterCard payments for games in direct contravention of MasterCards's given rule, while the world's press, and the angry lobby group, is watching?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com